According to the lawsuit, they're claiming there's a bug in the software that also appears in BNETD.
Re:laws for time travellers? who cares?
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
I understand what you mean but I think you misunderstand me.
What I'm saying is that perhaps, if you travel back into the past, you were, for lack of a better word, *meant* to go back and do whatever you end up doing. History are you see could not have happened if you didn't travel back into time and interact with things as you did/will/are.
By participate, I mean, you aren't making "changes"... you're just acting in history as you were always destined/meant/fated/etc to be.
by making the same, tired "Oh, we like Vivendi/RIAA/MPAA/etc today?" wisecracks.
Because, like, no one here has ever commented on the "irony" of thousands of posting not being in agreement.
Re:laws for time travellers? who cares?
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
I've always believed that if you traveled back in the past, you'd merely participate in it, not change it.
Because simply existing in the past and displacing molecules around you would be enough to cause paradoxes, let alone killing your grandfather. So, unless paralell universes are created, you simply can't make any changes to the past. If you try to kill your grandfather, something will prevent you from doing.
Star Trek the Next Generation had an episode featuring a society of clones. They use DNA from Riker and Pulaski to create clones of them. Riker feels violated and kills the clones while they're still developing.
It was an abortion rights metaphor originally but now, it's becoming a frightening take on an actual issue.
Call your Senator's office, say you represent such and such group and you would like to meet with the Senator to discuss concerns relating to a certain issue. Show up well-prepared and in business attire.
It may be harder to schedule an appointment with a Senator than a Representative though. Worse case, you'll end up talking to a staffer but you should almost always be able to talk to someone at the office.
Apparently, you're oblivious to the irony of your comments so I'll spell it out for you.
Your "Afghanis must pay the price for their leaders' actions" attitude is EXACTLY the same as Bin Laden's "Americans must pay the price for their leaders' actions" attitude.
Since Bin Laden's attitude is obviously illegitimate, maybe you should reconsider your own and realize that innocent people, Afghani or American, should never "pay the price" for their leaders' actions.
If somebody can take Linux and give it most of the good points that Windows has (ease of installation, better compatibility, GUI amdinistration instead of relying solely on command line...), then MS should feel quite threatened.
Isn't that what some have speculated AOL's master plan is? Start distributing a AOL-ized version of Linux on their CDs...
Bin Laden sees himself as fighting against, amongst other things: American's support of the Israeli occupation of Palestine Israel's war of terror against Palestinian civilians America's military occupation of Saudi Arabia
Employees excessively surfing the web is a *symptom* of, not the *reason*, too much free time at work. If they're goofing off, it's not because they have unrestricted internet access; it's because they either don't have enough work to do or they're not doing the work they've been given.
That means it's a problem their managers need to address; not something for the IT department. If someone is surfing six hours a day, then it's the manager's fault that they're not properly supervising them and giving them tasks or disciplining them for not getting their work done.
That said, a company would have to be foolish not to employ some basic filtering measures(porno, gambling, gaming sites, file sharing services, e-mail attachments) to keep network traffic and the more obvious time wasters in check.
However, if an employee is doing all their work and checking Yahoo Mail or ESPN.com, what is the harm? It keeps them happy and the company's work is getting done.
You said: [I]t's still a lighter browser over all. It takes around 66% of the download space of a recent MSIE, despite also having email and IRC and whatever, and even manages to be smaller than Netscape.
What exactly *were* you referring to then if not diskspace? Just the download file?
Great, that's an even better argument.
More bloat and less speed from a smaller file. Talk about efficiency. Maybe Microsoft could learn from this...
Re:Caffeine? (was Re:The full quote)
on
DOJ Dot-Narc
·
· Score: 2
Caffeine kills about 2000 people per year according to the CDC, which is about 2000 more than marijuana kills.
ACLU has misguided priorities?
on
DOJ Dot-Narc
·
· Score: 2
From the article: You must have JavaScript enabled in order to use the Wired News Multimedia Player.We apologize for any inconvenience. That has set off alarm bells at the American Civil Liberties Union.
