Wow that's pretty bad logic. The parent said "if it was perfect it would be released now", not "unless its perfect it won't be released". Big difference.
Well, I suppose they have the right to do it play hardball if they want. And users have the right to make a lot of noise about it.
I think the reason Google is so popular among this crowd is that they tend to rise above this sort of thing. For instance if you search for an address they offer the yahoo maps option as well. If you have a gmail account, they do several things that allow you to avoid lock-in (allowing you to use a different email as the from address, forwarding mail for free, etc). Google may be as greedy as the rest of them, it's just that their strategy for making the most money involves being perceived (by those who pay attention) as being "non evil". And that's good, I hope more companies adopt that strategy. And I hope people do pay attention.
So who knows if what ebay is doing is illegal. It is against the interests of its users, as well as being disingenuous to say the least. When a company does such a thing, I hope the users continue to make a big deal of it.
That would be the perfect response. Banning Ebay from its search results would hurt the user, which would make it a no-go at Google I'd think. But banning ads like those would align perfectly with Google's (supposed) goal to do what is best for users.
No....just because we are "discussing legal matters" does not mean we have to use legal language. "Alledgedly" simply means that some people claim it to be true. If the speaker does not take it as fact that it is true, "allegedly" is perfectly appropriate.
I don't see it as particularly inconsistant. Did he say that everyone should have a accepting of all beliefs equally?
I don't believe in Santa Claus. I do believe that the earth is round. And in my opinion adults who believe the opposite are rather nutty. Not just because the beliefs are different from mine, but because those particular beliefs are SO unsupported by evidence and logic. (And unlike conventional religious views, the believers don't have the excuse that they are exposed an extremely high level of social pressure to beleive in them)
Does that make me bigotted or inconsistant?
Dual booting not mentioned in the article
on
Apple's Fruitful Future
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You really think that if you post something (that you wrote) on your blog that someone is going to sue you for copyright infringement? You may have valid points about copyright being "out of hand", but if you seriously think that more than, say, five people in the world cancel their internet out of fear of being sued for infringement, you need to seriously get a grip on reality.
If you are in the content creation business, different story I suppose. But getting out of a particular business does not require ceasing to use the internet at all.
I'm kinda on your side, except that I think software patents would make more sense if they only lasted 4 or 5 years. On a patent like this, where someone would have surely done it in short order if they hadn't done it first, a 20 year patent is rather silly.
You are right that there is no mystery, but that is not it.
We see it that way because, based on things like clouds, the sky appears to be a fairly flat surface (as opposed to, say, a hemisphere). Therefore, we think of the sky near the horizon as being further away than the sky straight up (which of course, is typically true of clouds and other "near sky objects".
The sun or moon, covering half a degree in diameter whether up high or down low, is therefore perceived as bigger in "real size" when down low, since our brain sees it as being further away than when it is high up. It's a very basic perspective illusion, which is well understood.
Except that we live in a democracy, so you have to sell that to the voters. And it is certainly not in the interest of most voters, since it benefits the few rich far more than the regular people (compared to our current system).
By the way, that is not really a flat tax, since it increases with income. A true flat tax would charge the same amount to everyone.
state tax returns are generally really easy, compared to the federal, since they just have you copy stuff off your federal return. What they should do to get more people to use it is, when you are done, tell them what what numbers to put where on the federal form.
You are right that the public would be hurt as well. And whether they know the difference between the various media players, what *very* few of them understand is the long term economic ramifications of monopoly and bundling and such. And it's not really their job to understand it.
It's just not publically announced yet. I sincerely doubt c|net would have published this story, using the words they did, unless they were really, really sure.
giving kids an allowance is using a device to enforce parenting. You should just give them a credit card with a high limit, and teach them not to spend too much.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow that's pretty bad logic. The parent said "if it was perfect it would be released now", not "unless its perfect it won't be released". Big difference.
Well, I suppose they have the right to do it play hardball if they want. And users have the right to make a lot of noise about it.
I think the reason Google is so popular among this crowd is that they tend to rise above this sort of thing. For instance if you search for an address they offer the yahoo maps option as well. If you have a gmail account, they do several things that allow you to avoid lock-in (allowing you to use a different email as the from address, forwarding mail for free, etc). Google may be as greedy as the rest of them, it's just that their strategy for making the most money involves being perceived (by those who pay attention) as being "non evil". And that's good, I hope more companies adopt that strategy. And I hope people do pay attention.
