What?? That song was NOT from the movie! The song came out almost ten years AFTER the movie.
I know it's not in the movie because, coincidentally, I just finished watching it twice - once to remember, another time to hear Wierd Al and Jay (the manger/director) talk about it in the DVD alt audio track...
...and I just got my delivery of the DVD, which came out on June 11, which I bought because Emo Phillips is in it...
"Beverly Hillbillies", the takeoff on "I want my MTV", was the big musical number in UHF.
Level playing field means that MS can't use its monopoly position to crush otherwise viable competitors. When a monopoly's power gets too great, it actually creates a threat to a capitalist economy. That's why we have antitrust laws.
"I can open a URL from the same window I open my File Manager console from. I like that."
I don't use IE at all, and I still have those features. Those features are in fact incidental to integration.
Does Opera "just keep up"? Opera's had a MDI for two versions now. I can use mouse gestures. I can even put a picture of Anna Kournikova in my browser's background. And Opera had the best cookie control of any browser for a long time.
How long did it take for IE to have any of those features? So who's playing catch up now?
"Resistance is futile only for those who refuse to resist."
It amazes me how incredibly clever Microsoft is as they twist words. They go by the letter of the law, not the spirit, and we all suffer.
This is a very enlightening article, I think: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/254 23.html
I honestly wish I were clever enough to use their own tactics against them, but looking at how difficult the courts have made it, it seems impossible. How do we keep them from doing this to us over and over again?
The EULA is a CONTRACT, people! Contracts are non-binding unless BOTH parties agree to the terms of the contract. Under almost all contract law, a contract cannot be binding unless both parties have the capability to modify the contract and sign it.
The install software signs on behalf of the software publisher. (When you click "I agree", the software continues installing, so it has to have been signed.) You click on behalf of yourself.
Any changes you make to the EULA prior to signing (including erasing it) are signed by both parties when you click "I agree". Therefore the contract has taken on the new terms and you are bound by the new terms of the contract.
If that doesn't work, an acceptance by someone of the contract as signed by you is as legally binding as if they had signed it themselves. (I do this with rental agreements all the time.) All you have to do is change the term(s) and sign it. If they accept it, they agree de facto.
The only problem is that the other party never gets to see a copy of the new contract, and I'm not sure that the install mechanism has the power of attorney. But if it's presenting the contract (*and witnessing the signing!*), then it must, right?
That's not technically true in most cases. You can't be punished for something you knew nothing about. e.g., If a cop pulls you over for doing 50 in a 35, but there hasn't been a speed limit sign AND it's reasonable for you to think that the speed limit might be 50, then the court HAS to throw the ticket out.
I just read the city parking ordinance for Winston-Salem, NC, and it states that the city has the responsibility to maintain proper signage to let citizens know where/under what conditions to park or they can't enforce the dynamic portions of the law.
HOWEVER... If it is reasonable that you would know, say, the state/territory maximum speed limit, you can't use this argument. I.e., no going 95 when the state max is 65. In that case, you're still in (BIG) trouble.
Unfortunately, the powers that be here in the US have international jurisdiction, even when someone has done something that is NOT against the law in the country in which they live. I'm referring of course to DeCSS. That kid ended up getting arrested by the police, and he lived nowhere NEAR the US.
I believe it's called "summary judgement". It's the same thing Felten tried to get, and one of the music trading companies (Aimster, I think). It's not so much a suit against someone but more like a preemptive strike to prevent others from filing suit against 321 in the future.
Unfortunately, the courts don't seem to be very friendly to these nowadays, at least not in this arena...
Confirmed. I just did it myself, and I am very conscious of how my "marketing" settings are done. I wondered why I had gotten so much junk mail from Yahoo lately...
But seriously folks, how many of you actually put your *REAL* information there anyway? There is nothing but server logs that tie me to my yahoo account, and that has to go through my ISP to find the person using the IP at that time... Not an easy task.
I can't imagine putting my IRL information into the Yahoo database...
Repeat after me, children: This is why we use OPERA.
Does anybody else want an application-proxy for the desktop? I do... ZoneAlarm is great, but we need more granularity to restrict the *content* that our internet-capable apps are sending.
Still, I find it hard to believe that despite the plethora of evidence otherwise, they are still considering alteration of the *device* to be harmful to the *company*. Look at Lego, Aibo, and all the other products that have benefitted tremendously from the addition of new features brought about by 3rd-party hacks/products.