God damn. Is there nothing the ACLU won't complain about?
Be aware that while Mozilla is physically slower and more memory hungry, it's still a lighter browser over all. It takes around 66% of the download space of a recent MSIE, despite also having email and IRC and whatever, and even manages to be smaller than Netscape.
It may be slower and consume more resources but at least it uses less disk space?
That's really not an argument the open source community should be making.
After reading the Salon article about how improved and fast it was now, I decided to give it a whirl on my NT desktop at work.
I uninstalled it after about 15 minutes. It was just slow. Sluggish in loading pages, slow in creating new windows, everything. Not only was it slower than IE 5.5 but what surprised me was that it was slower than *Netscape* 4.7, which is what I primarily use. It's a shame because it had some nice options.
What am I missing? Is it not meant to run on NT? Is it debugging code? Would it run better on XP? I'd love to give it a chance but apparently, I got some other Mozilla browser instead of the one everyone here is raving about.
Frankly, I'm astounded that a proposal this anti-democratic, anti-consumer, anti-freedom and anti-free speech has made it as far as it has. It's just completely bad top to bottom. The SSSCA seems to be nothing but a massive payoff to the entertainment industry.
Hollywood has already cried fire where's there's not even ember. Anyone else remember Jack Valenti's predictions that the VCR would doom Hollywood? That VCR's would be to Hollywood what the Boston strangler was to women? Today, they can't live with out it. Valenti's been so wrong about so many things for so long that I'm surprised anyone takes that senile old coot seriously anymore. Do some research and the next time he shows up before your committee to whine about modern technology, ask him why anyone should believe a word he says.
Ditto for the RIAA. At the height of Napster's popularity, record sales were soaring. They were raking in money hand over fist. After the RIAA killed Napster and dispersed it to other services, sales utterly collapsed. Now, it's probably a stretch to say that no Napster=no sales, but obviously, the reverse, and the RIAA's primary claim, that Napster was hurting record sales, is not true in the least.
In any case, the SSSCA is just another way for corporations to completely screw over consumers. If they can't adapt to the times, then *they* need to change their business models. The government shouldn't be stepping in to prop up outdated ways of conducting business.
Ignore Hollywood's campaign contributions, ignore their spin, and ignore their whining. Support the *people* of this country for a change.
I think it's poor wording to use invisible. It's not going to be some Predator-like special effect. It's going to be camo that changes to match your surroundings, like a cameleon.
Whomever handles the mail will enter it into their CMS, give you the "TECH.GEN", "PIRACY.PRO" and "DRM.CON" interest codes, and add a row for you to get the non-committal form letter regarding DRM(DRMGEN). A couple weeks later when a legislative coorespondent gets around to writing the letter, they'll print them off all at once and mail them out.
At the end of the month, the sys admin will run a report of the top ten interest codes for the Congresscritter. If enough people wrote in about DRM, it'll make the bottom half of the list. (Social Security, Medicare, Abortion, Guns and Education will always be the first five.) The sys admin may or may not include a sample letter for each of the subjects. Depends on whether he threw them out as soon as they were assigned a response in the system.
It's only at that point that the Congresscritter will notice that anyone is against DRM. Whether he's influenced by one line in the report more than the $10,000 HollyPAC just sent his campaign is up for you to decide.
If you haven't already, you'll soon start receiving mailings from your Rep's office. ie: newsletter, meeting notices, etc.
(Hint: If you want to get everything your Rep sends out, send a letter about the future of technology, education and Social Security and portray yourself as a hispanic mother in your 40s.)
Slashdot Mirror
According to the lawsuit, they're claiming there's a bug in the software that also appears in BNETD.
I understand what you mean but I think you misunderstand me.
What I'm saying is that perhaps, if you travel back into the past, you were, for lack of a better word, *meant* to go back and do whatever you end up doing. History are you see could not have happened if you didn't travel back into time and interact with things as you did/will/are.
