Why? What does it matter? Debate? Screw debate. Let the lawsuits and fines commence with any and all in proximity taking collateral damage. Place the burden of proof on the companies that send spam to produce a consent that the receiver asked for the spam.
If the lawyers need to feed, let them feed on pr0n site owners and penis enlargement offerers.
If that is the case, why aren't all their children/wives complaining about it? Unless these congressmen are regular patrons of pr0n sites and are inclined to "lessen the noise". LOL.
"Oh, that's horrible honey. Yeah it's a big problem these days. Those damn spammers. We're trying to do something about it. Just be patient dear. Now, what was that delicio... I mean horrible site, lemme write that down so we can um... investigate them."
Whether or not (and I suspect you're right) the legislators/politicians actually see spam personally, they must wrestle with the fundamental concept of spam.
Spam, in essence, so far to date, is the ideological pure form of advertising.
- It requires very little cost. - Reaches millions of people. - Very quickly. - Can be tailored to targets. - Appears in a personal form. - Can be altered, retransmitted, reused easily - Has predictable factors and results - Can work round the clock - Automated
Legislators and money-makers alike must step through a fragile dance, so that "legitimate" businesses can capitalize on spam.
If they really wanted to reduce spam, they could have done so by now. Immediately I can think of ways to reduce spam. Quite easily.
Employ a bunch of monkeys (new jobs!), receive spam, take the most obvious spam (headers altered, subjects scrambled to avoid filters, etc.) for offering sexual content, shutdown websites they link and sender's. And don't tell me they can't. RIAA showed us how to apply pressure, and they did it long before laws were passed.
"No! Not the pr0n!"
Er... pr0n will always exist. Regardless of laws. It's like alcohol.
This will only reduce the spam from them. Abuse for this kind of outlaw is huge, yes. But two things.
[1] Does anyone really care about the pr0n site owners? [2] Isn't that what we want to cultivate? FUD among spammers?
"They'll just move their website." Yes. Costly. Until no ISPs will take them (ISPs cost for setting up the site, missed billings, hassles) or they move offshore. I've done it. And it takes a toll on the business. Even offshore.
Then you work your way up. Body part enlargement advertisers and get-rich-quick "opportunities".
Atleast their motives, whether they are misdirected or not, are of good intent. In this case, I think their motive is to protect children from seeing pr0n in spam.
Honestly I haven't seen any religious spam yet. Spamming from religion I would predict would be easy to filter, since deception (hiding headers or even subject) would be a no-no.
This is strange, since I would have suspected there to be an abundance of it. Evangelistic spreading of the "word" is in their charter, yet they've not chosen to use e-mail to do so.
I'm no religious adept, so if someone could find out. Perhaps the link between "The Beast" and the Internet? Dunno. Enlighten me. My guess is that sharing Faith is a personal experience, not an electronic one.
The Schumer SPAM Act -Stop Pornography and Abusive Marketing-
[Ed: Pr0n or Marketing? Which is it Chuck? Let's concentrate on one thing at a time buddy.]
Senator Charles Schumer has introduced the stop Pornography and Abusive Marketing (SPAM) Act to combat the mounting toll unsolicited commercial e-mail, commonly known as "spam," has taken on the Internet, businesses and e-mail users. The Schumer bill, S. 1231, is a effective comprehensive effort to address the technical problems associated with stopping spam, providing effective enforcement mechanisms to end the fraud and harassment perpetrated by junk e-mailers, and constitutes an important step in returning control over e-mail in-boxes to users. The SPAM Act will use six mechanisms to accomplish this goal:
Create a National No-Spam Registry Maintained by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the No-Spam registry will be a database of e-mail addresses for people who have "opted out" of receiving spam. Parents will have the option of putting their children's email addresses in the registry with a special designation to ensure that adult content does not reach their child's inbox. Anyone who sends spam to these addresses will be subject to stiff fines. The database will be protected by military-caliber encryption to ensure the protection of its contents.
