Your statement makes no sense. You can follow IEEE or any other standards and still be convicted of a monopoly. Do you think a judge cares whether microsoft's browser meets standards?
Standards are not law. They are industry recommendations made by non-elected officials who wield no power of law.
Monopoly law is something instituted by elected officials and who wield punitive power.
You're kidding, right? Before there was an event handling specification, IE implemented event handling. There was a need, and no standard. Sometimes you have to innovate. And if you do something and later a standards body writes a standard different than the way you did it, well, can you be blamed for not seeing into the future?
Assuming somehow you could prove that the directors and CxOs knew that the DRM was even sold, (what chances are there that those individuals are even tech savvy enough to know what DRM is), what justifies this? What are the losses? Has anyone stepped forward and said, 'My machine was hacked because of a defect in your product!'
Without quantifiable damages or actual harm, what right do you have to call for them being jailed? I think what's fair is a new copy of the CD without DRM. that's just. Also, a CD mailed with a utility that will clean the rootkit from the machine. That redresses the grievances. The rest of what you wrote is probably driven by anger either at corporate america in general, or at Sony in particular for this sneaky, underhanded tactic. I agree that Sony did a stupid thing, and risked people's computers. I think the FTC should examine and possibly give a fine, on the whole.
Imagine you're a CxO or Board Member. You're job is to predict music taste trends, and to make deals with other companies as part of marketing and such. Then police cuff you during a meeting, because a middle manager told his IT staff to use a contractor to customize and develop a tool for anti-piracy that you had no idea about. But you work for a company, so groupguilt applies.
The only reason we're even debating this issue is because a user didn't know the software was installed. Companies usually indemify themselves against lawsuits and charges by saying 'this software comes with no warrantee, implied or otherwise', so that if there is a bug that could cause a hack, they already told you there's that chance. That's part of that EULA that you clicked through.
I think the thing is that Google doesn't publish what they consider right or wrong. This dude didn't lose anything, but imagine that your business hinges on whether people can find you via google.
Competitors do LOTS of things via google to fuck over your company. They click your ads (this is more prevalant in yahoo, though, where people can see what you pay per click), they get pissed and report you if your webpage is higher on search rankings.
I work for a firm that gets all its business from our Google ranking. We have spent dime zero on advertising, instead we have a well described webpage.
Google's hypocracy is that they DON'T want you to do anything to get higher on their search results, yet people who DO get higher are rewarded with better business and therefore , a higher ranking.
And the thing is, we got booted off, and we weren't using any deceptive techniques. Not that we'd know what google would consider 'deceptive', since google doesn't publish its standards. Yet google respects blogs attacks on information by doing nothing about googlebombing blogs. If google wants the most accurate search results, they sure have a weird way of showing it: No open documentation on standards, allowing tainted results to be displayed, and using capricious methods to reset pageranks.
Umm, when you recycle aluminum or steel, you have to melt it. Same applies for glass, I think.
Recycling requires energy, yes. The benefit for recycling has never been that it takes less energy to form/manufacture , but that it is cheaper to buy X tonnes of used material versus digging/farming/buying X tonnes of new material.
If you're worried about heating, I wouldn't be. Heat can be generated via electricity, which can be generated via clean methods.
And as an experienced user, I find double clicking on the element in the windows form to get the default 'event' handler is way easier than copy/pasting another event handler and renaming it. I like being able to re-factor code by bringing up the properties tab in Visual Studio, it makes renaming and following conventions easier. I also love intellisense, etc. I don't think these tools make anyone any LESS of a programmer, if anything, it lowers the entry bar. Some people do get stuck and rely on the widgets soley, yes. But that's true anywhere. But those same people would just replace widget clicking with copying and pasting from a tutorial or a textbook, which is how people did it before these tools.
If your DB is on the same host as your web/application server
If you are relying on this type of architecture, where one machine does all the work, interoperability with seperate databases is probably not even needed.
But if you're working with a project that needs replication and such, then you really can't rely on DB and web server being the same machine. Sometimes you have to sell your software as an installable product and make it work on multiple DB platforms. Sometimes you have to write to foreign databases using ODBC.
Simplifying queries isn't an extensible solution. For instance, it is intuitive to use "LIMIT 10,20" (MySQL) instead of using "TOP 20 WHERE ID >= 10" (T-SQL). No simplification will fix that branch, and its kind of obvious that one of the solutions makes more sense. (Or, alternatively, how MySQL will by default install rules fill in blank strings in most fields if no data is provided for them, instead of throwing an error.)