So who knows if what ebay is doing is illegal. It is against the interests of its users, as well as being disingenuous to say the least. When a company does such a thing, I hope the users continue to make a big deal of it.
That would be the perfect response. Banning Ebay from its search results would hurt the user, which would make it a no-go at Google I'd think. But banning ads like those would align perfectly with Google's (supposed) goal to do what is best for users.
Funny example, BTW.
Although Noah Webster actually did make a significant impact in that direction. Most "Americanized" spellings ("center", "color", etc) are his doing.
Didja bother looking it up?
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/relatedly
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/relatedly
No....just because we are "discussing legal matters" does not mean we have to use legal language. "Alledgedly" simply means that some people claim it to be true. If the speaker does not take it as fact that it is true, "allegedly" is perfectly appropriate.
that they ended with a quote by Behe.
When will he just give up? He's just grasping at straws....
I don't see it as particularly inconsistant. Did he say that everyone should have a accepting of all beliefs equally?
I don't believe in Santa Claus. I do believe that the earth is round. And in my opinion adults who believe the opposite are rather nutty. Not just because the beliefs are different from mine, but because those particular beliefs are SO unsupported by evidence and logic. (And unlike conventional religious views, the believers don't have the excuse that they are exposed an extremely high level of social pressure to beleive in them)
Does that make me bigotted or inconsistant?
or is this just an early april fools joke?
just sayin'
Why should their business drop? How does it affect anything what their "parked" domains are on?
I predict half a dozen hard core anti-microsoft people will leave on principle, and the other 99 zillion of their customers won't give a rat's ass.
Good argument. Well, it would be if 90% of the roads in the world were compatible with Camry's but not Porches.
You really think that if you post something (that you wrote) on your blog that someone is going to sue you for copyright infringement? You may have valid points about copyright being "out of hand", but if you seriously think that more than, say, five people in the world cancel their internet out of fear of being sued for infringement, you need to seriously get a grip on reality.
If you are in the content creation business, different story I suppose. But getting out of a particular business does not require ceasing to use the internet at all.
So does that mean I can't complain about the president bush because I didn't run for office?
Larger companies can afford to support multiple platforms since the cost is spread out among more users?
I'm kinda on your side, except that I think software patents would make more sense if they only lasted 4 or 5 years. On a patent like this, where someone would have surely done it in short order if they hadn't done it first, a 20 year patent is rather silly.
For your example, couldn't you just freeze some sperm and eggs and such and accomplish the same thing more easily?
You are right that there is no mystery, but that is not it.
We see it that way because, based on things like clouds, the sky appears to be a fairly flat surface (as opposed to, say, a hemisphere). Therefore, we think of the sky near the horizon as being further away than the sky straight up (which of course, is typically true of clouds and other "near sky objects".
The sun or moon, covering half a degree in diameter whether up high or down low, is therefore perceived as bigger in "real size" when down low, since our brain sees it as being further away than when it is high up. It's a very basic perspective illusion, which is well understood.
This is easy to explain if you draw a picture.
Except that we live in a democracy, so you have to sell that to the voters. And it is certainly not in the interest of most voters, since it benefits the few rich far more than the regular people (compared to our current system).
By the way, that is not really a flat tax, since it increases with income. A true flat tax would charge the same amount to everyone.
state tax returns are generally really easy, compared to the federal, since they just have you copy stuff off your federal return. What they should do to get more people to use it is, when you are done, tell them what what numbers to put where on the federal form.
You are right that the public would be hurt as well. And whether they know the difference between the various media players, what *very* few of them understand is the long term economic ramifications of monopoly and bundling and such. And it's not really their job to understand it.
I notice you post anonymously so I can't do the same.
It's just not publically announced yet. I sincerely doubt c|net would have published this story, using the words they did, unless they were really, really sure.
Um, TV is the reward.
And for most allowance isn't a reward, it is an allocation, like $X per week. I don't see how it is so different than X hours per 10000 steps.
giving kids an allowance is using a device to enforce parenting. You should just give them a credit card with a high limit, and teach them not to spend too much.
Get over yourself.