We all deserve huge lawsuits cause we had shitty childhoods.
What I'm saying is the kid is going to grow up to be an adult that everyone hates because he mitigates responsibility. He's the one that going to be unhappy, and he'll have some money. I guess he can buy a beamer and spend the rest on therapy or something.
My point is that three families are poor and the kid is still a loser.
I'm sure SWK can use this little event to totally mitigate any responsibility he has in his life to being happy. The fact is that he was a nerdy little wuss boy before the video got released. I can absolutely guarantee you that if he was not the kind of person to attract negativity into him life then the dumb video never would have been a big deal (to him). See the one constant in the entire situation is *HIM*. He made the video, it got out, so fucking what. He can't deal with it cause he's too busy feeling emotionally wounded.
Now everyone in his town probably hates him more because he ruined three families lives because the world laughed a video that he fucking made. That he fucking made. That he made. Oops.
In his belief system everyone hates him. That what he attracts. Now he's just a nerdy wuss boy with money.
I just don't have sympathy for people like that because I was a cool kid in school that hung with with nerds too and just because they are socially inept does not stop them from being *assholes*. Stop sympathizing with him and saying that people hate him because he is fat and awkward. Perhaps he was ostracized in school because he's a *asshole*. It's entirely possible.
I suppose you could say that we've successfully proved that science doesn't work because two apparently valid clinical studies contradicted one another.
Firstly I understand people are upset that bittorrent packets in particular are being throttled. I'm kind of ambivalent about the situation because I only ever used bittorrent to grab BSG cause they air in the states before they do in Canada.. and the quality of the divxs usually sucks anyway. As far as I'm concerned, I'd be happy d/ling BSG for $2 a pop if it was possible.
I haven't checked bittorent speed in a while but if it's a matter of taking 2 days to d/l a BSG episode instead of 2 hours, I'm not going to whine about it too loudly.
I think that everyone has to agree however that piracy has put us in this situation.
Because again, it's just a fact that most traffic on the net is p2p, most of that is bittorrent, and most of that is piracy.
Personally I think some kind of bandwidth metering is fair, of course people sucking all the bandwidth aren't going to think so.
It will be interesting to see if the internet goes to a 'tiered' system as the big telecoms in the states are hoping. At that point this it all just a moot argument anyway, encryption or not.
...way back when the monthly b/w limit on Roger's was 1gb.
That's right, 1, as in uno.
Now people are whining about 60-100?
How much warez are you fools downloading anyway?
The fact is that at the end of the day ISPs pay for bandwidtch per byte. I say charge people that 'need' >100gb per byte more then the rest of us.
This isn't a new problem. As long there's been broadband there's been people that absolutely, positively, MUST saturate their entire bandwidth 24/7/365, and these people cry bloody murder when someone tells them they can't.
Bittorrent just happens to be the way that warez junkies do this today. Think about it. If you're shaw/rogers, and you see that 90% of your bandwidth usage is bitttorrent packets being sent by 1% of your customers, what would you do?
I agree but the crime is more like petty vandalism, ie, spraying your former employers front door and windows with ketchup in the middle of the night. Deleting one account? Gimme a break. A judge wouldn't accept ketchup on the windows costing $20000, but he would accept a deleted account because it's 'computers', and like, computers are all mysterious and technical and stuff.
The system has nothing to do with piracy. It has to do with control of distribution. That way not just anyone can distribute media, only those that purchase the DRM system.
They can shut out whoever they want. Bye bye independent media of any kind.
Like other have said, hey are switching the UPC with another valid one from another product. However probably in Walmart they have a till with only one line of text and a poor description of the item. So the cashier would have to be really paying attention to the items and prices as they are going through, which if it's busy, they are probably not.
However some places like Bestbuy have a full screen of text. Also I noticed they often check to make sure the item matches the what scans and they don't seem in as much of a rush. Probably that scam would be less successful in a place like that.
That happened because if you noticed a bunch of people placed his book on lists with homo-erotic oriented material, hence his book comes up with such material in related searches.
Lets face it, Jack Thompson picked a fight with the nerds and is losing. It's funny.
Most of the arguments here seemed based on the pretense that EULAs are binding contracts, which legal precedent seems to indicate they are not.
"By using this product you agree to..." is a generic moniker that could be attached to any product. I mean why not? In that case the EULA would supersede and trump all other laws, which is obviously absurd. EULAs can be safely ignored and disregarded, provided you follow existing laws, ie, in Canada, if I crack DRM to rip a CD to mp3s, that's Sony's Problem (tm).
Three people go to hotel. The hotel is $30 so they each pay $10. They're in their room and the manager remembers that actually the price is $25, not $30, so he gives the bellboy $5 and tells him to return it to the three people. The bellboy is lazy and doesn't feel like doing math in his head so he pockets $2 and gives a dollar each back to the three people. So now each of the three people paid $9.. $9*3=$27 + $2 that the bellboy pocketed = $29.