What makes it evil? I could get modded up to +5 by just saying the Patriot Act is evil, without saying WHY. How about debating the points of the Act that make it evil? People here on slashdot are just as guilty as the mainstream media, fearmongering with scary titles and finger-pointing. Instead we should be pointing out WHY this is dangerous or not dangerous, and what principles it violates or does not violate.
Eventually, People will stop writing for Operating Systems and Begin writing for Platforms. Meaning, that the.NET platform, an underused but terrific MS library, was made backwards compatible so that people could write for a platform and then the platform can be ported to the appropriate OS, taking the onus away from the developer. Heck, look at the MONO initiative. There may be a day that there's one platform that runs on all three major OSes (Linux, Mac, Windows).
Its interesting to note that on hardware specific platforms like Gaming Consoles, to release a title under all three, most companies develop under a third party toolkit, like Renderware. This way, they can simultaneously launch products and not have a gigantic code branch.
however, until people start actually writing.NET commercially on a large scale, I guess its a moot point.
hey man, I am a videogame fan. I like my xbox 360. What can I say? should I pretend I don't? I was also one of the first people to buy a Sony Playstation, back when we all had a bad taste in our mouths from the last regular corporation to try and dump into the market (phillips 3DO anyone?). I don't have a PS2 becauseabout 75% of games released are released on the big 3 at once (cube, ps2, xbox), and the xbox had marginally better graphics than PS2.
I give credit where credit is due... the original xbox was released after the PS2, and now the xbox 360 beat the PS2 to market, by probably close to a year. I also would give credit to how the PS2 came to market even though there wasn't an imminent MS threat.
Besides, it works both ways. I used to work at Funcoland video game store and heard my fellow employees openly bash xbox to customers. we all have our agendas.
Clearly my impression of the Xbox 360 is that it is positioned to compete significantly better in the next gen console
Could that be because the Xbox360 actually exists, and isn't just an idea. Does PS3 even have a launch date yet? People keep saying this and that about PS3, but Microsoft actually anticipated their existing product's shelf life accurately, and planned for it. I have been dying for some of the stuff the xbox 360 does, like HD gaming, a consistent online experience, and OEM wireless that comes with the system. Sure, xbox has issues, namely a lot of bugs made it through. But since I'm online they're patched pretty quickly and things are working out pretty well.
I'll take HD gaming now versus something that doesn't have a launch date yet.
Not really. The way it works is you request authorization the day of the sale for access for $x. The money is no longer available on the purchasers card. Then at COB (close of Business) the card companies send end of day results. The Transaction has now POSTED, and cannot be voided, but only returned. (which means, if you cancel a sale same day, you won't see it on your card, its as if the transaction never happened. If you cancel the next day, you will see two transactions, the original, and a credit transaction to balance it out.) Effectively, you are billed at COB that day for the product, whether you received it or not. Do credit card companies have security and fraud procedures in place to stop payment after the fact? Yes. Does the merchant account get the money at COB? No, most merchant accounts get the money at the end of the month . Can charges be disputed? Absolutely. But after the Close Of Business, you are CHARGED, which means you owe VISA $x and VISA has promised to deliver $x - VISA's take to the merchant account of the retailer.
Working at Sears on comission for a year after college made me learn all this, because people sometimes order TVs or electronics to be delivered after the date of renovations, but want to lock in ZERO FINANCING or some sort of sale.
Re:Dude, it's just a pre-order, not a pre-purchase
on
The Optimus Mini Keyboard
·
· Score: 3, Informative
What kind of 'they can't charge your card until product ships' crap are you spewing. Video games stores take pre-orders every day. Sears and Tweeter charge you TODAY for the TV that's shipping next week. There's no law that says receipt of good or shipment of goods must take place before charging can.
Now, if they fail to deliver the product EVER, that's a crime.
No one has yet to answer this question, but will these phones automatically know when one wireless network is out of range and switch to another? If no then this product is bunk. It's only good if you're staying in one place.
What's more, I have absolutely no problem with paying representatives well, as that is the only way to ensure that the most talented people seek the job.
Following up on your comments, think of what not paying them would mean: that it would be exclusively something that only rich people could do. Right now, most politicians are wealthy, but some are not. Not providing a salary would eliminate the non-wealthy ones.
If we're at war, the U.S. will simply enact legislation that says that Chinese bonds are null and void, or no longer available for cashing in.
During wartime, the Government keeps a very strict, conservative, and quite unfair grasp on the economies of the world. In WW2, everyone was mobilized for war. No cars, no phone service, nothing that was contrary to the war effort. Enemies will have ZERO leverage on U.S. assets.
The problem is not google filtering results. Its that China or any other country can behave this way, censor its people, and instead of being rebuked, people work WITH them. That's wrong. When someone acts in a reprehensible way, but you still concede to their behavior, you are validating and even ENCOURAGING Them to continue to behave that way.