[Ed: Encrypt this list? You mean the list that spammers have been doing well without anyway for all this time? Good to know we're protecting things that don't make much a difference to these spammers. And if this list isn't available to them, how are they gonna know not to send to them?]
Require ADV Labeling E-mail marketers will be required by law to include "ADV" in the e-mail subject line of marketing e-mail, permitting Internet Service Providers (ISPs), employers and individual users to filter spam from business and personal email. Legitimate marketers who comply with the highest electronic mail standards will be designated as trusted senders, relieving them of the need to comply with this requirement.
[Ed: "legitimate marketers"?]
Prevent E-mail Fraud According to an FTC report, 66% of spam contains false, misleading or deceptive information. The bill requires e-mail subject headings, header or router information of all commercial e-mail to accurately reflect its source and contents.
The Schumer SPAM Act -Stop Pornography and Abusive Marketing-
Senator Charles Schumer has introduced the stop Pornography and Abusive Marketing (SPAM) Act to combat the mounting toll unsolicited commercial e-mail, commonly known as "spam," has taken on the Internet, businesses and e-mail users. The Schumer bill, S. 1231, is a effective comprehensive effort to address the technical problems associated with stopping spam, providing effective enforcement mechanisms to end the fraud and harassment perpetrated by junk e-mailers, and constitutes an important step in returning control over e-mail in-boxes to users. The SPAM Act will use six mechanisms to accomplish this goal:
Create a National No-Spam Registry Maintained by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the No-Spam registry will be a database of e-mail addresses for people who have "opted out" of receiving spam. Parents will have the option of putting their children's email addresses in the registry with a special designation to ensure that adult content does not reach their child's inbox. Anyone who sends spam to these addresses will be subject to stiff fines. The database will be protected by military-caliber encryption to ensure the protection of its contents.
Require ADV Labeling E-mail marketers will be required by law to include "ADV" in the e-mail subject line of marketing e-mail, permitting Internet Service Providers (ISPs), employers and individual users to filter spam from business and personal email. Legitimate marketers who comply with the highest electronic mail standards will be designated as trusted senders, relieving them of the need to comply with this requirement.
Prevent E-mail Fraud According to an FTC report, 66% of spam contains false, misleading or deceptive information. The bill requires e-mail subject headings, header or router information of all commercial e-mail to accurately reflect its source and contents.
Provide an Opportunity to Unsubscribe The bill will require all commercial e-mail to provide recipients with an opportunity to decline any future e-mail from that sender. The notice and opportunity to unsubscribe must be functional, clear and conspicuous so recipients can fully exercise this choice.
Prohibit Harvesting of E-mail Addresses and Dictionary Attacks The bill will also prevent spammers from assembling e-mail lists through the practice of address "harvesting" carried out by software known as spam "bots" that mine web sites, chat rooms, news groups and other internet fora for publicly displayed e-mail addresses. It will also ban unsolivited e-mail sent by dictionary attacks, a practice that generates e-mail addresses by the random compilation of names and numbers.
Improve Enforcement and Increase Penalties The Schumer SPAM Act will enhance the FTC's anti-spam efforts by giving the Commission additional resources and tools to find and prosecute spammers. It will permit state attorneys general, ISPs and e-mail recipients who are harmed by spam to file civil suits against spammers themselves.
Come now. By the time we have nanotech common place, you don't think we'll be creating carbon atoms from subatomics? I mean, we gonna compete with nature we might as well do the whole verticle market, right? Why depend on her for anything?
Not like there's a universal Anti-Compeitive Monopoly Regulation, is there?
Just a reasonable expectation from looking at other posted articles that there's enough content in most to discern something from a layperson's perspective. Let me know if I am entirely out of my mind to think this.
It's part of a legal tactic called "offensive blocking patents" in which businesses or individual entrepreneurs use patents not so much as tools to build new products, but as legal roadblocks or bargaining chips against competitors or corporate giants.
I think the use of "Offensive" was quite appropriate.
Somewhat like what people did with doamin names? Great. Maybe I should start filing for those 1Gazillion combinations of DNA tomorrow. Got to be in it to win it right?