Actually the human genome project was publicly funded.
With that information in hand Identifying genes is not as expensive as you would think.
Computer tools, (ie, BLAST) will tell you the 'potential genes' by their sequence (which we have). It's then just a matter of confirming what they do and if they are functional. Once you're at this point it doesn't cost you much. Yes it costs you but certainly not 50 million dollars.
The USPTO is asleep at the wheel because you follow fairly well established protocols to identify genes. There's nothing 'innovative' about those protocols these days. Certainly the identification of a gene falls under the category of 'discovery' and not 'invention'. Theoretically inventions are patentable and discoveries are not.
I would imagine the dumbness of the USPTO is such that they might even grant patents based on 'prospective' genes, ie, running a BLAST search for some known gene in the rat genome against the human genome. In that case you could 'discover' genes in 5 minutes.
Also there's a potential for conflict based on the fact that a patent restricts use of the gene in any way. So publicly available genes then couldn't be used after they're identified? How screwball is that.
Trade secrets doesn't work because prospective genes are easy enough to find (because again, the entire genome is available) that your secret gene would be discovered by others pretty fast.
Patenting gene constructs, ie, GMOs I don't have a problem with because they're engineered and obviously inventions.
In this case patents *are* evil.
Because,
The patent holders are more inclined I think to sell use of the gene for profit (as ip) rather than applying the knowledge themselves.
Also remember that the acquisition of data identifying the gene in question was done using protocols and techniques in the public domain, probably developed by academia.
The entire situation is pretty much a crook of shit rip off.
Slashdot Mirror
I see.
We all deserve huge lawsuits cause we had shitty childhoods.
What I'm saying is the kid is going to grow up to be an adult that everyone hates because he mitigates responsibility. He's the one that going to be unhappy, and he'll have some money. I guess he can buy a beamer and spend the rest on therapy or something.
My point is that three families are poor and the kid is still a loser.
I'm sure SWK can use this little event to totally mitigate any responsibility he has in his life to being happy. The fact is that he was a nerdy little wuss boy before the video got released. I can absolutely guarantee you that if he was not the kind of person to attract negativity into him life then the dumb video never would have been a big deal (to him). See the one constant in the entire situation is *HIM*. He made the video, it got out, so fucking what. He can't deal with it cause he's too busy feeling emotionally wounded.
Now everyone in his town probably hates him more because he ruined three families lives because the world laughed a video that he fucking made. That he fucking made. That he made. Oops.
In his belief system everyone hates him. That what he attracts. Now he's just a nerdy wuss boy with money.
I just don't have sympathy for people like that because I was a cool kid in school that hung with with nerds too and just because they are socially inept does not stop them from being *assholes*. Stop sympathizing with him and saying that people hate him because he is fat and awkward. Perhaps he was ostracized in school because he's a *asshole*. It's entirely possible.
I suppose you could say that we've successfully proved that science doesn't work because two apparently valid clinical studies contradicted one another.
That's my perfectly reasonable claim.
Firstly I understand people are upset that bittorrent packets in particular are being throttled. I'm kind of ambivalent about the situation because I only ever used bittorrent to grab BSG cause they air in the states before they do in Canada.. and the quality of the divxs usually sucks anyway. As far as I'm concerned, I'd be happy d/ling BSG for $2 a pop if it was possible.
I haven't checked bittorent speed in a while but if it's a matter of taking 2 days to d/l a BSG episode instead of 2 hours, I'm not going to whine about it too loudly.
I think that everyone has to agree however that piracy has put us in this situation.
Because again, it's just a fact that most traffic on the net is p2p, most of that is bittorrent, and most of that is piracy.
Personally I think some kind of bandwidth metering is fair, of course people sucking all the bandwidth aren't going to think so.
It will be interesting to see if the internet goes to a 'tiered' system as the big telecoms in the states are hoping. At that point this it all just a moot argument anyway, encryption or not.
Yes. I agree completely.
...way back when the monthly b/w limit on Roger's was 1gb.
That's right, 1, as in uno.
Now people are whining about 60-100?
How much warez are you fools downloading anyway?
The fact is that at the end of the day ISPs pay for bandwidtch per byte. I say charge people that 'need' >100gb per byte more then the rest of us.
This isn't a new problem. As long there's been broadband there's been people that absolutely, positively, MUST saturate their entire bandwidth 24/7/365, and these people cry bloody murder when someone tells them they can't.
Bittorrent just happens to be the way that warez junkies do this today. Think about it. If you're shaw/rogers, and you see that 90% of your bandwidth usage is bitttorrent packets being sent by 1% of your customers, what would you do?