What has China learned? That if they censor people, they get what they want. they get access to the largest commercial search engine.
If Google had instead continued to reject them, then China would miss out on Google. The onus would be on THEM to change, because they want google and recognize its value.
Treo is a device, that works on many networks. I think the blackberry is a tight integration of device and software, moreso than the palm/whatever network you're on set up. The reason blackberry has been so successful is because even though its a pretty high-tech gadget, the corporate/management types who are usually non-technical can still figure them out / use them. Treos are way more functional than Blackberry, but Blackberry 'just-works' and is more intuitive.
There is nothing to stop the bells from offering VoIP
Do you know why VoIP is cheap? because the companies that provide it use someone else's infrastructure. VoIP companies don't own any telephone wires and don't have to pay unionized service techs who manage millions of miles of copper.
If anything, it is MORE expensive for phone companies to do VoIP over their existing copper because it adds yet another layer of complexity, more hardware to service, and more administration.
VoIP isn't some sort of magic; It's a service that relies on existing infrastructure, not a substitute for the infrastructure itself.
Someday, when TV really is digital like they promised, a little flag or box will pop up asking you which you'd rather see. Currently, not only does digital broadcasting have the ability to deliver the stunning picture and sound of HDTV, but it also has the ability to deliver four SDTV (standard def.) shows on one channel. Imagine if your Tivo could see this, and when you scheduled, asked you which you'd rather see.
How am I bending over? If it won't work with my TV, I WON'T buy it.
We've only had about 4 years of affordable HDTV, and only the last year or two has seen widespread acceptance of digital video carrying cables like DVI and HDMI. So essentially HALF of the HDTV pop. won't be able to use this.
Hey, I'm no rocket scientist but the company who DOES offer HDTV over component will instantly target the other 50% of the market share exclusively.
No, unfourtunately not. HDMI is a digital signal w/ encryption/copy protection. Component video is an analog video stream. If they allowed a converter, it would effectively defeat the copy protection. they're might be a converter, but it would probably distort the video like VHS tapes used to, when being played. (called super-something).
Slashdot Mirror
Your statement makes no sense. You can follow IEEE or any other standards and still be convicted of a monopoly. Do you think a judge cares whether microsoft's browser meets standards?
Standards are not law. They are industry recommendations made by non-elected officials who wield no power of law.
Monopoly law is something instituted by elected officials and who wield punitive power.
Two very different and unrelated things.
You're kidding, right? Before there was an event handling specification, IE implemented event handling. There was a need, and no standard. Sometimes you have to innovate. And if you do something and later a standards body writes a standard different than the way you did it, well, can you be blamed for not seeing into the future?
Board of directors? are you crazy?
Assuming somehow you could prove that the directors and CxOs knew that the DRM was even sold, (what chances are there that those individuals are even tech savvy enough to know what DRM is), what justifies this? What are the losses? Has anyone stepped forward and said, 'My machine was hacked because of a defect in your product!'
Without quantifiable damages or actual harm, what right do you have to call for them being jailed? I think what's fair is a new copy of the CD without DRM. that's just. Also, a CD mailed with a utility that will clean the rootkit from the machine. That redresses the grievances. The rest of what you wrote is probably driven by anger either at corporate america in general, or at Sony in particular for this sneaky, underhanded tactic. I agree that Sony did a stupid thing, and risked people's computers. I think the FTC should examine and possibly give a fine, on the whole.
Imagine you're a CxO or Board Member. You're job is to predict music taste trends, and to make deals with other companies as part of marketing and such. Then police cuff you during a meeting, because a middle manager told his IT staff to use a contractor to customize and develop a tool for anti-piracy that you had no idea about. But you work for a company, so groupguilt applies.
The only reason we're even debating this issue is because a user didn't know the software was installed. Companies usually indemify themselves against lawsuits and charges by saying 'this software comes with no warrantee, implied or otherwise', so that if there is a bug that could cause a hack, they already told you there's that chance. That's part of that EULA that you clicked through.
I think the thing is that Google doesn't publish what they consider right or wrong. This dude didn't lose anything, but imagine that your business hinges on whether people can find you via google.
Competitors do LOTS of things via google to fuck over your company. They click your ads (this is more prevalant in yahoo, though, where people can see what you pay per click), they get pissed and report you if your webpage is higher on search rankings.
I work for a firm that gets all its business from our Google ranking. We have spent dime zero on advertising, instead we have a well described webpage.
Google's hypocracy is that they DON'T want you to do anything to get higher on their search results, yet people who DO get higher are rewarded with better business and therefore , a higher ranking.