Veritas, it is not about "harm". It's about control. Derivation from the original design intentions for a product limits the producer's capability to control the product. Which means that they can't rape their consumers anymore, so they "lose" money.
You know, it is legal to sell drug paraphanilia, even though the use of it is illegal... Does the DMCA actually provide for the confiscation of things like this?
If not, they have no right to ask for them.
If so, how the hell did we get to a state where potential copyright infringement is more fascistly regulated than drugs??!?
Absolutely, I totally agree. By that same token, though, we could say that Be should have marketed their OS differently. Instead of being a consumer OS, they could have capatilized on their pro audio capabilities and made a fortune.
But Be had the cojones to compete with MS, and Dell, etc. did not.
So I agree that the blame should be shared... but that by no means absolves MS of its responsibility or culpability.
Hmmm... I wonder if we could sue Dell and the others for aiding and abetting a monopoly...?? (smirk)
I wish that were the case!!! I *have* to use MS products. The professional audio products I use won't work with any other OS. My employer requires that I use IE in Windows to access my email when I'm on call, else I have to drive into the office 1 1/2 hours away. People with whom I do business need the compatibility that comes with MS.
I love BeOS intensely. I still have it installed, and I use it, but I still have to have MS. Why is that? It's not because they make a better product, not because they have better marketing (though that helped...), but because they established an illegal monopoly. I'm stuck because they broke the law.
That's why they should be punished. I just wish I could sue them myself. But I'll settle for a painful lawsuit from Be.
The website seems a little sparse on technical information. Can you use it with an existing TV card (e.g., Ati A-I-W) or does it have to be used with their own? What recording/playback formats does it support?
It is interesting, to be sure, however. Something to consider...
Right, you got me.:-) I haven't laid out the cash for one yet. But why couldn't I use a modem to do the channel/guide d/l's? That's what the PVR does anyway.
I never considered the guides to be the biggest attractor, anyway, b/c the downside (i.e., having all my viewing habits broadcast back to the company) goes hand-in-hand with it. But I would love to have the pause and rewind features, even if it means I don't have the guide...
Has anyone worked on an emulator yet to use a PC as a Tivo or ReplayTV? It seems with all the work done so far, they're using the TIVO's a lot to go to a PC for output/modification anyway, so why not just go straight to PC?
You're very right. Nothing hurts a cause worse than a fanatic.
I'm not sure if it's the Christian groups' own fault, or those opposed, but somehow everything gets lumped together and ends up ticking everybody off.
I consider myself a well-reasoned Christian. I would rather evaluate new technology, etc. on the principles of faith rather than on faith itself. It would seem to me that the principles of faith don't change, but the faith itself changes frequently. Just look at the Catholic church's view of the heavens, pre-Galileo (Copernicus/Kepler/Brahe/etc.)... The principle of faith didn't change, e.g., that God is creator of the universe, but the faith itself did, e.g., that the Earth is/is not the center of God's created universe.
What drives me nuts is people who believe that all homosexuals are pedophiles, or that all Christians are thoughtless bigots. Those seem like different sides of the same coin to me.
Problem is, there are enough pedophilic homosexuals and thoughtless, bigoted Christians that opponents of either can use non-representative examples as representative samples to make their case, which never helps.
BTW your post was very well spoken. Thank you for the refreshing POV!
Sorry, humor does not require detailed accuracy, only truth in precept. (id est, it isn't the details that make it funny...)
Still, it is sad that this might be going away. I always thought it a noble and interesting cause. (Imagine someday rebuilding a lost species!) I sincerely believe (and hope) that someone steps up to the plate and preserves this menagerie.
I wonder if PETA or another preservation organization would consider this within the bounds of their mission... I never considered that in vitro might be the beginning of preservation of animals. Something to ponder, for sure.
Slashdot Mirror
What?? That song was NOT from the movie! The song came out almost ten years AFTER the movie.
I know it's not in the movie because, coincidentally, I just finished watching it twice - once to remember, another time to hear Wierd Al and Jay (the manger/director) talk about it in the DVD alt audio track...
...and I just got my delivery of the DVD, which came out on June 11, which I bought because Emo Phillips is in it...
"Beverly Hillbillies", the takeoff on "I want my MTV", was the big musical number in UHF.
Ouch, I am OLD!!
