The reason this is a nonsensical argument is that windows vista does not provide any features substantially in advance of windows xp.
I think you are confusing the fact that old apps don't support new features with no new features. This is the expected behavior. I mean, it's not like starcraft should automagically switch from isometric sprits to directx 10 3D because Microsoft released a new OS.
As far as new features in the OS. One that pops right out that isn't just eye-candy is the audio support. The OS tuning my speaker setup automatically is pretty sweet. Having seperate volume controls for each audio application is also really handy.
Natively you also have a ton of more visibility into what is going on due to the included monitoring tools.
The mini/live windows are pretty nice too. Works on tabs in sea monkey as well.
This has been available for a long time. Before they released the OS. Before it shipped to corp customers. Have you ever seen a car commercial? Or an advertisement for anything that includes options? They demonstrate the top of the line and they mention prices of the bottom of the line.
Re:Another organization that wants to be above the
on
ICANN Wants Immunity
·
· Score: 1
Yeah. I'd like to hear the names of these countries too. In fact why wouldn't you cough that up in the first place? Because you're making it up? Afraid that if you said a name a dozen people would point at examples of censorship? Point at politicians on the take? Or are you Prince Roy?
Because he has damned 3D technology to confirm his theory as the absolutely proven method used. Goddammit! He modeled it on his computer, it is the inviolate truth.
When there are a million people a month joining the internet you are losing market share if your number of visitors remains fixed. Sort of like you get a paycut when you don't at least a 3% (or so, whatever is the current inflation rate) every year.
You are certainly pigeonholing both religious people and scientists. There are plenty of scientists who think they know the truth and are not longer searching, and there are plenty of believers who are still looking for the truth. Take a look at the number of people believe the big bang without any experimental evidence and no observational evidence that can't be explained by other theories. Just because an authority told them it was true. Don't rail on the religious for not personally investigating every aspect of their faith unless you're willing to do the same to every secularist. How many of the anti-religious here can describe Hawking radiation and its significance? How can you explain the rapid expansion period? It's a useful phenomena that has been created to make the math work.
Personally I'd prefer that some scientists just take their shit on faith instead of, for example, spending $30 million pumping energy into the upper atmosphere just to see what it does.
And, while I'm a big fan of scientific research, I sometimes wonder about the rationality of the world spending $2.5 billion creating a device to look for a particle that may or may not exist and which, as yet, not a single scientist can even suggest practical spin-offs of the search for the Higgs boson.
When was it a question of reliability? It was a question of neutrality. Every nation represents it's own interests over those of other nations. Even Switzerland.
If you want to be pedantic about it those 48% of the responders are right. Evolution, genetic drift, natural selection, etc. have very little evidence to support them. Personally I think they're the best bet. But there isn't hard and strict scientific evidence that demonstrates evolution occurs. Nobody has observed an organism mutate and then saw the parent organism be selected against with the end result that the new organism continues and the old organism has died out. The fossil record is very good for the purpose of proving extinction, but very poor for proving evolution.
As I told a friend recently, so far through out human history science has been 100% wrong.
I think you fail to understand. Relying on IP or DNS is like putting regular household windows on a vault. They serve no purpose so leave them out. Additionally neither system was designed as a security mechanism, using them as such is asking for trouble. To extend your boolean logic here is an equivalent formula for you: 1 AND 1 AND private key. For anyone intent on breaking into your system, the first two will always be true.
Yes YoutTube has more active continous maintaince than most "products", but a "service" requires much more manpower and individual attention than YouTube could possibly provide and still remain free and open to the masses.
And?
If the masses want to have this type of capability, they either need to develop the technical capability and build out the infrastructure on their own dime or pay someone else to do it. Having some third party do it for them for free while ripping off content producers is a losers game.
Not half so silly as 12,000 people forming a search and rescue team then going down to the local starbucks to sip coffee and look at pictures. Way to go nerds!
Since you can't understand the difference between a product sold by a business and a service actively controlled and exploited by a business, why do you participate? You can make all the stupid pseudo-analogies you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Youtube is not a tool. It is not an inanimate object completely under the control of whoever picks it up. It is absolutely and totally under the control of Google and Google's employees. You, as a user of youtube, can do nothing with it that they do not explicitly allow you to do. How hard is that to comprehend?
He's not on target at all. First, he'd have to skip from the manufacturer of the woodchipper to the owner of the woodchipper. Then he'd have to hypothesize a wood chipper that had a million feed hoppers hidden in the dark. Specifically setup so that there is no way to tell who is putting what into the machine. And the owner of the wood chipper somehow made money off of intestines and brains spraying from the outlet. And even after someone coming along and pointing out that "Inside that sack right there, that's Bob." So they pull Bob from the machine. And then they calmly watch and collect money as someone else chucks Bob right back into the machine. And when someone says "Gosh, this is terrible. The way all these people are dying in your wood chipper." They answer with "Not our fault. We've got a sign right there that says 'Don't put people in the machine.' and whenever anyone asks us to we take people out of the machine. It would cut into our profit margin if we had to actually look at what was being put into the machine before we started making money off it." Then he'd be on target.