And the thing is, we got booted off, and we weren't using any deceptive techniques. Not that we'd know what google would consider 'deceptive', since google doesn't publish its standards. Yet google respects blogs attacks on information by doing nothing about googlebombing blogs. If google wants the most accurate search results, they sure have a weird way of showing it: No open documentation on standards, allowing tainted results to be displayed, and using capricious methods to reset pageranks.
Umm, when you recycle aluminum or steel, you have to melt it. Same applies for glass, I think.
Recycling requires energy, yes. The benefit for recycling has never been that it takes less energy to form/manufacture , but that it is cheaper to buy X tonnes of used material versus digging/farming/buying X tonnes of new material.
If you're worried about heating, I wouldn't be. Heat can be generated via electricity, which can be generated via clean methods.
As an expirienced user, I have no problem manually typing
private void Button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
}
And as an experienced user, I find double clicking on the element in the windows form to get the default 'event' handler is way easier than copy/pasting another event handler and renaming it. I like being able to re-factor code by bringing up the properties tab in Visual Studio, it makes renaming and following conventions easier. I also love intellisense, etc. I don't think these tools make anyone any LESS of a programmer, if anything, it lowers the entry bar. Some people do get stuck and rely on the widgets soley, yes. But that's true anywhere. But those same people would just replace widget clicking with copying and pasting from a tutorial or a textbook, which is how people did it before these tools.
If your DB is on the same host as your web/application server
If you are relying on this type of architecture, where one machine does all the work, interoperability with seperate databases is probably not even needed.
But if you're working with a project that needs replication and such, then you really can't rely on DB and web server being the same machine. Sometimes you have to sell your software as an installable product and make it work on multiple DB platforms. Sometimes you have to write to foreign databases using ODBC.
Simplifying queries isn't an extensible solution. For instance, it is intuitive to use
"LIMIT 10,20" (MySQL) instead of using "TOP 20 WHERE ID >= 10" (T-SQL). No simplification will fix that branch, and its kind of obvious that one of the solutions makes more sense. (Or, alternatively, how MySQL will by default install rules fill in blank strings in most fields if no data is provided for them, instead of throwing an error.)
What makes it evil? I could get modded up to +5 by just saying the Patriot Act is evil, without saying WHY. How about debating the points of the Act that make it evil? People here on slashdot are just as guilty as the mainstream media, fearmongering with scary titles and finger-pointing. Instead we should be pointing out WHY this is dangerous or not dangerous, and what principles it violates or does not violate.
Eventually, People will stop writing for Operating Systems and Begin writing for Platforms. Meaning, that the .NET platform, an underused but terrific MS library, was made backwards compatible so that people could write for a platform and then the platform can be ported to the appropriate OS, taking the onus away from the developer. Heck, look at the MONO initiative. There may be a day that there's one platform that runs on all three major OSes (Linux, Mac, Windows).
.NET commercially on a large scale, I guess its a moot point.
Its interesting to note that on hardware specific platforms like Gaming Consoles, to release a title under all three, most companies develop under a third party toolkit, like Renderware. This way, they can simultaneously launch products and not have a gigantic code branch.
however, until people start actually writing
hey man, I am a videogame fan. I like my xbox 360. What can I say? should I pretend I don't? I was also one of the first people to buy a Sony Playstation, back when we all had a bad taste in our mouths from the last regular corporation to try and dump into the market (phillips 3DO anyone?). I don't have a PS2 becauseabout 75% of games released are released on the big 3 at once (cube, ps2, xbox), and the xbox had marginally better graphics than PS2.
I give credit where credit is due... the original xbox was released after the PS2, and now the xbox 360 beat the PS2 to market, by probably close to a year. I also would give credit to how the PS2 came to market even though there wasn't an imminent MS threat.
Besides, it works both ways. I used to work at Funcoland video game store and heard my fellow employees openly bash xbox to customers. we all have our agendas.
Clearly my impression of the Xbox 360 is that it is positioned to compete significantly better in the next gen console
Could that be because the Xbox360 actually exists, and isn't just an idea. Does PS3 even have a launch date yet? People keep saying this and that about PS3, but Microsoft actually anticipated their existing product's shelf life accurately, and planned for it. I have been dying for some of the stuff the xbox 360 does, like HD gaming, a consistent online experience, and OEM wireless that comes with the system. Sure, xbox has issues, namely a lot of bugs made it through. But since I'm online they're patched pretty quickly and things are working out pretty well.
I'll take HD gaming now versus something that doesn't have a launch date yet.
