Although I applaud standing one's ground, you must understand that of those who don't there is a portion who aren't simply caving in - they are taking a calculated decision.
Do I... A. Stand by ground, go to jail, and spend the next 4-8 years there pretty much powerless. or B. Let them win this one, and be free to fight another day that isn't 4-8 years into the future - like the next day.
Which option one chooses -should- be carefully considered.. I presume GP did:) ( not saying they would actually go to jail, let alone for 4-8 years )
1. make app X convert to a format device Y can understand 2. put the format in a streaming format header 3. put the format on a website 4. ??? wtf?
So this specifically was a tutorial with regards to MythTV and seeing your recordings on your mobile phone, and the steps were pretty much as above? Why is this front page news? Why is this news at all? Would it be front page news if I used a combination of my Avermedia recording app, mIRC, windows media encoder and the Apache web server to achieve the same but for "Stream Avermedia to your wifi-enabled PocketPC"?
Meh... on-topic.. 3G is fun and all, unless you have data rates. T-Mobile has a nice 'limitless' data connection (flat fee) in most of western Europe - but almost all others will charge you up the wazoo per MB. Until that drops or stops, I'm not streaming anything to my phone - I'll just copy it to the 2GB MiniSD card, tyvm.
Good point, though still... they could just be setting up for inviting the people of those major cities over for a guided tour of their spaceships *nod*
Parent has a good point, but not in the way they expect - I suspect.
Every time it's about the numbers - and of course they have to use numbers, because the members of congress they support like the numbers. But on the flip side, they always get -attacked- over those numbers as well, such as here on Slashdot. Review the comments, and one thing should become glaringly obvious: nobody seems to think that there aren't any losses from piracy, just that the amount is inaccurate - and some say can't be measured anyway.
But most people seems to skip the former half of that point... there are losses. So what if it's not $7B? Say it's only $5M - that's still $5M I'm sure they would rather have had than not have. Whether you think they're entitled to that $7B, $5M, or even $5 (bargain bin DVD sales) is another matter - but per their business, they should; I bet the RIAA/MPAA would wish even only half the people here defended the business model of -selling- media as much as they were to defend the GPL*, it'd be a lot healthier an industry to begin with.
* "if you don't like the terms of the GPL, then don't incorporate the GPL software" - not "then do it anyway"
"if you don't like paying money for a movie, then don't watch the movie" - not "then pirate the movie and watch it anyway"
if you prefer the 'stolen' copy for the reasons you mentioned, why wouldn't you go out and buy the original anyway?
it's one thing to dislike those things, and getting a pirated copy on the side so you can enjoy it the way you want to - it's another entirely to enjoy it (in any way) without any reward for those who produced it
It's an option... You don't -have- to get the Smart Key. You have to pay extra to get it. There's tons of reasons not to get a Prius, but this isn't particularly one of them.
Regardless, WoW should have nothing to do with either of them apart from legislation restricting export of certain goods, such as software, to countries to which the originating country holds an embargo - such as Iran. I had to look into that for the software developed at our country as well to see if we could sell to a potential customer in Iraq - and we could after it was 'liberated'. Fore more information, see:
Point 2: 2. General Software Note. License Exception TSU (\"mass market\" software) is available to all destinations, except countries in Country Group E:1 of Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR, for release of software that is generally available to the public by being:
There's other things it really got wrong, really.. the voice synth (see also poster above) could just have been bought by both David/and/ NORAD - that's not entirely infeasible.
However, the codes being projected onto their faces is something that is indeed plain wrong - it's done in many other movies as well.
The 'exploding' consoles are odd as well - if WOPR's drawing power, there wouldn't be a power surge that would blow out components (like they do on Star Trek.. all the time.)
Other than that, the movie's actually fairly nice from a techie viewpoint, and definitely good over all. Who has seen the movie and doesn't remember the chairs being taken out of the missile silo control bunkers? They could have left the seats there, save them a couple bucks for dismounting them and removing them, but it made the image very clear that the 'human being' was being taken out of the loop.
