"...beyond the intangible benefit of brand loyalty (which on the Internet probably doesn't amount to a whole lot)..."
Brand loyalty doesn't amount to much on the Internet? I think that notion is very wrong. I believe that the more products/services one uses from a company - the more likely the avg person will stick with them. When a consumer trusts in a company, their loyalty usually follows. Sure, it isn't true for everyone, but trust/loyalty of the brand name is surely a very significant factor in any marketplace, the Internet being no exception.
It's not really the animals hair/fur that is the most significant allergen, but rather their *dander*. (Dander is flakes of dead skin). Their saliva and urine can also cause an allergic reaction. http://www.theallergyreliefcenter.com/animal_aller gy.htm
I've been using a similar D-Link router (DI-704p) for about 4 yrs. Very easy to use, very dependable. It's excellent web interface makes DHCP setup and port-forwarding a breeze. And no, it doesn't discriminate against Linux.
In my observation, you had better have a fast CPU to compliment that GF4-Ti4200, because with a processor that is also close to minimum spec (AMD 1600+), the motion is often very sluggish and choppy... YMMV
Remember all the news about D3 P2P "theft"?
on
Doom 3 Demo Available
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I wonder how much difference a demo would have made in the number of pirated copies being traded via P2P, had it been available before or at the time of the game's release?
If my hardware is not in the list, does not assure to me that that is compatible
Likewise, If your hardware is not in the Linux Compatibility List, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is not compatible. Neither may be a definitive resourse, but they're both useful none-the-less.
It's not "pimpage". Its being up-front about the fact that the news source used in the story is somehow affiliated with Slashdot. By 'not hiding' that fact, they hope it helps to quell possible accusations of bias or other improprieties.
"Notice the cheap recycled cardboard in the fourth generation packaging where there was styrofoam in the third edition packaging. This was definitely a cut corner because I really did think the styrofoam was awesome before"
A "cut corner" as in "a measure taken where the consumer receives less value"? Or a "cut corner" as in "a measure taken where the new packaging performs just as well, but reduces costs - which in-turn trickle down to the consumer"?
In spite of your conclusion that the previously used styrofoam was "awesome", do you really think that Apple would decide to use a less-than-secure packaging medium, and risk a huge increase in the amount of units that arrive to the consumer in a damaged state?
It is what it is; a luxury item that will attract a lot of buyers for various reasons. From actual usefulness - to ego/status bolstering. (though i'd guess the latter to be the prevailing motivation)
What exactly is being protected by copyright here? Is it the original copy of 1's and 0's (the digital audio) pressed into a plastic disc? Or is it the music (the song, the art) itself? Sure, a lossy mp3 copy of a song may be considered less valuable than the original copy. But I don't think it matters if it's a 1:1 copy at all. The content/property being protected isn't the physical CD itself, it's the music that is being delivered on the CD.
I think that the notion that people should be able to freely distribute degraded copies of music is akin to broadcasting music over the radio. Don't radio stations have to pay royalties on every song they play? Or since they have an original copy of the CD, do they have the right to broadcast it over the open airwaves without restriction?
The root of the issue is that copyright owners want (have?) control of your ability to LISTEN to their recordings, period. When you buy a CD, they are granting you the privilege to unlimited personal use. That personal "use" means listening to the music only. Not re-distribution in any way or form, whether it be less than 1:1 copies or not (mp3 files, FM radio, streaming internet radio, whatever...).
Illegal distribution of copyrighted material is just as bad as downloading/possessing it. Period. Whether you do it willingly or knowingly doesn't likely matter.
Even if he can't, I'll bet money that Lance Armstrong or a similarly well-conditioned pro cyclist can hold this thing off the ground easily.
I bet it will indeed take an exceptional athlete such as Armstrong to measure up to the task.
Example:
"Data from several researchers shows that professional cyclists produce power outputs of between 320 and 450 watts during time trials ranging from 5 to 70 km in major tours."
"Dr. Alejandro Lucia, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Spain, has predicted that Lance Armstrong on his ascent of the Alpe D¹Huez (a 14 km climb of 8% mean gradient) in the 2001 Tour de France produced one of the greatest performances in the history of cycling: 38 minutes of near-maximal to maximal effort at an estimated mean power output as high as 475-500 watts! His average speed was 22 kilometers/hour, which he reached at a mean cadence of about 100-rpm using a 39 x 23 gear. Lance would have been averaging about 7 watts/kg."