By participate, I mean, you aren't making "changes"... you're just acting in history as you were always destined/meant/fated/etc to be.
by making the same, tired "Oh, we like Vivendi/RIAA/MPAA/etc today?" wisecracks.
Because, like, no one here has ever commented on the "irony" of thousands of posting not being in agreement.
I've always believed that if you traveled back in the past, you'd merely participate in it, not change it.
Because simply existing in the past and displacing molecules around you would be enough to cause paradoxes, let alone killing your grandfather. So, unless paralell universes are created, you simply can't make any changes to the past. If you try to kill your grandfather, something will prevent you from doing.
Star Trek the Next Generation had an episode featuring a society of clones. They use DNA from Riker and Pulaski to create clones of them. Riker feels violated and kills the clones while they're still developing.
It was an abortion rights metaphor originally but now, it's becoming a frightening take on an actual issue.
Call your Senator's office, say you represent such and such group and you would like to meet with the Senator to discuss concerns relating to a certain issue. Show up well-prepared and in business attire.
It may be harder to schedule an appointment with a Senator than a Representative though. Worse case, you'll end up talking to a staffer but you should almost always be able to talk to someone at the office.
To speed up your system
format c:
Apparently, you're oblivious to the irony of your comments so I'll spell it out for you.
Your "Afghanis must pay the price for their leaders' actions" attitude is EXACTLY the same as Bin Laden's "Americans must pay the price for their leaders' actions" attitude.
Since Bin Laden's attitude is obviously illegitimate, maybe you should reconsider your own and realize that innocent people, Afghani or American, should never "pay the price" for their leaders' actions.
If somebody can take Linux and give it most of the good points that Windows has (ease of installation, better compatibility, GUI amdinistration instead of relying solely on command line...), then MS should feel quite threatened.
Isn't that what some have speculated AOL's master plan is? Start distributing a AOL-ized version of Linux on their CDs...
"So easy to use, you don't even need Windows!"
Bin Laden sees himself as fighting against, amongst other things:
American's support of the Israeli occupation of Palestine
Israel's war of terror against Palestinian civilians
America's military occupation of Saudi Arabia
>> It's a same their people pay for the evil of their leaders, but it IS their leaders who have borught this on them.
Funny. That seems to be Bin Laden's attitude as well.
I'm sure Senator Hollings stripped out all of the SSSCA's objectionable provisions when he renamed it.
http://www.senate.gov
Find your Senate, find his/her fax number and start sending your letters!
Unfortunately, you'd be swearing under penalty of perjury that your claims are valid.
when companies start paying to broadcast images onto your eye.
Everytime you see a car... "Microsoft: Where do you want to go today?"
Everytime you see a bottle... "Isn't it Miller time?"
Everytime you see your girlfriend... "AOL: It can't get any easier than this."
Employees excessively surfing the web is a *symptom* of, not the *reason*, too much free time at work. If they're goofing off, it's not because they have unrestricted internet access; it's because they either don't have enough work to do or they're not doing the work they've been given.
That means it's a problem their managers need to address; not something for the IT department. If someone is surfing six hours a day, then it's the manager's fault that they're not properly supervising them and giving them tasks or disciplining them for not getting their work done.
That said, a company would have to be foolish not to employ some basic filtering measures(porno, gambling, gaming sites, file sharing services, e-mail attachments) to keep network traffic and the more obvious time wasters in check.
However, if an employee is doing all their work and checking Yahoo Mail or ESPN.com, what is the harm? It keeps them happy and the company's work is getting done.
You might feel differently about ads in the mail if you were being forced to pay the postage for all of it when you received it.
Which is what happens with e-mail spam.
Where did I say disk space?
You said:
[I]t's still a lighter browser over all. It takes around 66% of the download space of a recent MSIE, despite also having email and IRC and whatever, and even manages to be smaller than Netscape.
What exactly *were* you referring to then if not diskspace? Just the download file?
Great, that's an even better argument.