...in fact, he may not be a genius. However, he worked on the tech side of a TV broadcasting station, using the same satellites the aliens were, and recognized that the distortions in TV picture weren't random, but rather repetitive - if decreasing slowly. Most people would probably guess that something's going to happen when it ceased to decrease... after all, "beep... beep beep beepbeepbeebeebebebebebbbbbbbb" tends to be the forecast for some manner of action hero saying "RUN!" or "DUCK!"
Now as to how he'd make the logic jump from that to the countdown being "destruction of all human life", that's another thing to question - but given that most people who believe in aliens fall into two camps: A. they come in peace and B. they're out to destroy us... *shrug*
It's weird questions, really... it's like that bad science website complaining about shuttles not being able to do this-and-that like they did in Armageddon; completely failing to understand that they weren't ordinary shuttles. Of course they could argue that "but those don't exist!" - well yes, and neither do talking animals.. I guess if they find that reason to dismiss a movie, their kids will have a very peculiar childhood.
In addition, the byline reads: "... Good news: the system is password protected. Bad news: it only takes David Lightman... about a minute to guess it."
I hope they mean excluding all the -days- he apparently (he was missed from school for days) spent reviewing library material on the author of the system, reviewing videos, etc. etc. He didn't guess it in 1 minute - it came to him in a thought that lasted mere seconds after Jennifer mentioned the designer's son's name, reciting it from an article.
...that the reason they don't allow AdSense on parked domains, is that they have a special ad program for that: http://www.google.com/domainpark/
So you see.. it's not that it's not allowed per se, it's just that they have very specific rules for parked domains, and you'll have to go through -that- program instead of the general AdSense program.
---
Back on topic: I don't see why Google is getting blamed in this. A typosquatter registers a domain, places ads on it (by whoever, in this case: Google), and not the typosquatter but the ad company is at fault? Riiight. The only way anybody could attempt to argue that would be "if ad companies didn't allow it, typosquatting wouldn't be as lucrative, and less typosquatter domains would exist" - except that if Google (and other reputable ad companies) doesn't do it, one of the many porn kings will. If I -am- going to make a typo, I'd rather be hit with google ads than porn ads (which tend to come in the form of popups, popunders, flash overlays) and attempts to install Spyware Flavor X through Z.
If you think there's no money in bootlegged musics, movies, software (games and business software), then you need to think again. Sure, there may not be much if you're distributing over P2P (some money going to sites hosting trackers for torrents or authors of the P2P software in question instead) - but if you do it through high-rate FTP sites or even further down to actual CD/DVD sales... there is decent money to be made. Depending on the scale and geography of your operation, either a nice sports car, or enough money to not work for a few years.
Now if you meant to say those who are indeed downloading off of P2P networks, or those passing out a CD to their classsmate for free... yeah, agreed, time better spent on the big fishes. That said, both are illegal, so both should be addressed.
( And yes, I know not all downloads are copyright protected, and yes I know that many of those that are, are instead governed by licenses such as the GPL. The context here is audio/video/software that the recipients would not be legally entitled to have. )
I guess I can't read the dialog to see what it says (not to mention that it's not a vanilla Windows environment, so most people won't even recognize it's IE right away), but can't a javascripted dialog pop up again and again and again ad nauseum in Firefox just as well? Be it with a timer event, or by means of an onLeave() cancelling the leave, etc. ?
Ah, yes... I take it you're referring to the two world wars?
Let's see... the U.S. got involved in WW1 because they were helping Europe out? Ah, no, they did so because those silly Germans used their U-boats to sink and seize U.S. commercial ships. Before that, the U.S. tried to stay the hell out of it.
Well then... the U.S. got involved in WW2 because they were helping Europe out? Ah, no, they did so because those silly Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. Before that, the U.S. tried to stay the hell out of it.