Would you like that in blue, or blue?
on
The Blues for LEDs
·
· Score: 1
His rant doesn't fall on deaf ears here. Went to buy a case fan a couple weeks ago from a major electronics retailer (B.B.). (normally i buy parts online, but i had a gift card...) Anyhow, all I wanted was a decent black 80mm fan. They had 3 different brands/kinds of suitable 80mm fans. All of them were clear plastic with blue LEDs... no variety of colors, no black...
I love it how the store figures that since blue LEDs are all the rage, that it's all they should sell. *rolleyes*
(oh well, at least it goes well with the bright blue LED on the front of my Chieftec case...)
""One reason I'm rethinking this long-held conviction is in my lap. I'm writing this column on a nearly 4-year-old IBM ThinkPad, a computer that was a marvel of technology in its time but is now fairly old stuff. Linux has rejuvenated this machine.""
Rejuvenated? As in gave it new life? A laptop that is a whopping 4 yrs-old (sarcasm) is pretty much useless with only Windows to run on it? Give me a break. I was using Wintel laptops for professional CAD design work 7 yrs ago... However did I manage?
Say goodbye to BuyMusic.com, the web site. It's being integrated into the parent site, Buy.com. Not quite the same as giving up and closing shop. Or did I miss something?
Is it really goodbye, or more like "See you later, when you re-open down the street"...
"
Bandwidth, Data Storage and Other limitations - Use of the Comcast network infrastructure in a manner that (i) exceeds the then current bandwidth, data storage or other limitations on the Comcast High-Speed Internet service or (ii) puts an excessive burden on the limitations of the network. Examples include: Using the Comcast network to run a Web-hosting server or any other commercial enterprise."
Apparently with the right legal mumbo-jumbo, you can convince a court that "unlimited" doesn't necessarily mean "without limit"... Or at least that's what their legal dept. seems to think.
" Needless to say, my next soundcard is a Philips. "
I have a Philips Acoustic Edge PCI card (specs/review) and liked it a lot. It provided good clean sound to my Klipsch speakers. However, I wasn't very pleased with it when I found out there is no linux support for Philips cards....:|
Has Charter made any statements as to *why* they are fighting it? What possible legal ground do they have to stand on? Unless they've come up with some ingenious angle that might acually win, I'm guessing they might just be doing this for the good PR of being a company that "cares about it's customers". ( IE - they might not even expect to win ) The article would be 10x more interesting if it told of Charter's motives. But perhaps Charter is keeping it hush-hush before it reaches court? ( which would make sense since they probably don't have a case to begin with... )... hmmm...
Slashdot Mirror
"...beyond the intangible benefit of brand loyalty (which on the Internet probably doesn't amount to a whole lot)..."
Brand loyalty doesn't amount to much on the Internet? I think that notion is very wrong. I believe that the more products/services one uses from a company - the more likely the avg person will stick with them. When a consumer trusts in a company, their loyalty usually follows. Sure, it isn't true for everyone, but trust/loyalty of the brand name is surely a very significant factor in any marketplace, the Internet being no exception.
I really like the Media Library too.
:)
I can't remember exactly in which revision it first appeared, but the Media Library *IS/WAS* available in a 2.9x version.
It can probably still be found on oldversion.com
" I can make my cat like that with a shaver..."
r gy.htm
It's not really the animals hair/fur that is the most significant allergen, but rather their *dander*. (Dander is flakes of dead skin). Their saliva and urine can also cause an allergic reaction.
http://www.theallergyreliefcenter.com/animal_alle
This is a technology issue, and he's a politician.
He just doesn't get it.
Nor does his staff / advisors.
This rule is seldom untrue.
I've been using a similar D-Link router (DI-704p) for about 4 yrs. Very easy to use, very dependable. It's excellent web interface makes DHCP setup and port-forwarding a breeze. And no, it doesn't discriminate against Linux.
http://www.dlink.com/products/category.asp?cid=2
In my observation, you had better have a fast CPU to compliment that GF4-Ti4200, because with a processor that is also close to minimum spec (AMD 1600+), the motion is often very sluggish and choppy... YMMV
I wonder how much difference a demo would have made in the number of pirated copies being traded via P2P, had it been available before or at the time of the game's release?