Level playing field means that MS can't use its monopoly position to crush otherwise viable competitors. When a monopoly's power gets too great, it actually creates a threat to a capitalist economy. That's why we have antitrust laws.
"I can open a URL from the same window I open my File Manager console from. I like that."
I don't use IE at all, and I still have those features. Those features are in fact incidental to integration.
Does Opera "just keep up"? Opera's had a MDI for two versions now. I can use mouse gestures. I can even put a picture of Anna Kournikova in my browser's background. And Opera had the best cookie control of any browser for a long time.
How long did it take for IE to have any of those features? So who's playing catch up now?
"Resistance is futile only for those who refuse to resist."
Perhaps I need to clarify.
It takes one [monopoly] to know one [monopoly].
It's not off-topic.
Hey, now! At least make it (Score: -1; Funny)!
Takes one to know one, doesn't it?
[does happy dance]
It amazes me how incredibly clever Microsoft is as they twist words. They go by the letter of the law, not the spirit, and we all suffer.
4 23.html
This is a very enlightening article, I think:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/25
I honestly wish I were clever enough to use their own tactics against them, but looking at how difficult the courts have made it, it seems impossible. How do we keep them from doing this to us over and over again?
Nope, no joke. I own one too. They're very handy, and it saves a lot of time and trouble.
"People ask fewer questions when you look official." -Me
The EULA is a CONTRACT, people! Contracts are non-binding unless BOTH parties agree to the terms of the contract. Under almost all contract law, a contract cannot be binding unless both parties have the capability to modify the contract and sign it.
The install software signs on behalf of the software publisher. (When you click "I agree", the software continues installing, so it has to have been signed.) You click on behalf of yourself.
Any changes you make to the EULA prior to signing (including erasing it) are signed by both parties when you click "I agree". Therefore the contract has taken on the new terms and you are bound by the new terms of the contract.
If that doesn't work, an acceptance by someone of the contract as signed by you is as legally binding as if they had signed it themselves. (I do this with rental agreements all the time.) All you have to do is change the term(s) and sign it. If they accept it, they agree de facto.
The only problem is that the other party never gets to see a copy of the new contract, and I'm not sure that the install mechanism has the power of attorney. But if it's presenting the contract (*and witnessing the signing!*), then it must, right?
I am really starting to warm to this idea.
it is illigal to forbid reverse engenneering!
I'm not aware of that one... Please provide supporting references!
That's not technically true in most cases. You can't be punished for something you knew nothing about. e.g., If a cop pulls you over for doing 50 in a 35, but there hasn't been a speed limit sign AND it's reasonable for you to think that the speed limit might be 50, then the court HAS to throw the ticket out.
I just read the city parking ordinance for Winston-Salem, NC, and it states that the city has the responsibility to maintain proper signage to let citizens know where/under what conditions to park or they can't enforce the dynamic portions of the law.
HOWEVER... If it is reasonable that you would know, say, the state/territory maximum speed limit, you can't use this argument. I.e., no going 95 when the state max is 65. In that case, you're still in (BIG) trouble.
Unfortunately, the powers that be here in the US have international jurisdiction, even when someone has done something that is NOT against the law in the country in which they live. I'm referring of course to DeCSS. That kid ended up getting arrested by the police, and he lived nowhere NEAR the US.
This abuse of power is downright scary.
I believe it's called "summary judgement". It's the same thing Felten tried to get, and one of the music trading companies (Aimster, I think). It's not so much a suit against someone but more like a preemptive strike to prevent others from filing suit against 321 in the future.
Unfortunately, the courts don't seem to be very friendly to these nowadays, at least not in this arena...
Confirmed. I just did it myself, and I am very conscious of how my "marketing" settings are done. I wondered why I had gotten so much junk mail from Yahoo lately...
But seriously folks, how many of you actually put your *REAL* information there anyway? There is nothing but server logs that tie me to my yahoo account, and that has to go through my ISP to find the person using the IP at that time... Not an easy task.
I can't imagine putting my IRL information into the Yahoo database...
Repeat after me, children:
This is why we use OPERA.
Does anybody else want an application-proxy for the desktop? I do... ZoneAlarm is great, but we need more granularity to restrict the *content* that our internet-capable apps are sending.
Doesn't matter. Just b/c the ads are downloaded, doesn't mean they have to be displayed...