Don't get me wrong, a lot of Europeans thank those who have fought in those wars, fighting side-by-side with their own countrymen - to this date, many nations hold remembrance days for those fallen, including special days for (among other) the Americans and Canadians (WW2). But don't kid yourself if you think the U.S. came in to save the day out of the good of their hearts or because other nations needed them to (though ultimately the U.S. troops helped beyond measure) - it did so because it was provoked.
(And of course the U.S. provoked japan with the embargos, etc. etc. - plenty of history books if you want to read about it)
It's funny... you love her music, and you wanted it, so you went out and bought it - came home, found that the DRM killed the experience, and...
returned the product and pirated it instead.
That's funny, because you could also just as well have pirated it without returning the product - that way you'd still be supporting the artist (in a very small way, and yes - you'd also be supporting the label, the drm guys, the shop owner, the guy driving the truck with packages of CDs/DVDs, etc.). All in all, though, nobody really forced you to truly pirate.
Also, you say they have lost you as a customer - that's a good definition, as they didn't lose you as a consumer. You still get to enjoy the end-result of people's work, without rewarding them in the way they have chosen to be wanting to be rewarded (i.e. $$$).
The sibling poster was right - could've bought it legit in a reasonable online store if you really, really felt strongly about returning the DRM-crippled CD/DVD.
True, I should have left out 'distributing', or at least annotate that I meant that others could then copy it from you (a la most file sharing utilities).
I'm glad you provide such an excellent example for me to work with, though...
You say there's a song that you may play once every two years (seems unlikely - greater chance you would hear it on a radio at that rate and wouldn't have needed to 'pirate' it, but that as an aside), which takes you back to where you were in 1998. This to me means it evokes some manner of emotion for you, it brings back memories, etc. - like it or not, the song has value to you. Yet, you're also saying that this value it has to you does not even equal $0.99 (iTunes assumption) - is that really how little you value this song (see above)? If not, and you do value it more than that - then why wouldn't you buy it?
That's a funny way of looking at it, and I partially share it. You may copy all my commercial goods all you want, distribute them, etc. etc.... the day that I can copy a loaf of bread*. Until that day, I have to buy my bread, and you have to buy my commercial goods. (* and the baker can copy wheat, and the farmer can copy seeds and manure, etc.)
If you don't agree with that - by all means. If you subsequently also act upon your disagreement by copying my commercial goods, you're an ass -and- you're breaking the law.
-----
Looking at it another way... if you wouldn't have gone out to buy the product, then what on Earth makes you feel like you're entitled to it all the same?
true, but if a U.S. candy company would try a continental europe market first, it'd likely be the German one.
btw, 'Blätterkrokant' - unless images.google.com isn't exactly giving correct results, is a year-round thing here in The Netherlands. Commonly referred to as plain 'bonbons', even though I'm not sure that's what they are:)
Typical Dutch easter candy is just chocolate eggs wrapped in colorful foils, lots of nuts, special easter bread (thicker dough, and often baked in the shape of a hare (no idea why not a bunny.) and bread loafs with bits of 'fruit', powder sugar on top, and a line of almond paste you're supposed to scoop out and spread over the surface of a slice. Easter isn't too much about candy here other than those chocolate eggs:) ( which do come in a gazillion shapes, sizes and flavors )
Sure, the entire world (presumably) knows what marshmellows are. Even if they're of slightly different consistency and are named differently (like 'spekkies' or 'spekjes' in The Netherlands).
However, and this is the big one: what about marshmellow peeps? I know of them because my gf sent some to me for easter two years ago. They're tiny yellow (sometimes pink, I'm sure they come in blue too) sugar-coated marshmellow-ish things that vaguely resemble a 'peep'; or chick (the hatchling chicken/rooster kind). In all honesty, they look more like ducks than chicks, but whatever.
So I know what they are... but do they 'rule the world'? Outside of an expatriate store here in The Hague, I haven't seen them -anywhere- for sale in The Netherlands. I would imagine that the same goes for any other country where the product simply hasn't been introduced. I would actually not be surprised if this -is- indeed a north-american curiosity at worst, and something sold in e.g. the UK+Ireland, Australia and perhaps Germany at best.