Youtube built a system that facilitates copyright infringment. They cannot identify who uploads a particular clip. They do not prevent reuploading of the exact same file that has been legally removed. They are nothing like an ISP.
The real question is will Google be able to make their billion dollars back before the law is amended to eliminate this particular situation. My guess is that the second they have to screen each video clip or that they must be able to identify the exact person (ie. real name and address) who uploaded a particular clip, Youtube will grind to a halt.
Where are you everytime there is a story about some corporation trading in your* personal data? Thirty years ago your data was just as distributed and collected as it is now. The difference is exactly the difference that allows some hosehead to share a copy of his recently purchased CD with 500,000 of his best friends. Maybe data collection and sharing should be banned. But maybe the right thing is for the consumers to come up with a lifestyle that isn't based on anonymity and unaccountability.
It used to be that if you wanted a luxury you would work hard for it. Now the entitlement generation just bases their ethical code on the ever popular rallying cry of the two year old: "gimme! mine!"
* - Not really yours, since anything that makes it to your credit report, medical records, criminal history, etc. involves, at least, a second party.
So you're saying you'd be ok with my opening up my murder factory? Where you drop the "product" into a shoot at one end and through an automated process the "product" is shot, stabbed, sliced, diced, electrocuted, drowned, whipped, ground, fricasseed, grated, steamed, boiled, broiled, fried and finally spit out the other end in neat little individually wrapped packets. And I can point at legitimate uses of people dropping their cows in there, and whenever the family of any non-cow writes me a letter I'll go ahead and pull the "product" from the line. You're OK with that? It's ridiculous I know, but so is your "it's automated" defense.
You need to ask the question whether Google should be allowed to profit from massive copyright violation just because it is hard or expensive to not do so. We generally don't allow any other industries to get away with "harmful" behaviors just because it's hard or expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you are confusing the fact that old apps don't support new features with no new features. This is the expected behavior. I mean, it's not like starcraft should automagically switch from isometric sprits to directx 10 3D because Microsoft released a new OS.
As far as new features in the OS. One that pops right out that isn't just eye-candy is the audio support. The OS tuning my speaker setup automatically is pretty sweet. Having seperate volume controls for each audio application is also really handy.
Natively you also have a ton of more visibility into what is going on due to the included monitoring tools.
The mini/live windows are pretty nice too. Works on tabs in sea monkey as well.
Wow. Another attorney wants a settlement. Woop de do.
This has been available for a long time. Before they released the OS. Before it shipped to corp customers. Have you ever seen a car commercial? Or an advertisement for anything that includes options? They demonstrate the top of the line and they mention prices of the bottom of the line.
Yeah. I'd like to hear the names of these countries too. In fact why wouldn't you cough that up in the first place? Because you're making it up? Afraid that if you said a name a dozen people would point at examples of censorship? Point at politicians on the take? Or are you Prince Roy?
Whatever. 5. pshaw. You'll never beat The first Slashdot troll post investigation. While they've gone in and tried to rewrite history, K5 has the juice.
Because he has damned 3D technology to confirm his theory as the absolutely proven method used. Goddammit! He modeled it on his computer, it is the inviolate truth.
You mean we don't have that market now?
When there are a million people a month joining the internet you are losing market share if your number of visitors remains fixed. Sort of like you get a paycut when you don't at least a 3% (or so, whatever is the current inflation rate) every year.
You are certainly pigeonholing both religious people and scientists. There are plenty of scientists who think they know the truth and are not longer searching, and there are plenty of believers who are still looking for the truth. Take a look at the number of people believe the big bang without any experimental evidence and no observational evidence that can't be explained by other theories. Just because an authority told them it was true. Don't rail on the religious for not personally investigating every aspect of their faith unless you're willing to do the same to every secularist. How many of the anti-religious here can describe Hawking radiation and its significance? How can you explain the rapid expansion period? It's a useful phenomena that has been created to make the math work.
Personally I'd prefer that some scientists just take their shit on faith instead of, for example, spending $30 million pumping energy into the upper atmosphere just to see what it does.
And, while I'm a big fan of scientific research, I sometimes wonder about the rationality of the world spending $2.5 billion creating a device to look for a particle that may or may not exist and which, as yet, not a single scientist can even suggest practical spin-offs of the search for the Higgs boson.
When was it a question of reliability? It was a question of neutrality. Every nation represents it's own interests over those of other nations. Even Switzerland.
Yep. I do not filter on IP addresses. I block almost all incoming ports, but the ports that are open are open to any IP address.
What skills do you imagine it takes to forge an IP address?