It's not "pimpage". Its being up-front about the fact that the news source used in the story is somehow affiliated with Slashdot. By 'not hiding' that fact, they hope it helps to quell possible accusations of bias or other improprieties.
A "cut corner" as in "a measure taken where the consumer receives less value"? Or a "cut corner" as in "a measure taken where the new packaging performs just as well, but reduces costs - which in-turn trickle down to the consumer"?
In spite of your conclusion that the previously used styrofoam was "awesome", do you really think that Apple would decide to use a less-than-secure packaging medium, and risk a huge increase in the amount of units that arrive to the consumer in a damaged state?
It is what it is; a luxury item that will attract a lot of buyers for various reasons. From actual usefulness - to ego/status bolstering. (though i'd guess the latter to be the prevailing motivation)
What exactly is being protected by copyright here? Is it the original copy of 1's and 0's (the digital audio) pressed into a plastic disc? Or is it the music (the song, the art) itself? Sure, a lossy mp3 copy of a song may be considered less valuable than the original copy. But I don't think it matters if it's a 1:1 copy at all. The content/property being protected isn't the physical CD itself, it's the music that is being delivered on the CD.
I think that the notion that people should be able to freely distribute degraded copies of music is akin to broadcasting music over the radio. Don't radio stations have to pay royalties on every song they play? Or since they have an original copy of the CD, do they have the right to broadcast it over the open airwaves without restriction?
The root of the issue is that copyright owners want (have?) control of your ability to LISTEN to their recordings, period. When you buy a CD, they are granting you the privilege to unlimited personal use. That personal "use" means listening to the music only. Not re-distribution in any way or form, whether it be less than 1:1 copies or not (mp3 files, FM radio, streaming internet radio, whatever...).
Illegal distribution of copyrighted material is just as bad as downloading/possessing it. Period. Whether you do it willingly or knowingly doesn't likely matter.
copyrighted works -
(real world definition:) Works owned by entities with lawyers . . .
Example: http://www.polarusa.com/consumer/powerkit/Article
"Is there something I'm missing, maybe?"
That laptops normally aren't used as gaming rigs?
His rant doesn't fall on deaf ears here. Went to buy a case fan a couple weeks ago from a major electronics retailer (B.B.). (normally i buy parts online, but i had a gift card...) Anyhow, all I wanted was a decent black 80mm fan. They had 3 different brands/kinds of suitable 80mm fans. All of them were clear plastic with blue LEDs... no variety of colors, no black...
I love it how the store figures that since blue LEDs are all the rage, that it's all they should sell. *rolleyes*
(oh well, at least it goes well with the bright blue LED on the front of my Chieftec case...)
OpenOffice.org is still free and available for Windows.
Rejuvenated? As in gave it new life? A laptop that is a whopping 4 yrs-old (sarcasm) is pretty much useless with only Windows to run on it? Give me a break. I was using Wintel laptops for professional CAD design work 7 yrs ago... However did I manage?
Hugh .....?
... I don't get it...
...Ooooh!!!
What? Janus?
There's something funny about "Hugh Ja...." *grin*
" Apple is one step closer to dominating digital music distribution..."
;p
Maybe, if you factor out P2P distribution...
mwahahaha!
Say goodbye to BuyMusic.com, the web site.
It's being integrated into the parent site, Buy.com.
Not quite the same as giving up and closing shop.
Or did I miss something?
Is it really goodbye, or more like "See you later, when you re-open down the street"...
Apparently with the right legal mumbo-jumbo, you can convince a court that "unlimited" doesn't necessarily mean "without limit"... Or at least that's what their legal dept. seems to think.
Has Charter made any statements as to *why* they are fighting it? What possible legal ground do they have to stand on? Unless they've come up with some ingenious angle that might acually win, I'm guessing they might just be doing this for the good PR of being a company that "cares about it's customers". ( IE - they might not even expect to win ) The article would be 10x more interesting if it told of Charter's motives. But perhaps Charter is keeping it hush-hush before it reaches court? ( which would make sense since they probably don't have a case to begin with... ) ... hmmm...