So GP is quite right in calling attention to the 'rule the world' bit. Unfortunately they seem to have left out the word 'peeps' in his final sentence, causing the mayhem of "you don't know what marshmellows are!?" replies that missed the point they were trying to make.
Then again, maybe he really did mean that he doesn't know what marshmellows are, in which case I'll join the ranks and say "wtf?":)
Indeed.. which used to make me wonder why people are supposedly so protective of their social security number. But from reading plenty of Slashdot (not sure that's healthy, I know) it seems as though having a SSN is like having the master key to all information you could ever possibly want on a person, without further authentication required.
So it seems to me that people knowing your SSN isn't bad per se, it's the fact that with -just- the SSN, they can do things they really shouldn't be able to.
It's like credit card vs debit card, in a way... If you have all the info on a credit card, you can happily shop away online, book tickets over the phone, etc. This is what SSN is seems to be. If you have somebody's debit card PIN number... well lucky you, but you'll still also need the card itself (or a copy, but that's another discussion). This is what SSN should be (not a card, per se.. but certainly further authentication requirements).
...these specific cases, as Shake was available on Windows NT - until Apple bought it, killed the Windows version, and drove the cost of the Linux version up. Pro/Logic? Same type of story.
Embrace, extend, destroy - sound like another company we know?
Not quite equating Apple with Microsoft here, but there's certain trais the companies share.
This isn't such a big deal when you're posting some pirated music videos to YouTube, but for those of us who create new original video content, it is a bit galling to see our work reposted and stripped of any credit to the authors.
Ahhh... hypocrisy at its finest. "It's okay to do it to others, but not to me - because my content is special"
Slashdot Mirror
Although I applaud standing one's ground, you must understand that of those who don't there is a portion who aren't simply caving in - they are taking a calculated decision.
:)
Do I...
A. Stand by ground, go to jail, and spend the next 4-8 years there pretty much powerless.
or
B. Let them win this one, and be free to fight another day that isn't 4-8 years into the future - like the next day.
Which option one chooses -should- be carefully considered.. I presume GP did
( not saying they would actually go to jail, let alone for 4-8 years )
It's "Insightful" if anything, although it's a no-brainer.
That said - an airport terminal and collateral damages (people staying away, lawsuits, etc.) will run much, much higher than a plane.
1. make app X convert to a format device Y can understand
2. put the format in a streaming format header
3. put the format on a website
4. ??? wtf?
So this specifically was a tutorial with regards to MythTV and seeing your recordings on your mobile phone, and the steps were pretty much as above? Why is this front page news? Why is this news at all? Would it be front page news if I used a combination of my Avermedia recording app, mIRC, windows media encoder and the Apache web server to achieve the same but for "Stream Avermedia to your wifi-enabled PocketPC"?
Meh... on-topic.. 3G is fun and all, unless you have data rates. T-Mobile has a nice 'limitless' data connection (flat fee) in most of western Europe - but almost all others will charge you up the wazoo per MB. Until that drops or stops, I'm not streaming anything to my phone - I'll just copy it to the 2GB MiniSD card, tyvm.
In the EU, they'd have to eye -this- little pink guy instead:= &q=Duracell+Bunny
http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr
( no, not the same company at all - quite heavy competitors in the U.S. actually, though Duracell doesn't use their bunny in the U.S. I think )
have to reply with this with the following: rofl!
Good point, though still... they could just be setting up for inviting the people of those major cities over for a guided tour of their spaceships *nod*
Parent has a good point, but not in the way they expect - I suspect.
Every time it's about the numbers - and of course they have to use numbers, because the members of congress they support like the numbers.
But on the flip side, they always get -attacked- over those numbers as well, such as here on Slashdot. Review the comments, and one thing should become glaringly obvious: nobody seems to think that there aren't any losses from piracy, just that the amount is inaccurate - and some say can't be measured anyway.