'Where there's a system, there's a way around it.' -Indica
It's a hand-over-hand thing. Someone always comes out with a way to trump the other guy, who then turns around and trumps it right back.
I think my incentive to not view ads is every bit as motivating as a company's incentive to get me to view them.
Ok, fair enough.
Still, I find it hard to believe that despite the plethora of evidence otherwise, they are still considering alteration of the *device* to be harmful to the *company*. Look at Lego, Aibo, and all the other products that have benefitted tremendously from the addition of new features brought about by 3rd-party hacks/products.
Veritas, it is not about "harm". It's about control. Derivation from the original design intentions for a product limits the producer's capability to control the product. Which means that they can't rape their consumers anymore, so they "lose" money.
What a fucking crock.
You know, it is legal to sell drug paraphanilia, even though the use of it is illegal... Does the DMCA actually provide for the confiscation of things like this?
If not, they have no right to ask for them.
If so, how the hell did we get to a state where potential copyright infringement is more fascistly regulated than drugs??!?
Absolutely, I totally agree. By that same token, though, we could say that Be should have marketed their OS differently. Instead of being a consumer OS, they could have capatilized on their pro audio capabilities and made a fortune.
But Be had the cojones to compete with MS, and Dell, etc. did not.
So I agree that the blame should be shared... but that by no means absolves MS of its responsibility or culpability.
Hmmm... I wonder if we could sue Dell and the others for aiding and abetting a monopoly...?? (smirk)
I wish that were the case!!! I *have* to use MS products. The professional audio products I use won't work with any other OS. My employer requires that I use IE in Windows to access my email when I'm on call, else I have to drive into the office 1 1/2 hours away. People with whom I do business need the compatibility that comes with MS.
I love BeOS intensely. I still have it installed, and I use it, but I still have to have MS. Why is that? It's not because they make a better product, not because they have better marketing (though that helped...), but because they established an illegal monopoly. I'm stuck because they broke the law.
That's why they should be punished. I just wish I could sue them myself. But I'll settle for a painful lawsuit from Be.
The website seems a little sparse on technical information. Can you use it with an existing TV card (e.g., Ati A-I-W) or does it have to be used with their own? What recording/playback formats does it support?
It is interesting, to be sure, however. Something to consider...
Right, you got me. :-) I haven't laid out the cash for one yet. But why couldn't I use a modem to do the channel/guide d/l's? That's what the PVR does anyway.
I never considered the guides to be the biggest attractor, anyway, b/c the downside (i.e., having all my viewing habits broadcast back to the company) goes hand-in-hand with it. But I would love to have the pause and rewind features, even if it means I don't have the guide...
Has anyone worked on an emulator yet to use a PC as a Tivo or ReplayTV? It seems with all the work done so far, they're using the TIVO's a lot to go to a PC for output/modification anyway, so why not just go straight to PC?
Awesome. Can you /. a site that explains what the /. effect is?
She's a good catch. Good luck and congratulations.
You're very right. Nothing hurts a cause worse than a fanatic.
I'm not sure if it's the Christian groups' own fault, or those opposed, but somehow everything gets lumped together and ends up ticking everybody off.
I consider myself a well-reasoned Christian. I would rather evaluate new technology, etc. on the principles of faith rather than on faith itself. It would seem to me that the principles of faith don't change, but the faith itself changes frequently. Just look at the Catholic church's view of the heavens, pre-Galileo (Copernicus/Kepler/Brahe/etc.)... The principle of faith didn't change, e.g., that God is creator of the universe, but the faith itself did, e.g., that the Earth is/is not the center of God's created universe.
What drives me nuts is people who believe that all homosexuals are pedophiles, or that all Christians are thoughtless bigots. Those seem like different sides of the same coin to me.
Problem is, there are enough pedophilic homosexuals and thoughtless, bigoted Christians that opponents of either can use non-representative examples as representative samples to make their case, which never helps.
BTW your post was very well spoken. Thank you for the refreshing POV!
Sorry, humor does not require detailed accuracy, only truth in precept. (id est, it isn't the details that make it funny...)
Still, it is sad that this might be going away. I always thought it a noble and interesting cause. (Imagine someday rebuilding a lost species!) I sincerely believe (and hope) that someone steps up to the plate and preserves this menagerie.
I wonder if PETA or another preservation organization would consider this within the bounds of their mission... I never considered that in vitro might be the beginning of preservation of animals. Something to ponder, for sure.