And what good is this primitive resource for energy when there's all sorts of fusion/fission/ultraplasmagigatomic-energy sources that I would suspect an intergalatic race to possess?
I may be a political midget so correct me if I've missed something. This appears to be a company, which by the way is one company, bringing services here to created training and jobs in Buffalo. Especially with University Buffalo students. I think the goal here is that Hillary doesn't want college drop outs like you sitting around trolling/. all day, and instead have you working for this Indian company bringing water bottles to their meetings.
I think Offshoring is when American companies take their manufacturing plants, like the enema factory your father works at, and move them to cheaper labor elsewhere, like your sister.
The concept of fair competition is for companies to compete on attributes (price, performance, etc.) of the product so that consumers vote with purchases. So underselling your competition is part of the fair competition. It's what drives the perfect market condition to lower prices near cost.
However, MS is not competing on the attributes of the product. They are competing with their size and bankroll. They are competing using fear and relationships. This is not part of fair competition, but rather modern competition. Whether they sell below their cost or not. Whether they are dumping or not. They may not be using draconian license agreements with resellers, but they are using draconian methods to isolate and target LindowsOS with pricing policies. Their rebates are specifically aimed at one company. Their only tangible competitor for a rather in-elastic product. How can you blame them though.
Although such pricing policies may be viewed as normal competition (what else would MS do if you were making its decisions? Sit idle and watch shrinking marketshare?), Most of the Linux defense comes from a deep rooted compassion and benevolence for an underdog. I would admit to it. Who on earth cheers for the bully at the schoolyard (other bullies?)? Don't we measure heros by the weakness of those the hero helps?
I install windows regularly for some people I know (for free). I got by the lean years with others paying me to install Windows. They're not stupid. They're just computerphobes. Don't you have anything you're simply not good at or don't like messing with? Cars? Plumbing? Flowers? Some may say those things are not difficult but you may.
The point is it may not be a successful strategy based on the target market, but its an opportunity nonetheless. It's not altogether farfetched that some of them may decide to install windows over their linux box. They may even pay me to come and use their $50 windows to install over their lindows. Either way, getting that survey is probably the main objective, not the displacement of the OS. Displacement of OS is just a shot in the dark. You send in reconnaissance and light infantry before sending in your main battalion.
Mispelling of Linux was not a mistake. It's a feable attempt to confuse brand recognition. If they were really smart they would have just left Linux out and only included Lindows, since Lindows either comes with the box or is the option offered. The best way to bury brand recognition is obscurity.
Though not everyone wants that specific feature, everyone has a specific feature that they want. That is the general case.
As far as people using the wrong tool for the job, what happens when your manager sends you a presentation? Will you be asking your manager why he's using the wrong tool for the job? Or will he be asking you how come you can't open this document that everyone else can?
I'm all for the Linux movement and all, which is why to the point of this article, I'd have to say that MS is making a dangerous move to displace the OS preference. This is clearly monopoly anti-competitive selling. Unfortunately the statement by Lindows CEO is rather dissappointing.
Don't you just love articles on/. that have just as cryptic description as the title providing no clue to what it's about if you never heard of "jabber"?
Remember that all these goods are not necessary to have. They are a luxury in life. Alternatives are everywhere.
I have no Antenna. The only thing I have connected to my screen is a DVD player and the only movies I used to watch were Anime. Music is all from small labels. I try to spend most of my time interactively, not sitting absorbing entertainment. Not an extremist by any means. I'll go to the occasional theatre, perhaps 3 or 4 a year.
The funny thing is, I've done business with them. Infact I've purchased licenses for reproduction/redistribution (yes you can purchase songs for resale. They cost a little over $0.10. Apple's makes a killing on $1 a song). Their system of license management is horrendus. It's nothing more than a large house of beraucracy that generates all this money. All their electronic/computer systems are there to support their paper system. Their business methods are as old as their business model.
For those of you too lazy to click a link from the FAQ... Let me try to give you an analogy for Slashdot's homepage... The ultimate goal is, of course, to create an omelette that I enjoy eating: by 8pm, I want to see a dozen interesting stories on Slashdot. I hope you enjoy them too. I believe that we've grown in size because we share a lot of common interests with our readers. But that doesn't mean that I'm gonna mix an omelette with all sausages, or someday throw away the tomatoes because the green peppers are really fresh. There are many components to the Slashdot Omelette.
Hence, Slashdot content is content he feels he would enjoy. Whether we enjoy it or not may be inconsequential, although he hopes we enjoy it.
If you were in charge, and you saw comments that some found funny but you found utterly useless, would you allow them to float to the top? You may, you might not. I'm not sure myself and might subject it to my mood. Altogether, I think people pay too much attention to the mechanics, and not enough on the stories.
Quite correct. Because paying someone puts them on the hook to fix your problems, especially the company that the product comes from. So doesn't he pay the IT department to fix it? Yes. But the adadge goes "you get what you pay for". Whether this is the case or not, it is the perception that drives the sale.
If you had to pick out a cosmetic kit as a present for your girlfriend, (with an assumption you knew nothing about make-up kits), would you purchase the $19.99 or the $120 kit?
Please no comments about the assumption. It's only to prove an argument about price.
And a good one indeed. Only problem is Sales and Marketing people don't have the corner on scumbag routines. They have most of it. (Lawyers have another piece of it.)
Some programmers too are scumbags. If I were a scumbag Project Manager or Executive or Sales and a programmer started doing this, preventing me from dishing out fake sells, keeping me from my commisions, I'd go find another programmer who was [1] Young and dumb to try fulfill my request [2] Scumbag programmer who will nod and let me fill my empty orders or [3] Even bigger scumbag programmer who will stop the documentation at my request so I can fill my request as long as I can scratch some itch he's got (ie hook him up with that pretty thing in finance or push finance to sign off on that new laptop for him). There's a reason why business people are successful. Who says barter is dead? They do it everyday to push an agenda.
Clearly too many posters don't get to the heart of the matter, which I thought was transparent. Evidently not.
The goal of the RIAA is to scare people with examples to prevent the activity. It would hardly be an example if their target was a struggle, wouldn't it? They've already tried to scare the downloaders of songs. Now they are moving up the chain to those that setup the tools in their environment. If this doesn't work, they may consider a move up the chain again and sue school administration. The theory would be that school administration would put pressure on the students (various ways academic institutes can apply) to stop their activities. Perhaps deploy a strategy/policy for computer network usage to restrict it (ie IT department of the school). But this is probably an option that they wouldn't want to take since conflicts between schools and students usually end up ugly. But it would allow the RIAA to push their agenda without getting their hands too dirty, letting the schools do the dirty work for them.
"To fight the bugs, one must first understand the bugs." - StarShip Troopers
I beg to differ. With $12K as lunch money, millions in potential from impacts, and the freedom of choice for everyone, and the law essentially turning a blind eye with it being in the spotlight.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=66956&thresh ol d=-1&commentsort=0&tid=123&mode=thread&cid=6150427
Roger Ames, the chief executive of Warner Music Group, said any plan that handed control of the industry's licensing to the government would simply shrink its revenues and prevent it from financing artist careers. As for the taxation idea: "It sounds like communism," Mr. Ames added.
You mean to finance the advertising, air-time, limousine, leer-jet, clothing, pirotechniques, not to mention the manager's gucci wallet and filling it, for the 12 boyband-artists among 10,000 that you starve normally?
And exactly how does this benefit me listening to the tunes I wanted to hear, the bands that deserve recognition and pay, or society in general growing up listening to britney spears?
Slashdot Mirror
Why? What does it matter? Debate? Screw debate. Let the lawsuits and fines commence with any and all in proximity taking collateral damage. Place the burden of proof on the companies that send spam to produce a consent that the receiver asked for the spam.
If the lawyers need to feed, let them feed on pr0n site owners and penis enlargement offerers.
Just my penny.
Sounds like he's good at what he does. lol.
If that is the case, why aren't all their children/wives complaining about it? Unless these congressmen are regular patrons of pr0n sites and are inclined to "lessen the noise". LOL.
"Oh, that's horrible honey. Yeah it's a big problem these days. Those damn spammers. We're trying to do something about it. Just be patient dear. Now, what was that delicio... I mean horrible site, lemme write that down so we can um... investigate them."
Whether or not (and I suspect you're right) the legislators/politicians actually see spam personally, they must wrestle with the fundamental concept of spam.
Spam, in essence, so far to date, is the ideological pure form of advertising.
- It requires very little cost.
- Reaches millions of people.
- Very quickly.
- Can be tailored to targets.
- Appears in a personal form.
- Can be altered, retransmitted, reused easily
- Has predictable factors and results
- Can work round the clock
- Automated
Legislators and money-makers alike must step through a fragile dance, so that "legitimate" businesses can capitalize on spam.
If they really wanted to reduce spam, they could have done so by now. Immediately I can think of ways to reduce spam. Quite easily.
Employ a bunch of monkeys (new jobs!), receive spam, take the most obvious spam (headers altered, subjects scrambled to avoid filters, etc.) for offering sexual content, shutdown websites they link and sender's. And don't tell me they can't. RIAA showed us how to apply pressure, and they did it long before laws were passed.
"No! Not the pr0n!"
Er... pr0n will always exist. Regardless of laws. It's like alcohol.
This will only reduce the spam from them. Abuse for this kind of outlaw is huge, yes. But two things.
[1] Does anyone really care about the pr0n site owners?
[2] Isn't that what we want to cultivate? FUD among spammers?
"They'll just move their website." Yes. Costly. Until no ISPs will take them (ISPs cost for setting up the site, missed billings, hassles) or they move offshore. I've done it. And it takes a toll on the business. Even offshore.
Then you work your way up. Body part enlargement advertisers and get-rich-quick "opportunities".
Lather, Rinse, Repeat.
Atleast their motives, whether they are misdirected or not, are of good intent. In this case, I think their motive is to protect children from seeing pr0n in spam.
Honestly I haven't seen any religious spam yet. Spamming from religion I would predict would be easy to filter, since deception (hiding headers or even subject) would be a no-no.
This is strange, since I would have suspected there to be an abundance of it. Evangelistic spreading of the "word" is in their charter, yet they've not chosen to use e-mail to do so.
I'm no religious adept, so if someone could find out. Perhaps the link between "The Beast" and the Internet? Dunno. Enlighten me. My guess is that sharing Faith is a personal experience, not an electronic one.
The closest I got to punch cards was fortran. I can only imagine. Remembering to put characters on the 7th column was annoying enough.
I think the earliest recollection I have is some form of BASIC on an Atari800 which predated my programming (out of order) experience on a PET.
The Schumer SPAM Act
-Stop Pornography and Abusive Marketing-
[Ed: Pr0n or Marketing? Which is it Chuck? Let's concentrate on one thing at a time buddy.]
Senator Charles Schumer has introduced the stop Pornography and Abusive Marketing (SPAM) Act to combat the mounting toll unsolicited commercial e-mail, commonly known as "spam," has taken on the Internet, businesses and e-mail users. The Schumer bill, S. 1231, is a effective comprehensive effort to address the technical problems associated with stopping spam, providing effective enforcement mechanisms to end the fraud and harassment perpetrated by junk e-mailers, and constitutes an important step in returning control over e-mail in-boxes to users. The SPAM Act will use six mechanisms to accomplish this goal:
Create a National No-Spam Registry
Maintained by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the No-Spam registry will be a database of e-mail addresses for people who have "opted out" of receiving spam. Parents will have the option of putting their children's email addresses in the registry with a special designation to ensure that adult content does not reach their child's inbox. Anyone who sends spam to these addresses will be subject to stiff fines. The database will be protected by military-caliber encryption to ensure the protection of its contents.
[Ed: Encrypt this list? You mean the list that spammers have been doing well without anyway for all this time? Good to know we're protecting things that don't make much a difference to these spammers. And if this list isn't available to them, how are they gonna know not to send to them?]
Require ADV Labeling
E-mail marketers will be required by law to include "ADV" in the e-mail subject line of marketing e-mail, permitting Internet Service Providers (ISPs), employers and individual users to filter spam from business and personal email. Legitimate marketers who comply with the highest electronic mail standards will be designated as trusted senders, relieving them of the need to comply with this requirement.
[Ed: "legitimate marketers"?]
Prevent E-mail Fraud
According to an FTC report, 66% of spam contains false, misleading or deceptive information. The bill requires e-mail subject headings, header or router information of all commercial e-mail to accurately reflect its source and contents.
[Ed: And what if they don't?]
The Schumer SPAM Act
-Stop Pornography and Abusive Marketing-
Senator Charles Schumer has introduced the stop Pornography and Abusive Marketing (SPAM) Act to combat the mounting toll unsolicited commercial e-mail, commonly known as "spam," has taken on the Internet, businesses and e-mail users. The Schumer bill, S. 1231, is a effective comprehensive effort to address the technical problems associated with stopping spam, providing effective enforcement mechanisms to end the fraud and harassment perpetrated by junk e-mailers, and constitutes an important step in returning control over e-mail in-boxes to users. The SPAM Act will use six mechanisms to accomplish this goal:
Create a National No-Spam Registry
Maintained by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the No-Spam registry will be a database of e-mail addresses for people who have "opted out" of receiving spam. Parents will have the option of putting their children's email addresses in the registry with a special designation to ensure that adult content does not reach their child's inbox. Anyone who sends spam to these addresses will be subject to stiff fines. The database will be protected by military-caliber encryption to ensure the protection of its contents.
Require ADV Labeling
E-mail marketers will be required by law to include "ADV" in the e-mail subject line of marketing e-mail, permitting Internet Service Providers (ISPs), employers and individual users to filter spam from business and personal email. Legitimate marketers who comply with the highest electronic mail standards will be designated as trusted senders, relieving them of the need to comply with this requirement.
Prevent E-mail Fraud
According to an FTC report, 66% of spam contains false, misleading or deceptive information. The bill requires e-mail subject headings, header or router information of all commercial e-mail to accurately reflect its source and contents.
Provide an Opportunity to Unsubscribe
The bill will require all commercial e-mail to provide recipients with an opportunity to decline any future e-mail from that sender. The notice and opportunity to unsubscribe must be functional, clear and conspicuous so recipients can fully exercise this choice.
Prohibit Harvesting of E-mail Addresses and Dictionary Attacks
The bill will also prevent spammers from assembling e-mail lists through the practice of address "harvesting" carried out by software known as spam "bots" that mine web sites, chat rooms, news groups and other internet fora for publicly displayed e-mail addresses. It will also ban unsolivited e-mail sent by dictionary attacks, a practice that generates e-mail addresses by the random compilation of names and numbers.
Improve Enforcement and Increase Penalties
The Schumer SPAM Act will enhance the FTC's anti-spam efforts by giving the Commission additional resources and tools to find and prosecute spammers. It will permit state attorneys general, ISPs and e-mail recipients who are harmed by spam to file civil suits against spammers themselves.
Come now. By the time we have nanotech common place, you don't think we'll be creating carbon atoms from subatomics? I mean, we gonna compete with nature we might as well do the whole verticle market, right? Why depend on her for anything?
Not like there's a universal Anti-Compeitive Monopoly Regulation, is there?
Just a reasonable expectation from looking at other posted articles that there's enough content in most to discern something from a layperson's perspective. Let me know if I am entirely out of my mind to think this.
It's part of a legal tactic called "offensive blocking patents" in which businesses or individual entrepreneurs use patents not so much as tools to build new products, but as legal roadblocks or bargaining chips against competitors or corporate giants.
I think the use of "Offensive" was quite appropriate.
Somewhat like what people did with doamin names? Great. Maybe I should start filing for those 1Gazillion combinations of DNA tomorrow. Got to be in it to win it right?
And what good is this primitive resource for energy when there's all sorts of fusion/fission/ultraplasmagigatomic-energy sources that I would suspect an intergalatic race to possess?
Lubrication?
I may be a political midget so correct me if I've missed something. This appears to be a company, which by the way is one company, bringing services here to created training and jobs in Buffalo. Especially with University Buffalo students. I think the goal here is that Hillary doesn't want college drop outs like you sitting around trolling /. all day, and instead have you working for this Indian company bringing water bottles to their meetings.
I think Offshoring is when American companies take their manufacturing plants, like the enema factory your father works at, and move them to cheaper labor elsewhere, like your sister.
Need a refresher course in micro-economics?
The concept of fair competition is for companies to compete on attributes (price, performance, etc.) of the product so that consumers vote with purchases. So underselling your competition is part of the fair competition. It's what drives the perfect market condition to lower prices near cost.
However, MS is not competing on the attributes of the product. They are competing with their size and bankroll. They are competing using fear and relationships. This is not part of fair competition, but rather modern competition. Whether they sell below their cost or not. Whether they are dumping or not. They may not be using draconian license agreements with resellers, but they are using draconian methods to isolate and target LindowsOS with pricing policies. Their rebates are specifically aimed at one company. Their only tangible competitor for a rather in-elastic product. How can you blame them though.
Although such pricing policies may be viewed as normal competition (what else would MS do if you were making its decisions? Sit idle and watch shrinking marketshare?), Most of the Linux defense comes from a deep rooted compassion and benevolence for an underdog. I would admit to it. Who on earth cheers for the bully at the schoolyard (other bullies?)? Don't we measure heros by the weakness of those the hero helps?
I install windows regularly for some people I know (for free). I got by the lean years with others paying me to install Windows. They're not stupid. They're just computerphobes. Don't you have anything you're simply not good at or don't like messing with? Cars? Plumbing? Flowers? Some may say those things are not difficult but you may.
The point is it may not be a successful strategy based on the target market, but its an opportunity nonetheless. It's not altogether farfetched that some of them may decide to install windows over their linux box. They may even pay me to come and use their $50 windows to install over their lindows. Either way, getting that survey is probably the main objective, not the displacement of the OS. Displacement of OS is just a shot in the dark. You send in reconnaissance and light infantry before sending in your main battalion.
Mispelling of Linux was not a mistake. It's a feable attempt to confuse brand recognition. If they were really smart they would have just left Linux out and only included Lindows, since Lindows either comes with the box or is the option offered. The best way to bury brand recognition is obscurity.
Though not everyone wants that specific feature, everyone has a specific feature that they want. That is the general case.
As far as people using the wrong tool for the job, what happens when your manager sends you a presentation? Will you be asking your manager why he's using the wrong tool for the job? Or will he be asking you how come you can't open this document that everyone else can?
I'm all for the Linux movement and all, which is why to the point of this article, I'd have to say that MS is making a dangerous move to displace the OS preference. This is clearly monopoly anti-competitive selling. Unfortunately the statement by Lindows CEO is rather dissappointing.
Don't you just love articles on /. that have just as cryptic description as the title providing no clue to what it's about if you never heard of "jabber"?
Remember that all these goods are not necessary to have. They are a luxury in life. Alternatives are everywhere.
I have no Antenna. The only thing I have connected to my screen is a DVD player and the only movies I used to watch were Anime. Music is all from small labels. I try to spend most of my time interactively, not sitting absorbing entertainment. Not an extremist by any means. I'll go to the occasional theatre, perhaps 3 or 4 a year.
The funny thing is, I've done business with them. Infact I've purchased licenses for reproduction/redistribution (yes you can purchase songs for resale. They cost a little over $0.10. Apple's makes a killing on $1 a song). Their system of license management is horrendus. It's nothing more than a large house of beraucracy that generates all this money. All their electronic/computer systems are there to support their paper system. Their business methods are as old as their business model.
I think more accurately, you are right. But does it matter?
There's a sucker born every minute? Some of those are bound to be programmers.
For those of you too lazy to click a link from the FAQ...
Let me try to give you an analogy for Slashdot's homepage... The ultimate goal is, of course, to create an omelette that I enjoy eating: by 8pm, I want to see a dozen interesting stories on Slashdot. I hope you enjoy them too. I believe that we've grown in size because we share a lot of common interests with our readers. But that doesn't mean that I'm gonna mix an omelette with all sausages, or someday throw away the tomatoes because the green peppers are really fresh.
There are many components to the Slashdot Omelette.
Hence, Slashdot content is content he feels he would enjoy. Whether we enjoy it or not may be inconsequential, although he hopes we enjoy it.
If you were in charge, and you saw comments that some found funny but you found utterly useless, would you allow them to float to the top? You may, you might not. I'm not sure myself and might subject it to my mood. Altogether, I think people pay too much attention to the mechanics, and not enough on the stories.
Quite correct. Because paying someone puts them on the hook to fix your problems, especially the company that the product comes from. So doesn't he pay the IT department to fix it? Yes. But the adadge goes "you get what you pay for". Whether this is the case or not, it is the perception that drives the sale.
If you had to pick out a cosmetic kit as a present for your girlfriend, (with an assumption you knew nothing about make-up kits), would you purchase the $19.99 or the $120 kit?
Please no comments about the assumption. It's only to prove an argument about price.
And a good one indeed. Only problem is Sales and Marketing people don't have the corner on scumbag routines. They have most of it. (Lawyers have another piece of it.)
Some programmers too are scumbags. If I were a scumbag Project Manager or Executive or Sales and a programmer started doing this, preventing me from dishing out fake sells, keeping me from my commisions, I'd go find another programmer who was [1] Young and dumb to try fulfill my request [2] Scumbag programmer who will nod and let me fill my empty orders or [3] Even bigger scumbag programmer who will stop the documentation at my request so I can fill my request as long as I can scratch some itch he's got (ie hook him up with that pretty thing in finance or push finance to sign off on that new laptop for him). There's a reason why business people are successful. Who says barter is dead? They do it everyday to push an agenda.
Clearly too many posters don't get to the heart of the matter, which I thought was transparent. Evidently not.
The goal of the RIAA is to scare people with examples to prevent the activity. It would hardly be an example if their target was a struggle, wouldn't it? They've already tried to scare the downloaders of songs. Now they are moving up the chain to those that setup the tools in their environment. If this doesn't work, they may consider a move up the chain again and sue school administration. The theory would be that school administration would put pressure on the students (various ways academic institutes can apply) to stop their activities. Perhaps deploy a strategy/policy for computer network usage to restrict it (ie IT department of the school). But this is probably an option that they wouldn't want to take since conflicts between schools and students usually end up ugly. But it would allow the RIAA to push their agenda without getting their hands too dirty, letting the schools do the dirty work for them.
"To fight the bugs, one must first understand the bugs." - StarShip Troopers
I beg to differ. With $12K as lunch money, millions in potential from impacts, and the freedom of choice for everyone, and the law essentially turning a blind eye with it being in the spotlight.
h ol d=-1&commentsort=0&tid=123&mode=thread&cid=6150427
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=66956&thres
Roger Ames, the chief executive of Warner Music Group, said any plan that handed control of the industry's licensing to the government would simply shrink its revenues and prevent it from financing artist careers. As for the taxation idea: "It sounds like communism," Mr. Ames added.
You mean to finance the advertising, air-time, limousine, leer-jet, clothing, pirotechniques, not to mention the manager's gucci wallet and filling it, for the 12 boyband-artists among 10,000 that you starve normally?
And exactly how does this benefit me listening to the tunes I wanted to hear, the bands that deserve recognition and pay, or society in general growing up listening to britney spears?