Not really. The way it works is you request authorization the day of the sale for access for $x. The money is no longer available on the purchasers card. Then at COB (close of Business) the card companies send end of day results. The Transaction has now POSTED, and cannot be voided, but only returned. (which means, if you cancel a sale same day, you won't see it on your card, its as if the transaction never happened. If you cancel the next day, you will see two transactions, the original, and a credit transaction to balance it out.) Effectively, you are billed at COB that day for the product, whether you received it or not. Do credit card companies have security and fraud procedures in place to stop payment after the fact? Yes. Does the merchant account get the money at COB? No, most merchant accounts get the money at the end of the month . Can charges be disputed? Absolutely. But after the Close Of Business, you are CHARGED, which means you owe VISA $x and VISA has promised to deliver $x - VISA's take to the merchant account of the retailer.
Working at Sears on comission for a year after college made me learn all this, because people sometimes order TVs or electronics to be delivered after the date of renovations, but want to lock in ZERO FINANCING or some sort of sale.
What kind of 'they can't charge your card until product ships' crap are you spewing. Video games stores take pre-orders every day. Sears and Tweeter charge you TODAY for the TV that's shipping next week. There's no law that says receipt of good or shipment of goods must take place before charging can.
Now, if they fail to deliver the product EVER, that's a crime.
Maybe google could wrangle major software developers to develop a version of their popular software product for Linux. Like, say , Photoshop.
No one has yet to answer this question, but will these phones automatically know when one wireless network is out of range and switch to another? If no then this product is bunk. It's only good if you're staying in one place.
What's more, I have absolutely no problem with paying representatives well, as that is the only way to ensure that the most talented people seek the job.
Following up on your comments, think of what not paying them would mean: that it would be exclusively something that only rich people could do. Right now, most politicians are wealthy, but some are not. Not providing a salary would eliminate the non-wealthy ones.
Call in the Bonds?
If we're at war, the U.S. will simply enact legislation that says that Chinese bonds are null and void, or no longer available for cashing in.
During wartime, the Government keeps a very strict, conservative, and quite unfair grasp on the economies of the world. In WW2, everyone was mobilized for war. No cars, no phone service, nothing that was contrary to the war effort. Enemies will have ZERO leverage on U.S. assets.
The problem is not google filtering results. Its that China or any other country can behave this way, censor its people, and instead of being rebuked, people work WITH them. That's wrong. When someone acts in a reprehensible way, but you still concede to their behavior, you are validating and even ENCOURAGING Them to continue to behave that way.
What has China learned? That if they censor people, they get what they want. they get access to the largest commercial search engine.
If Google had instead continued to reject them, then China would miss out on Google. The onus would be on THEM to change, because they want google and recognize its value.
Treo is a device, that works on many networks. I think the blackberry is a tight integration of device and software, moreso than the palm/whatever network you're on set up. The reason blackberry has been so successful is because even though its a pretty high-tech gadget, the corporate/management types who are usually non-technical can still figure them out / use them. Treos are way more functional than Blackberry, but Blackberry 'just-works' and is more intuitive.
Maybe if you weren't a pussy posting on slashdot about your heartache, you would be the kind of man who doesn't get cheated on.
There is nothing to stop the bells from offering VoIP
Do you know why VoIP is cheap? because the companies that provide it use someone else's infrastructure. VoIP companies don't own any telephone wires and don't have to pay unionized service techs who manage millions of miles of copper.
If anything, it is MORE expensive for phone companies to do VoIP over their existing copper because it adds yet another layer of complexity, more hardware to service, and more administration.
VoIP isn't some sort of magic; It's a service that relies on existing infrastructure, not a substitute for the infrastructure itself.
Someday, when TV really is digital like they promised, a little flag or box will pop up asking you which you'd rather see. Currently, not only does digital broadcasting have the ability to deliver the stunning picture and sound of HDTV, but it also has the ability to deliver four SDTV (standard def.) shows on one channel. Imagine if your Tivo could see this, and when you scheduled, asked you which you'd rather see.
its $399 for the Non-core, and worth every penny.
How am I bending over? If it won't work with my TV, I WON'T buy it.
We've only had about 4 years of affordable HDTV, and only the last year or two has seen widespread acceptance of digital video carrying cables like DVI and HDMI. So essentially HALF of the HDTV pop. won't be able to use this.
Hey, I'm no rocket scientist but the company who DOES offer HDTV over component will instantly target the other 50% of the market share exclusively.
No, unfourtunately not. HDMI is a digital signal w/ encryption/copy protection. Component video is an analog video stream. If they allowed a converter, it would effectively defeat the copy protection. they're might be a converter, but it would probably distort the video like VHS tapes used to, when being played. (called super-something).