Yay for imaginary! Yay gravity! Yay strong nuclear force! Yay weak nuclear force! Yay electro-magnetic force! Yay big bang! Yay speed of light!
I don't believe in organized religion, but I don't have the hubris to claim that my beliefs are not faith based.
If you want to be pedantic about it those 48% of the responders are right. Evolution, genetic drift, natural selection, etc. have very little evidence to support them. Personally I think they're the best bet. But there isn't hard and strict scientific evidence that demonstrates evolution occurs. Nobody has observed an organism mutate and then saw the parent organism be selected against with the end result that the new organism continues and the old organism has died out. The fossil record is very good for the purpose of proving extinction, but very poor for proving evolution.
As I told a friend recently, so far through out human history science has been 100% wrong.
I think you fail to understand. Relying on IP or DNS is like putting regular household windows on a vault. They serve no purpose so leave them out. Additionally neither system was designed as a security mechanism, using them as such is asking for trouble. To extend your boolean logic here is an equivalent formula for you: 1 AND 1 AND private key. For anyone intent on breaking into your system, the first two will always be true.
And?
If the masses want to have this type of capability, they either need to develop the technical capability and build out the infrastructure on their own dime or pay someone else to do it. Having some third party do it for them for free while ripping off content producers is a losers game.
Why would you trust DNS for anything? Or IPs? The only thing you may trust is the correct private key. And maybe not even that.
Switzerland isn't neutral. They are firmly on their side. You can tell by the way they looted jewish deposits during world war ii.
It should be controversial. What's so special about police officers? Why doesn't his lack of support extend to any game where you kill people?
So are they going to break it out everytime someone is lost? Or is this more of that equal treatment where some people are more equal than others?
Not half so silly as 12,000 people forming a search and rescue team then going down to the local starbucks to sip coffee and look at pictures. Way to go nerds!
Since you can't understand the difference between a product sold by a business and a service actively controlled and exploited by a business, why do you participate? You can make all the stupid pseudo-analogies you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Youtube is not a tool. It is not an inanimate object completely under the control of whoever picks it up. It is absolutely and totally under the control of Google and Google's employees. You, as a user of youtube, can do nothing with it that they do not explicitly allow you to do. How hard is that to comprehend?
He's not on target at all. First, he'd have to skip from the manufacturer of the woodchipper to the owner of the woodchipper. Then he'd have to hypothesize a wood chipper that had a million feed hoppers hidden in the dark. Specifically setup so that there is no way to tell who is putting what into the machine. And the owner of the wood chipper somehow made money off of intestines and brains spraying from the outlet. And even after someone coming along and pointing out that "Inside that sack right there, that's Bob." So they pull Bob from the machine. And then they calmly watch and collect money as someone else chucks Bob right back into the machine. And when someone says "Gosh, this is terrible. The way all these people are dying in your wood chipper." They answer with "Not our fault. We've got a sign right there that says 'Don't put people in the machine.' and whenever anyone asks us to we take people out of the machine. It would cut into our profit margin if we had to actually look at what was being put into the machine before we started making money off it." Then he'd be on target.
Youtube built a system that facilitates copyright infringment. They cannot identify who uploads a particular clip. They do not prevent reuploading of the exact same file that has been legally removed. They are nothing like an ISP.
The real question is will Google be able to make their billion dollars back before the law is amended to eliminate this particular situation. My guess is that the second they have to screen each video clip or that they must be able to identify the exact person (ie. real name and address) who uploaded a particular clip, Youtube will grind to a halt.
Where are you everytime there is a story about some corporation trading in your* personal data? Thirty years ago your data was just as distributed and collected as it is now. The difference is exactly the difference that allows some hosehead to share a copy of his recently purchased CD with 500,000 of his best friends. Maybe data collection and sharing should be banned. But maybe the right thing is for the consumers to come up with a lifestyle that isn't based on anonymity and unaccountability.
It used to be that if you wanted a luxury you would work hard for it. Now the entitlement generation just bases their ethical code on the ever popular rallying cry of the two year old: "gimme! mine!"
* - Not really yours, since anything that makes it to your credit report, medical records, criminal history, etc. involves, at least, a second party.
If you're not even going to make an effort to understand the argument why do you participate?
So you're saying you'd be ok with my opening up my murder factory? Where you drop the "product" into a shoot at one end and through an automated process the "product" is shot, stabbed, sliced, diced, electrocuted, drowned, whipped, ground, fricasseed, grated, steamed, boiled, broiled, fried and finally spit out the other end in neat little individually wrapped packets. And I can point at legitimate uses of people dropping their cows in there, and whenever the family of any non-cow writes me a letter I'll go ahead and pull the "product" from the line. You're OK with that? It's ridiculous I know, but so is your "it's automated" defense.
You need to ask the question whether Google should be allowed to profit from massive copyright violation just because it is hard or expensive to not do so. We generally don't allow any other industries to get away with "harmful" behaviors just because it's hard or expensive.