> I can't imagine people not wanting to see ads that are focused on their > interests.
It's like this: I'm not interested in buying anything except when I am specifically shopping for some specific thing that I intend to buy. So why would I want to see any ads, "focused" or otherwise? Besides, my interests are so esoteric that I don't fit any demographic anyway.
> I wasn't aware that the book publishing industry was swimming in as much > cash as Hollywood...
Actually Hollywood is pretty small potatoes by Washington standards. The reason you hear so much about them is that being heard about is their business. The textbook publishing industry is even smaller. Sure, Congress will give in to them on this if no one else speaks up: why not? But it would take very little to outshout them.
Of course, the best solution would be to get government entirely out of education...
> Will a bill such as this endanger publishing companies...
Sure. So what?
>...in the same way Internet journalism endangers traditional journalism?
This implies that you equate "traditional journalism" with newspaper publishing. Journalism and publishing are two different things. Journalism is about news and opinion. It is vibrantly alive on the Net. Publishing is about manufacturing and distributing pieces of paper with ink on them. It is obsolete.
Why do none of you people reinstall when you discover that a machine is compromised? You appear to be using the compromised OS to scan itself. That cannot be reliable.
> Don't install anything- ANYTHING- from the internet unless you know exactly > what it is.
I'd amend this to "Don't install anything- ANYTHING- from the internet even if you know do exactly what it is." Because the sort of users we are discussing here, when they "know exactly what it is", are WRONG.
> What frequencies are not resonant in Aouminum Oxide paint?
The reporter is just yammering. He hasn't the foggiest idea what the word "resonant" means and knows less than nothing about radio. All we can glean from this is that someone has put out a press release about rf absorbant paint, something that has been around for decades.
Bullshit. Tux and Beastie are both cool. If you can't see it you've been sucking up too much Apple marketing. Not everything needs to be pompously self-important.
> ahhh, how do you over 60s feel about this promotion?
Looks like television. I haven't watched television since some time in the previous century. There's a reason for that.
> Maybe it is actually a good thing to encourage you old folks to get together > and learn "the new technology".
Smarmy advertising for crap software is "the new technology"? Sorry. I'm too busy with Free Software.
> Do you relate to it?
The ad? I have a strong stomach so it doesn't make me vomit, if that is what you mean. The "technology"? I don't have _that_ strong a stomach. Fortunately I don't have to use it. I have Debian.
What line? The government is going to pay for your health care (whether you like it or not) and it is going to damn well see to it that you don't cost it money by behaving in an unhealthy manner. Damn uppity sheeple.
> I held that opinion for quite a while, but later came to amend it. I find it > even more boring when it's like the Formula One races were for several years, > with Nissan coming in 1st and 2nd every time because they came up with a > particularly effective turbocharger.
That isn't even about drivers. It's about money. Useful stuff, but who wants to watch it?
Of course, now that they have taken to deliberately crashing cars maybe it will become interesting again, in a morbid, hockey-like way.
Slashdot Mirror
> I can't imagine people not wanting to see ads that are focused on their
> interests.
It's like this: I'm not interested in buying anything except when I am specifically shopping for some specific thing that I intend to buy. So why would I want to see any ads, "focused" or otherwise? Besides, my interests are so esoteric that I don't fit any demographic anyway.
How many (printed, on paper) newspapers do you subscribe to?
> I wasn't aware that the book publishing industry was swimming in as much
> cash as Hollywood...
Actually Hollywood is pretty small potatoes by Washington standards. The reason you hear so much about them is that being heard about is their business. The textbook publishing industry is even smaller. Sure, Congress will give in to them on this if no one else speaks up: why not? But it would take very little to outshout them.
Of course, the best solution would be to get government entirely out of education...
> Will a bill such as this endanger publishing companies...
Sure. So what?
> ...in the same way Internet journalism endangers traditional journalism?
This implies that you equate "traditional journalism" with newspaper publishing. Journalism and publishing are two different things. Journalism is about news and opinion. It is vibrantly alive on the Net. Publishing is about manufacturing and distributing pieces of paper with ink on them. It is obsolete.
Why do none of you people reinstall when you discover that a machine is compromised? You appear to be using the compromised OS to scan itself. That cannot be reliable.
> Don't install anything- ANYTHING- from the internet unless you know exactly
> what it is.
I'd amend this to "Don't install anything- ANYTHING- from the internet even if you know do exactly what it is." Because the sort of users we are discussing here, when they "know exactly what it is", are WRONG.
> I predict a mass exodus from gasoline to electric powered cars that will make
> the Toyota Prius look like a fad.
It was.
> Don't know where you are browsing but I've been blocking the majority of
> cookies for years with little problem.
Same here.
...I think I can find the bathroom without Google's help.
> What frequencies are not resonant in Aouminum Oxide paint?
The reporter is just yammering. He hasn't the foggiest idea what the word "resonant" means and knows less than nothing about radio. All we can glean from this is that someone has put out a press release about rf absorbant paint, something that has been around for decades.
> You're riding the wrong kinda motorcycle.
You're riding the wrong kind of horse. Motorcycles can't do 5 foot fences.
> I did not know when the launch-date for this was.
I still don't.
Surely you don't believe that those things are accidental? (Well, except perhaps the microwave.)
Bullshit. Tux and Beastie are both cool. If you can't see it you've been sucking up too much Apple marketing. Not everything needs to be pompously self-important.
> Ah, but the 21st century has television only dreamt of in the previous
> century...
I saw some 21st century television a few years back when I was visiting my father. It has not improved.
> This is the part where you hop on your motorcycle and wheelie the f out of
> there, right? RIGHT!?!?
No. Motorcycles are boring. A thoroughbred.
You appear to believe that the "target audience" includes "over sixties". That's me.
> ahhh, how do you over 60s feel about this promotion?
Looks like television. I haven't watched television since some time in the previous century. There's a reason for that.
> Maybe it is actually a good thing to encourage you old folks to get together
> and learn "the new technology".
Smarmy advertising for crap software is "the new technology"? Sorry. I'm too busy with Free Software.
> Do you relate to it?
The ad? I have a strong stomach so it doesn't make me vomit, if that is what you mean. The "technology"? I don't have _that_ strong a stomach. Fortunately I don't have to use it. I have Debian.
> A larger brain is not the key to man's intelligence. Some Neanderthals had
> larger brains than we.
Yes. So what? Aristotle probably had a larger brain than the Roman soldier who whacked him too.
> As for more free time, if that made us any brighter then /. would be crock
> full of blinkin' geniuses.
Well, there you go. Case proven.
So no one without a cellphone can have a BOA account?
What line? The government is going to pay for your health care (whether you like it or not) and it is going to damn well see to it that you don't cost it money by behaving in an unhealthy manner. Damn uppity sheeple.
> Care to back that up with anything?
How about humor tags?
> I held that opinion for quite a while, but later came to amend it. I find it
> even more boring when it's like the Formula One races were for several years,
> with Nissan coming in 1st and 2nd every time because they came up with a
> particularly effective turbocharger.
That isn't even about drivers. It's about money. Useful stuff, but who wants to watch it?
Of course, now that they have taken to deliberately crashing cars maybe it will become interesting again, in a morbid, hockey-like way.
> Well, spec series are about the driver's skill, which is pretty much what
> sports are about - the skill of the players.
And players of any sport, unless they are personal friends, are boring.
Mechanical engineering is obsolete. It's all done in software now.