When I glanced at the headline, I first thought it said "TK'ing Banned in China For Minors." I thought, "Finally, some videogame legislation that's actually useful!"
An Internet outlet? Swell. But who's going to be in charge? With the current telephone system, it's okay if you use Pacific Bell, and want to call someone who uses Atlantic Bell, or perhaps wireless from Cingular. But if the Internet outlet is implemented 50 times faster than the phone system (as will probably be the case), then who's going to make sure that people with I-Socket (ooh, better copyright that name) provider A will be able to talk to I-Socket provider B? Or what if I buy an eToaster that's incompatible with my house's I-Socket system? And if there is one omnipotent provider, what kind of privacy issues will accompany that kind of total control?
Slashdot Mirror
When I glanced at the headline, I first thought it said "TK'ing Banned in China For Minors." I thought, "Finally, some videogame legislation that's actually useful!"
Just replace "Talks" with "Software" in the headline and you're good to go.
Yeah, but "they," "them" and "their" when referring to a single hax0r is grammatically |nc0rr3c7.
Someone set up us the mass-email legislation!
Send off every spam!
An Internet outlet? Swell. But who's going to be in charge? With the current telephone system, it's okay if you use Pacific Bell, and want to call someone who uses Atlantic Bell, or perhaps wireless from Cingular. But if the Internet outlet is implemented 50 times faster than the phone system (as will probably be the case), then who's going to make sure that people with I-Socket (ooh, better copyright that name) provider A will be able to talk to I-Socket provider B? Or what if I buy an eToaster that's incompatible with my house's I-Socket system? And if there is one omnipotent provider, what kind of privacy issues will accompany that kind of total control?