It was mostly a rhetorical question anyway.
Actually I can't predict what you would do in your example situation because you could be lying.
Why don't animals have free will then?
Doesn't determinism rely on a governing force outside of the will?
Determinism and free will are directly conflicting ideas. Please explain.
I agree but the crime is more like petty vandalism, ie, spraying your former employers front door and windows with ketchup in the middle of the night. Deleting one account? Gimme a break. A judge wouldn't accept ketchup on the windows costing $20000, but he would accept a deleted account because it's 'computers', and like, computers are all mysterious and technical and stuff.
That's exactly the point of doing this.
The system has nothing to do with piracy. It has to do with control of distribution. That way not just anyone can distribute media, only those that purchase the DRM system.
They can shut out whoever they want. Bye bye independent media of any kind.
Like other have said, hey are switching the UPC with another valid one from another product. However probably in Walmart they have a till with only one line of text and a poor description of the item. So the cashier would have to be really paying attention to the items and prices as they are going through, which if it's busy, they are probably not.
However some places like Bestbuy have a full screen of text. Also I noticed they often check to make sure the item matches the what scans and they don't seem in as much of a rush. Probably that scam would be less successful in a place like that.
That happened because if you noticed a bunch of people placed his book on lists with homo-erotic oriented material, hence his book comes up with such material in related searches.
Lets face it, Jack Thompson picked a fight with the nerds and is losing. It's funny.
Most of the arguments here seemed based on the pretense that EULAs are binding contracts, which legal precedent seems to indicate they are not.
"By using this product you agree to..." is a generic moniker that could be attached to any product. I mean why not? In that case the EULA would supersede and trump all other laws, which is obviously absurd. EULAs can be safely ignored and disregarded, provided you follow existing laws, ie, in Canada, if I crack DRM to rip a CD to mp3s, that's Sony's Problem (tm).
Plant life makes a great carbon sink. That's how all that carbon ended up in fossil fuels in the first place.
"Suddenly they are the ultimate vehicle for brand-bashing, personal attacks, political extremism and smear campaigns."
Kinda like they're doing with blogs. It's called free speech.
Fucking idiots.
I guess the Catholic Church knows all about sexual predators, don't they?
I agree my windows box is great for games. And cheap now too, barely more then a console costs.
I do everything else on my ibook.
Three people go to hotel. The hotel is $30 so they each pay $10. They're in their room and the manager remembers that actually the price is $25, not $30, so he gives the bellboy $5 and tells him to return it to the three people. The bellboy is lazy and doesn't feel like doing math in his head so he pockets $2 and gives a dollar each back to the three people. So now each of the three people paid $9.. $9*3=$27 + $2 that the bellboy pocketed = $29.
Where did the other dollar go?
It's stupid I know.
Now they need to figure out how to get two of these things working together in SLI.. or what about *four* of them in gigabyte's crazy quad mb:
i ndex.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20051004/
sweeeeeeet.
Actually the human genome project was publicly funded.
With that information in hand Identifying genes is not as expensive as you would think.
Computer tools, (ie, BLAST) will tell you the 'potential genes' by their sequence (which we have). It's then just a matter of confirming what they do and if they are functional. Once you're at this point it doesn't cost you much. Yes it costs you but certainly not 50 million dollars.
The USPTO is asleep at the wheel because you follow fairly well established protocols to identify genes. There's nothing 'innovative' about those protocols these days. Certainly the identification of a gene falls under the category of 'discovery' and not 'invention'. Theoretically inventions are patentable and discoveries are not.
I would imagine the dumbness of the USPTO is such that they might even grant patents based on 'prospective' genes, ie, running a BLAST search for some known gene in the rat genome against the human genome. In that case you could 'discover' genes in 5 minutes.
Also there's a potential for conflict based on the fact that a patent restricts use of the gene in any way. So publicly available genes then couldn't be used after they're identified? How screwball is that.
Trade secrets doesn't work because prospective genes are easy enough to find (because again, the entire genome is available) that your secret gene would be discovered by others pretty fast.
Patenting gene constructs, ie, GMOs I don't have a problem with because they're engineered and obviously inventions.
In this case patents *are* evil.
Because,
The patent holders are more inclined I think to sell use of the gene for profit (as ip) rather than applying the knowledge themselves.
Also remember that the acquisition of data identifying the gene in question was done using protocols and techniques in the public domain, probably developed by academia.
The entire situation is pretty much a crook of shit rip off.
This story has been posted, again.
Apple store is updated:
A ppleStore.woa/72402/wo/k67XqgsiIPmx2rSBFFfYAA1SdhK /1.SLID?nclm=iPod&mco=CC4D3CBB
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/
It looks sweet but I wonder if it's as scratch-tastic as the nano.
I think I'll hold off on buying one until that issue is resolved.