More bloat and less speed from a smaller file. Talk about efficiency. Maybe Microsoft could learn from this...
Caffeine kills about 2000 people per year according to the CDC, which is about 2000 more than marijuana kills.
From the article:
You must have JavaScript enabled in order to use the Wired News Multimedia Player.We apologize for any inconvenience. That has set off alarm bells at the American Civil Liberties Union.
God damn. Is there nothing the ACLU won't complain about?
Be aware that while Mozilla is physically slower and more memory hungry, it's still a lighter browser over all. It takes around 66% of the download space of a recent MSIE, despite also having email and IRC and whatever, and even manages to be smaller than Netscape.
It may be slower and consume more resources but at least it uses less disk space?
That's really not an argument the open source community should be making.
that I seem to be missing?
After reading the Salon article about how improved and fast it was now, I decided to give it a whirl on my NT desktop at work.
I uninstalled it after about 15 minutes. It was just slow. Sluggish in loading pages, slow in creating new windows, everything. Not only was it slower than IE 5.5 but what surprised me was that it was slower than *Netscape* 4.7, which is what I primarily use. It's a shame because it had some nice options.
What am I missing? Is it not meant to run on NT? Is it debugging code? Would it run better on XP? I'd love to give it a chance but apparently, I got some other Mozilla browser instead of the one everyone here is raving about.
Dear Judiciary Senators:
Frankly, I'm astounded that a proposal this anti-democratic, anti-consumer, anti-freedom and anti-free speech has made it as far as it has. It's just completely bad top to bottom. The SSSCA seems to be nothing but a massive payoff to the entertainment industry.
Hollywood has already cried fire where's there's not even ember. Anyone else remember Jack Valenti's predictions that the VCR would doom Hollywood? That VCR's would be to Hollywood what the Boston strangler was to women? Today, they can't live with out it. Valenti's been so wrong about so many things for so long that I'm surprised anyone takes that senile old coot seriously anymore. Do some research and the next time he shows up before your committee to whine about modern technology, ask him why anyone should believe a word he says.
Ditto for the RIAA. At the height of Napster's popularity, record sales were soaring. They were raking in money hand over fist. After the RIAA killed Napster and dispersed it to other services, sales utterly collapsed. Now, it's probably a stretch to say that no Napster=no sales, but obviously, the reverse, and the RIAA's primary claim, that Napster was hurting record sales, is not true in the least.
In any case, the SSSCA is just another way for corporations to completely screw over consumers. If they can't adapt to the times, then *they* need to change their business models. The government shouldn't be stepping in to prop up outdated ways of conducting business.
Ignore Hollywood's campaign contributions, ignore their spin, and ignore their whining. Support the *people* of this country for a change.
Sincerely,
I think it's poor wording to use invisible. It's not going to be some Predator-like special effect. It's going to be camo that changes to match your surroundings, like a cameleon.
Whomever handles the mail will enter it into their CMS, give you the "TECH.GEN", "PIRACY.PRO" and "DRM.CON" interest codes, and add a row for you to get the non-committal form letter regarding DRM(DRMGEN). A couple weeks later when a legislative coorespondent gets around to writing the letter, they'll print them off all at once and mail them out.
At the end of the month, the sys admin will run a report of the top ten interest codes for the Congresscritter. If enough people wrote in about DRM, it'll make the bottom half of the list. (Social Security, Medicare, Abortion, Guns and Education will always be the first five.) The sys admin may or may not include a sample letter for each of the subjects. Depends on whether he threw them out as soon as they were assigned a response in the system.
It's only at that point that the Congresscritter will notice that anyone is against DRM. Whether he's influenced by one line in the report more than the $10,000 HollyPAC just sent his campaign is up for you to decide.
If you haven't already, you'll soon start receiving mailings from your Rep's office. ie: newsletter, meeting notices, etc.
(Hint: If you want to get everything your Rep sends out, send a letter about the future of technology, education and Social Security and portray yourself as a hispanic mother in your 40s.)