But most people seems to skip the former half of that point... there are losses. So what if it's not $7B? Say it's only $5M - that's still $5M I'm sure they would rather have had than not have. Whether you think they're entitled to that $7B, $5M, or even $5 (bargain bin DVD sales) is another matter - but per their business, they should; I bet the RIAA/MPAA would wish even only half the people here defended the business model of -selling- media as much as they were to defend the GPL*, it'd be a lot healthier an industry to begin with.
* "if you don't like the terms of the GPL, then don't incorporate the GPL software" - not "then do it anyway"
"if you don't like paying money for a movie, then don't watch the movie" - not "then pirate the movie and watch it anyway"
if you prefer the 'stolen' copy for the reasons you mentioned, why wouldn't you go out and buy the original anyway?
it's one thing to dislike those things, and getting a pirated copy on the side so you can enjoy it the way you want to - it's another entirely to enjoy it (in any way) without any reward for those who produced it
It's an option... You don't -have- to get the Smart Key. You have to pay extra to get it. There's tons of reasons not to get a Prius, but this isn't particularly one of them.
This is about the Axis of Evil - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil
Regardless, WoW should have nothing to do with either of them apart from legislation restricting export of certain goods, such as software, to countries to which the originating country holds an embargo - such as Iran.
I had to look into that for the software developed at our country as well to see if we could sell to a potential customer in Iraq - and we could after it was 'liberated'.
Fore more information, see:
There's other things it really got wrong, really.. the voice synth (see also poster above) could just have been bought by both David /and/ NORAD - that's not entirely infeasible.
However, the codes being projected onto their faces is something that is indeed plain wrong - it's done in many other movies as well.
The 'exploding' consoles are odd as well - if WOPR's drawing power, there wouldn't be a power surge that would blow out components (like they do on Star Trek.. all the time.)
Other than that, the movie's actually fairly nice from a techie viewpoint, and definitely good over all. Who has seen the movie and doesn't remember the chairs being taken out of the missile silo control bunkers? They could have left the seats there, save them a couple bucks for dismounting them and removing them, but it made the image very clear that the 'human being' was being taken out of the loop.
...in fact, he may not be a genius. However, he worked on the tech side of a TV broadcasting station, using the same satellites the aliens were, and recognized that the distortions in TV picture weren't random, but rather repetitive - if decreasing slowly. Most people would probably guess that something's going to happen when it ceased to decrease... after all, "beep ... beep beep beepbeepbeebeebebebebebbbbbbbb" tends to be the forecast for some manner of action hero saying "RUN!" or "DUCK!"
Now as to how he'd make the logic jump from that to the countdown being "destruction of all human life", that's another thing to question - but given that most people who believe in aliens fall into two camps: A. they come in peace and B. they're out to destroy us... *shrug*
It's weird questions, really... it's like that bad science website complaining about shuttles not being able to do this-and-that like they did in Armageddon; completely failing to understand that they weren't ordinary shuttles. Of course they could argue that "but those don't exist!" - well yes, and neither do talking animals.. I guess if they find that reason to dismiss a movie, their kids will have a very peculiar childhood.
In short: it's a movie - who gives a flying f*ck?
In addition, the byline reads: ... about a minute to guess it."
"... Good news: the system is password protected. Bad news: it only takes David Lightman
I hope they mean excluding all the -days- he apparently (he was missed from school for days) spent reviewing library material on the author of the system, reviewing videos, etc. etc. He didn't guess it in 1 minute - it came to him in a thought that lasted mere seconds after Jennifer mentioned the designer's son's name, reciting it from an article.
...that the reason they don't allow AdSense on parked domains, is that they have a special ad program for that: http://www.google.com/domainpark/
So you see.. it's not that it's not allowed per se, it's just that they have very specific rules for parked domains, and you'll have to go through -that- program instead of the general AdSense program.
