"People got upset at the mention of MS dropping support for Win98 and that is 6 years old now."
That had more to do with the who than the 'what they did'. Microsoft was bashed here both for discontinuing it, and then changing their mind and renewing it.
"How many do you need???... you freely admit that they have a monopoly."
Derrrrr. Go back and read the context of my post. The general point is that you guys go crying monopoly without generally realizing what the nature of it really is. The fact alone that MS only has 3 monopolies means that they don't have the power that it assumed they do. It means that the market said "We like this product over the rest" and they became a de-facto monopoly. (Note: That comment does not mean they didnt' do some nasty stuff to contribute to it. So spare me the tired "Oh but they arm twisted resellers etc." arguments. They're not terribly relevant in this particular case.) That means that a.) Their hold on the market is vulernable and b.) You cannot blame Microsoft on your failings.
If the OSS Community would understand these points, they'd suddenly discover that their uphill battle isn't as steep as they've made it out to be. That's the point of my post, not whether or not MS should be broken up or not. Save that for somebody who cares.
"The problem is the monopoly, the symptom is the software."
That problem is over-inflated here on Slashdot. Microsoft has proven time and time again that they cannot simply make a monopoly out of everything it touches. (XBOX, PocketPC, UltimateTV, etc...) Worse, their popular products have deficiencies that the OSS Community has addressed. Their biggest enemy isn't Microsoft, it's lack of awareness. Follow IBM's lead: Get some commercials on TV. Start a "Advertise Linux" fund. Get the PHBs out there who sign expense checks to understand that it's not just some hobbyist project that couldn't possibly be taken seriously like Microsoft's business products.
Don't be so quick to dismiss what I'm saying. Microsoft is creating opportunities left and right for you guys (blaster, MyDoom, etc), and you're doing a terrible job of taking advantage of them.
" have yet to see a scientist prove that the Red Sea was parted..."
You should watch Discovery Channel. They talked about the parting seas and what could have caused it. It was a while ago, so the details I remember are a little vauge. Something along the lines of a volcano erupting. This caused a geological disturbance that caused the waters to recede. After things settled down, the waters came rushing back. It's possible that during these events, a group of people could have crossed at the moment of the parting, and when the people chasing them started to cross, the water came back with a vengence.
It is not the point of my post to say it was proven, but rather there are investigations of events that might have inspired the bible.
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the truth were somewhere in the middle.
"The RFID readers can do it passively, and can identify the customer based on what they're wearing/carrying - UPC codes can't be used for that passively."
Okay. So what you're saying is somebody could walk through a store and have everything on them be read, right? How do they link what they're carrying to that particular person?
"A "clearing house" for RFID-based tracking data could be set up, where partner retailers submit their data about when a customer purchases an item, what identification they provided (be it "discount card" or identifying the customer based on them carrying past purchases), for data warehousing and consumer tracking."
Why does RFID open this door? Why can't UPC codes be used the same way?
"The paranoid in me would also suggest that they could pay off Waste Management et al to install RFID readers so the retailers could figure out how long you keep your items before tossing them (which may actually be interesting information, but not something I am seeking to share with said retailers..) "
Fair point. For that to happen, the serial number of each item would have to be embedded in the code as well in order to link it to you. Yes, that would be a new capability that RFID would be able to incorporate. I think you'd run out of numbers pretty quick though. (Well.. bad assumption, one can only expect the technology to get better.)
I can't say I'm quaking in fear of them getting that info, though. I have a difficult time imagining that they'd be able to find all the places that the trash ends up at.
"A great musician once said... "Silence is also music."
That reminds me of something that happened over at an art forum a couple of years ago. A dude there had a really good reputation for generating interesting art. Unfortunately, over time, people started getting maliciously nitpicky about some of the details of his work. He invited this form of nastiness as certain subject matter caused him to respond rather negatively. The last pic I remember him releasing was all black. The title: "The Nitpick Proof Image". Almost immediately after it, somebody responded "Put credits on it!"
Re:I don't have a sound card!
on
Friday Apple Fun
·
· Score: 5, Funny
"But then how would you know they were silent? "
Because there's an animated icon of a tree falling in the woods.
Why? What's a realistic scenario where this could be abused?
Let me define realistic:
1.) Not something that'd be against the law. 2.) Not something that would be way too expensive to implement. 3.) Not something that a company wouldn't want exposed. (I.e. They'd be exposed if they started calling people and saying "I'll tell the world you bought a porn DVD if you don't come to our sale on Saturday.")
I'm not trying to bust your chops here, I just haven't heard anything but really extreme examples that are borderline science fiction.
I take it you've never been to Utah? And no, that's not a joke, the rock formations out there are breath-taking. Parts of Galaxy Quest were filmed there for that reason.
These pics are cool. It's an interesting mix of alien and familiar. Wish I had something more insightful to say, but I'm a little too startled for that.
"Are we at a state where social skills are more important than intellectual skills? Often, the more intelligent ones are the ones with really poor social skills."
This may be true at the age of 20, but how about 40? I had a terrible time in high school, but now I'm in my mid-20's, and I'm not having anywhere near the problems with women that I used to. I think when women reach a certain phase in their lives, it's less about looks and more about "Can I stand this guy?"
"And if this is the case, the *intelligent* ones are actually being beaten by the less capable ones. The more intellectual ones are the ones who are single."
Not to rehash what I said before, but I really think this situation only really occurs in the younger age brackets. I have a tough time imagining that when most of the people that frequent here reach 40, they're not married or at least have a very significant relationship.
"Does this not fly in the face of Darwinism? Just wondering, as someone who had a bad breakup the day before Valentine's day:)"
Not if smart people use condoms.;) Seriously, though, one would probably find that 'geeks' are fewer in number than jocks. If women don't find geekier types as attractive, then yeah there'll be fewer babies born to these folks. Does this fly in the face of what I just said? No, I don't think so. Farther down the line, people get more responsible. A 30 year old is less likely to become pregnant 'accidentally' than a 20 year old. But at the young age, you get caught up in hormones, find an attractive mate and...
On a side note, diversity is more important than brains. Would it be so bad if genetics made us a little less smart and a little more physical? Having brains is probably nice, but it sure makes opening pickle jobs needlessly difficult.
Troll? Oh come on! The dude's all pissed off, but doesn't explain why. Why am I in trouble for challenging him to strengthen his point? Why was he modded up as +5 insightful? Product placement == evil? Whatever.
I really hope a more sensible mod will come by and give me a re-evaluation.
Slashdot Mirror
No, they were bashed, and they were bashed no matter what move they made.
Sorry, I wasn't clear enough in my original post. It should have been more like "in light of all the overuse of this joke, why was it...".
Thankfully the mods came and fixed it. *WhEw*
Why'd this get +5? Is there like a reference to Hitchhiker's Guide or Doctor Who that I'm missing?
50 replies? Damn, I owe somebody $1. Musta been the LotR movies.
My gf gave me a plastic cow that dispenses brown jelly beans. Of all the things I spend my time finding meaning in...
"I found a DVD player by accident, yay! I haven't checked if it works yet though, it's quite dirty, smells strange and doesn't include any cables :/"
Better make sure that's not a DivX player...
"Sorry; it would seem that some humour is too subtle for /."
Is the 'subtle joke' that you didn't RTFL? In that case, you're right, it was quite humorous.
"A new screenshot showing OS4's default icon set by Martin 'Mason' Merz has been revealed."
A small handful of people rejoice!!
"People got upset at the mention of MS dropping support for Win98 and that is 6 years old now."
That had more to do with the who than the 'what they did'. Microsoft was bashed here both for discontinuing it, and then changing their mind and renewing it.
"How many do you need???... you freely admit that they have a monopoly."
Derrrrr. Go back and read the context of my post. The general point is that you guys go crying monopoly without generally realizing what the nature of it really is. The fact alone that MS only has 3 monopolies means that they don't have the power that it assumed they do. It means that the market said "We like this product over the rest" and they became a de-facto monopoly. (Note: That comment does not mean they didnt' do some nasty stuff to contribute to it. So spare me the tired "Oh but they arm twisted resellers etc." arguments. They're not terribly relevant in this particular case.) That means that a.) Their hold on the market is vulernable and b.) You cannot blame Microsoft on your failings.
If the OSS Community would understand these points, they'd suddenly discover that their uphill battle isn't as steep as they've made it out to be. That's the point of my post, not whether or not MS should be broken up or not. Save that for somebody who cares.
"What version are these things? Seems it generally takes MS about 3 major revisions before they start to take over."
Name one product besides Windows, Office, and Internet Explorer where Microsoft has a monopoly. I don't mean market lead, I mean monopoly.
"The problem is the monopoly, the symptom is the software."
That problem is over-inflated here on Slashdot. Microsoft has proven time and time again that they cannot simply make a monopoly out of everything it touches. (XBOX, PocketPC, UltimateTV, etc...) Worse, their popular products have deficiencies that the OSS Community has addressed. Their biggest enemy isn't Microsoft, it's lack of awareness. Follow IBM's lead: Get some commercials on TV. Start a "Advertise Linux" fund. