This isn't necessarily scary for the privacy advocates. It's just another battle, and not a surprising decision based on recent trends.
The people that should really be scared are those that use this technology, privacy advocate or not.
I still use my HP deskjet 500! It's a tank. Not a single problem. I really don't consider it all that noisy either.
I'm hoping that printers will start to improve in quality once the wow factor of near photo quality prints wears off and people actually start demanding something that will last.
I like the ground hogs day effect of clicking on "next page" only to keep reading " Many people don't know it, but today's PCs--including the system you're using right now--contain elements that have hardly changed at all in the last 20 years" -- start dream sequence here ~~ " hardly changed at all..." "hardly changed at all" "have harldy changed at all..." --que twilight zone scream clip -- fade to black --
Good point, but I've always taken issue with that statement on a more fundamental level. First it's a garbage statement that simpletons say while assuming everyone else is a simpleton like themselves and has no need for privacy. Additionally though, what if you've done something wrong and have something to hide? That's certainly a right I don't want taken away from me. After all, it's one that is protected quite well amongst politicians. IF any of you find this statement shocking, let's pause to reconsider who gets to define "wrong."
Some of us ride pedal bikes because we care about the environment. Have you looked at the rising asthma statistics recently? Have you noticed the problem America has with acid rain? Have you noticed how you're dependent on foreign oil imports? *sighs*
Have you noticed how stereotypical you sound right now? it kind of makes me chuckle.
bingo. I think you're right on. It makes sense that for things like photoshop you'd want more memory and faster speeds for better price (a la PC), but I have a hard time with the idea that a PC would be better for rendering DV. The double processor configuration in the G4 systems really makes for quicker renders (and I'm anti-mac all the way)... so I agree that this is a strategic move more than a technical statement.
I am dissapointed that they choose this strategy rather than scrapping premiere and building it from the bottom up to compete with final cut.
can anyone actually confirm that this is taking place as described in the article? I have a hard time believing anything coming from the Chinese press, and this just sounds like a cover for the government to nail whomever's cell phone they'd like.
Yeah... I live near birmingham and my computers do wonders for my heat bill... but even more impressive is what they do for my electric bill when I have to crank my AC.
there are two things fundamently wrong here.
1. the heat is/is not waste is viewpoint specific just like this , and it applies to corporations just as it does to homes. 2.
The parent post has been rated insightful
sure.... but if you're in charge of making things more efficient, I'm a little worried b/c it seems that it would have been easier to just read the article -- "Princeton, Minn"
I'm not at all convinced that stronger faster humans is the path of evolution at all. It seems the natural course of evolution would be fatter slower humans with less consistant DNA across the species (as more mutating factors are introduced into our enviornment). And based on all the emails I get it seems that our species main concern is puffing up our genetalia. If there's one thing that's for certain in regards to this manner it's that normal healthy people will continue to feel dissatisfied with their bodies throughout time and the media will perpetuate this.
I'll be interested when we can transfect the gene for polite driving demeanor.
no no no. what's it's like is like this, it's like an electric company that figures out a way to make electricity out of water and then sells it in drinking fountains outside your house on the black market when nobody's looking and sometimes they sneak inside your house steal your cheese puffs and then they have these secret sales where they raise the price of the water but say that they're including these "free" cheese puffs and then these clowns-- you know the ones from IT (not your IT dept. but the movie that steven king made) anyway so these clowns they take the electricity and they give it to their circus, but it turns out it's really an evil circus that the old water company put there because nobody is buying their water anymore and everyone is just going nuts and they have a huge food fight -- it's friggin' awesome let me tell you... my friend daniel went to school in ohio and he said that onetime there was a foodfight there and someone threw a cupcake right at the lunchlady's face... her face!! uh, what were you saying about the evil water clowns?
C'mon now, wouldn't you stutter too trying to spit out such a laughable statement as saying that buffy is one of the best shows on television? That couldn't have been easy.
ex. "reality television is the grape
greatest thing to come our way since seppuku:
Back in Russia it was very typical. It didn't disturb me as otherwise powerful people would have everything. Well, eachtime, when there was not such limits, powerful people had everything and I didn't.
Well, not being disturbed by that would also make you a socialist, or at least a victim of socialist policy. I will not take aim at your socio-political outlook here, but for the sake of discussion I think you must agree that having a socialist view on bandwidth caps puts us in a completely different discussion. One that would render the finer details I was trying to illustrate rather unconsequential.
Our (implying the US and loosely including the views of the UK) constitution was designed with the view that all citizens have an equal opportunity to achieve any given level of success, and this equality entails equal treatment of all people even at the cost of inherent inequalities among groups of people (ie. the poor not having milk because the rich bought it all). This makes sense if you believe in economic mobility of individuals and the fact that it would be unfair to impose inequalities on success simply because of success itself. Of course the reality is much more complicated than this, and there are checks and balances in a competitve market environment that should prevent the supply of milk from diminishing to the point where the poor no longer had equal access to it.
Bac in 1930x American shared my point and have been patiently staying in line to get a limited amount of bread.
Forget about bad countries and bad times: you have a limit of wour wireless traffic, haven't you?
what is being done with it is not the point. and quite frankly it's none of your business. It's questions like that which distract from the real point here: people are losing unrestricted access to the net even though they are paying good money for access. What once seemed like a right is becoming a precious commodity. Somewhere in some office, a bigwig asked the same kind of question you did, and simply because he and his cronies weren't imaginative to think of why people might actually want to take advantage of unlimited access, they imposed a ceiling limiting all their users to the bounds of their own inadequate imaginations.
If your supermarket created a rule stating that you could only purchase 55 gallons of milk per week (sounds like enough for even the largest family to me), wouldn't the simple principle disturb you? Isn't that seemingly harmless imposition an anti-capitalistic precedent for future limitations, one of which will eventually penetrate the bounds of your comfort?
I don't get it.. why would you flush beer down your toilet??
Or are you implying that the yellowish substance you excrete is beer?
My friend, it may look that way, but I assure you that is urine. Being convinced otherwise could get you into some rather unpleasant scenarios.
I'd have to agree that this sounds a little to corporation friendly. How does Joe user take on overseas providers like terra.es (one of if not the most henious spam hosts on the planet) in small claims court? It might turn out that the number of people who persues legal action (especially at $10) does not outweigh the benefits reaped by paying the state for the list and then spamming that list.
Still, it would be good for one of these states to try this as an experiment because at the very least it's a somewhat agreeable law because it doesn't greatly obstruct anyone's right to be obnoxious, and isn't that what this country is all about?
Slashdot Mirror
I downloaded the world wide web of pain once. It took forever!
p.s. Either "The Rock" from WWE or the Iraqi information minister must have written this article.
"... only the most determined and technologically savvy of them will continue to steal music."
Hmm, I remember people saying this when mp3 technology first came out.
This isn't necessarily scary for the privacy advocates. It's just another battle, and not a surprising decision based on recent trends.
The people that should really be scared are those that use this technology, privacy advocate or not.
Damn, you stole my post.
btw, have you seen this http://www.microsoft.com/Office/clippy/
Why does M$ use so mouch foul language in their videos? Also, why does video 2 feature Hitler??
I still use my HP deskjet 500! It's a tank. Not a single problem. I really don't consider it all that noisy either.
I'm hoping that printers will start to improve in quality once the wow factor of near photo quality prints wears off and people actually start demanding something that will last.
I wrote my representative
Have you?
here in Soviet Russia representative elects YOU!
I like the ground hogs day effect of clicking on "next page" only to keep reading " Many people don't know it, but today's PCs--including the system you're using right now--contain elements that have hardly changed at all in the last 20 years" -- start dream sequence here ~~ " hardly changed at all..." "hardly changed at all" "have harldy changed at all..." --que twilight zone scream clip -- fade to black --
Good point, but I've always taken issue with that statement on a more fundamental level. First it's a garbage statement that simpletons say while assuming everyone else is a simpleton like themselves and has no need for privacy. Additionally though, what if you've done something wrong and have something to hide? That's certainly a right I don't want taken away from me. After all, it's one that is protected quite well amongst politicians. IF any of you find this statement shocking, let's pause to reconsider who gets to define "wrong."
Have you noticed how stereotypical you sound right now? it kind of makes me chuckle.
bingo. I think you're right on. It makes sense that for things like photoshop you'd want more memory and faster speeds for better price (a la PC), but I have a hard time with the idea that a PC would be better for rendering DV. The double processor configuration in the G4 systems really makes for quicker renders (and I'm anti-mac all the way)... so I agree that this is a strategic move more than a technical statement.
I am dissapointed that they choose this strategy rather than scrapping premiere and building it from the bottom up to compete with final cut.
can anyone actually confirm that this is taking place as described in the article? I have a hard time believing anything coming from the Chinese press, and this just sounds like a cover for the government to nail whomever's cell phone they'd like.
yeah, the kid that always gets picked on will have to lug everyone's phones around with him while they all go out and break stuff or whatever.
Then oneday junior will wise up and drop all the phones off at the local crack house.
"A knife can beat a gun if the attacker is within 25 feet or so."
yeah I saw that movie. it was SooOOO awesome!!!!!!!!
since when is windowsXP L337?
Yeah... I live near birmingham and my computers do wonders for my heat bill... but even more impressive is what they do for my electric bill when I have to crank my AC.
there are two things fundamently wrong here.
1.
the heat is/is not waste is viewpoint specific just like this
, and it applies to corporations just as it does to homes.
2.
The parent post has been rated insightful
sure.... but if you're in charge of making things more efficient, I'm a little worried b/c it seems that it would have been easier to just read the article -- "Princeton, Minn"
I'm not at all convinced that stronger faster humans is the path of evolution at all. It seems the natural course of evolution would be fatter slower humans with less consistant DNA across the species (as more mutating factors are introduced into our enviornment). And based on all the emails I get it seems that our species main concern is puffing up our genetalia. If there's one thing that's for certain in regards to this manner it's that normal healthy people will continue to feel dissatisfied with their bodies throughout time and the media will perpetuate this.
I'll be interested when we can transfect the gene for polite driving demeanor.
no no no. what's it's like is like this, it's like an electric company that figures out a way to make electricity out of water and then sells it in drinking fountains outside your house on the black market when nobody's looking and sometimes they sneak inside your house steal your cheese puffs and then they have these secret sales where they raise the price of the water but say that they're including these "free" cheese puffs and then these clowns-- you know the ones from IT (not your IT dept. but the movie that steven king made) anyway so these clowns they take the electricity and they give it to their circus, but it turns out it's really an evil circus that the old water company put there because nobody is buying their water anymore and everyone is just going nuts and they have a huge food fight -- it's friggin' awesome let me tell you... my friend daniel went to school in ohio and he said that onetime there was a foodfight there and someone threw a cupcake right at the lunchlady's face... her face!! uh, what were you saying about the evil water clowns?
C'mon now, wouldn't you stutter too trying to spit out such a laughable statement as saying that buffy is one of the best shows on television? That couldn't have been easy.
ex. "reality television is the grape
greatest thing to come our way since seppuku:
I really thought Paul McFedries response using Lexis Nexis to prove his point was a nice touch!
Don't bank on it for much longer Wang... we'll have that taken care of soon with one of our "spezial macheens"
Well, not being disturbed by that would also make you a socialist, or at least a victim of socialist policy. I will not take aim at your socio-political outlook here, but for the sake of discussion I think you must agree that having a socialist view on bandwidth caps puts us in a completely different discussion. One that would render the finer details I was trying to illustrate rather unconsequential.
Our (implying the US and loosely including the views of the UK) constitution was designed with the view that all citizens have an equal opportunity to achieve any given level of success, and this equality entails equal treatment of all people even at the cost of inherent inequalities among groups of people (ie. the poor not having milk because the rich bought it all). This makes sense if you believe in economic mobility of individuals and the fact that it would be unfair to impose inequalities on success simply because of success itself. Of course the reality is much more complicated than this, and there are checks and balances in a competitve market environment that should prevent the supply of milk from diminishing to the point where the poor no longer had equal access to it.
Bac in 1930x American shared my point and have been patiently staying in line to get a limited amount of bread. Forget about bad countries and bad times: you have a limit of wour wireless traffic, haven't you?
so... All your bases are belong to us??
what is being done with it is not the point. and quite frankly it's none of your business. It's questions like that which distract from the real point here: people are losing unrestricted access to the net even though they are paying good money for access. What once seemed like a right is becoming a precious commodity. Somewhere in some office, a bigwig asked the same kind of question you did, and simply because he and his cronies weren't imaginative to think of why people might actually want to take advantage of unlimited access, they imposed a ceiling limiting all their users to the bounds of their own inadequate imaginations.
If your supermarket created a rule stating that you could only purchase 55 gallons of milk per week (sounds like enough for even the largest family to me), wouldn't the simple principle disturb you? Isn't that seemingly harmless imposition an anti-capitalistic precedent for future limitations, one of which will eventually penetrate the bounds of your comfort?
I don't get it.. why would you flush beer down your toilet??
Or are you implying that the yellowish substance you excrete is beer?
My friend, it may look that way, but I assure you that is urine. Being convinced otherwise could get you into some rather unpleasant scenarios.
I'd have to agree that this sounds a little to corporation friendly. How does Joe user take on overseas providers like terra.es (one of if not the most henious spam hosts on the planet) in small claims court? It might turn out that the number of people who persues legal action (especially at $10) does not outweigh the benefits reaped by paying the state for the list and then spamming that list.
Still, it would be good for one of these states to try this as an experiment because at the very least it's a somewhat agreeable law because it doesn't greatly obstruct anyone's right to be obnoxious, and isn't that what this country is all about?