---
Back on topic: I don't see why Google is getting blamed in this. A typosquatter registers a domain, places ads on it (by whoever, in this case: Google), and not the typosquatter but the ad company is at fault? Riiight. The only way anybody could attempt to argue that would be "if ad companies didn't allow it, typosquatting wouldn't be as lucrative, and less typosquatter domains would exist" - except that if Google (and other reputable ad companies) doesn't do it, one of the many porn kings will. If I -am- going to make a typo, I'd rather be hit with google ads than porn ads (which tend to come in the form of popups, popunders, flash overlays) and attempts to install Spyware Flavor X through Z.
Petty Warez, you say?
If you think there's no money in bootlegged musics, movies, software (games and business software), then you need to think again. Sure, there may not be much if you're distributing over P2P (some money going to sites hosting trackers for torrents or authors of the P2P software in question instead) - but if you do it through high-rate FTP sites or even further down to actual CD/DVD sales... there is decent money to be made. Depending on the scale and geography of your operation, either a nice sports car, or enough money to not work for a few years.
Now if you meant to say those who are indeed downloading off of P2P networks, or those passing out a CD to their classsmate for free... yeah, agreed, time better spent on the big fishes. That said, both are illegal, so both should be addressed.
( And yes, I know not all downloads are copyright protected, and yes I know that many of those that are, are instead governed by licenses such as the GPL. The context here is audio/video/software that the recipients would not be legally entitled to have. )
I guess I can't read the dialog to see what it says (not to mention that it's not a vanilla Windows environment, so most people won't even recognize it's IE right away), but can't a javascripted dialog pop up again and again and again ad nauseum in Firefox just as well? Be it with a timer event, or by means of an onLeave() cancelling the leave, etc. ?
Ah, yes... I take it you're referring to the two world wars?
Let's see... the U.S. got involved in WW1 because they were helping Europe out? Ah, no, they did so because those silly Germans used their U-boats to sink and seize U.S. commercial ships. Before that, the U.S. tried to stay the hell out of it.
Well then... the U.S. got involved in WW2 because they were helping Europe out? Ah, no, they did so because those silly Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. Before that, the U.S. tried to stay the hell out of it.
Don't get me wrong, a lot of Europeans thank those who have fought in those wars, fighting side-by-side with their own countrymen - to this date, many nations hold remembrance days for those fallen, including special days for (among other) the Americans and Canadians (WW2). But don't kid yourself if you think the U.S. came in to save the day out of the good of their hearts or because other nations needed them to (though ultimately the U.S. troops helped beyond measure) - it did so because it was provoked.
(And of course the U.S. provoked japan with the embargos, etc. etc. - plenty of history books if you want to read about it)
/sarcasm
It's funny... you love her music, and you wanted it, so you went out and bought it - came home, found that the DRM killed the experience, and...
returned the product and pirated it instead.
That's funny, because you could also just as well have pirated it without returning the product - that way you'd still be supporting the artist (in a very small way, and yes - you'd also be supporting the label, the drm guys, the shop owner, the guy driving the truck with packages of CDs/DVDs, etc.). All in all, though, nobody really forced you to truly pirate.
Also, you say they have lost you as a customer - that's a good definition, as they didn't lose you as a consumer. You still get to enjoy the end-result of people's work, without rewarding them in the way they have chosen to be wanting to be rewarded (i.e. $$$).
The sibling poster was right - could've bought it legit in a reasonable online store if you really, really felt strongly about returning the DRM-crippled CD/DVD.
Just my 2cts..
True, I should have left out 'distributing', or at least annotate that I meant that others could then copy it from you (a la most file sharing utilities).
:)
I'm glad you provide such an excellent example for me to work with, though...
You say there's a song that you may play once every two years (seems unlikely - greater chance you would hear it on a radio at that rate and wouldn't have needed to 'pirate' it, but that as an aside), which takes you back to where you were in 1998. This to me means it evokes some manner of emotion for you, it brings back memories, etc. - like it or not, the song has value to you.
Yet, you're also saying that this value it has to you does not even equal $0.99 (iTunes assumption) - is that really how little you value this song (see above)? If not, and you do value it more than that - then why wouldn't you buy it?
Just my 2cts
That's a funny way of looking at it, and I partially share it. You may copy all my commercial goods all you want, distribute them, etc. etc. ... the day that I can copy a loaf of bread*. Until that day, I have to buy my bread, and you have to buy my commercial goods.
(* and the baker can copy wheat, and the farmer can copy seeds and manure, etc.)
If you don't agree with that - by all means. If you subsequently also act upon your disagreement by copying my commercial goods, you're an ass -and- you're breaking the law.
-----
Looking at it another way... if you wouldn't have gone out to buy the product, then what on Earth makes you feel like you're entitled to it all the same?
true, but if a U.S. candy company would try a continental europe market first, it'd likely be the German one.
:)
:) ( which do come in a gazillion shapes, sizes and flavors )
btw, 'Blätterkrokant' - unless images.google.com isn't exactly giving correct results, is a year-round thing here in The Netherlands. Commonly referred to as plain 'bonbons', even though I'm not sure that's what they are
Typical Dutch easter candy is just chocolate eggs wrapped in colorful foils, lots of nuts, special easter bread (thicker dough, and often baked in the shape of a hare (no idea why not a bunny.) and bread loafs with bits of 'fruit', powder sugar on top, and a line of almond paste you're supposed to scoop out and spread over the surface of a slice. Easter isn't too much about candy here other than those chocolate eggs
Sure, the entire world (presumably) knows what marshmellows are. Even if they're of slightly different consistency and are named differently (like 'spekkies' or 'spekjes' in The Netherlands).
:)
However, and this is the big one: what about marshmellow peeps?
I know of them because my gf sent some to me for easter two years ago. They're tiny yellow (sometimes pink, I'm sure they come in blue too) sugar-coated marshmellow-ish things that vaguely resemble a 'peep'; or chick (the hatchling chicken/rooster kind). In all honesty, they look more like ducks than chicks, but whatever.
So I know what they are... but do they 'rule the world'? Outside of an expatriate store here in The Hague, I haven't seen them -anywhere- for sale in The Netherlands. I would imagine that the same goes for any other country where the product simply hasn't been introduced. I would actually not be surprised if this -is- indeed a north-american curiosity at worst, and something sold in e.g. the UK+Ireland, Australia and perhaps Germany at best.
So GP is quite right in calling attention to the 'rule the world' bit. Unfortunately they seem to have left out the word 'peeps' in his final sentence, causing the mayhem of "you don't know what marshmellows are!?" replies that missed the point they were trying to make.
Then again, maybe he really did mean that he doesn't know what marshmellows are, in which case I'll join the ranks and say "wtf?"
Indeed.. which used to make me wonder why people are supposedly so protective of their social security number. But from reading plenty of Slashdot (not sure that's healthy, I know) it seems as though having a SSN is like having the master key to all information you could ever possibly want on a person, without further authentication required.
So it seems to me that people knowing your SSN isn't bad per se, it's the fact that with -just- the SSN, they can do things they really shouldn't be able to.
It's like credit card vs debit card, in a way...
If you have all the info on a credit card, you can happily shop away online, book tickets over the phone, etc. This is what SSN is seems to be.
If you have somebody's debit card PIN number... well lucky you, but you'll still also need the card itself (or a copy, but that's another discussion). This is what SSN should be (not a card, per se.. but certainly further authentication requirements).
...these specific cases, as Shake was available on Windows NT - until Apple bought it, killed the Windows version, and drove the cost of the Linux version up. Pro/Logic? Same type of story.
Embrace, extend, destroy - sound like another company we know?
Not quite equating Apple with Microsoft here, but there's certain trais the companies share.
Ahhh... hypocrisy at its finest. "It's okay to do it to others, but not to me - because my content is special"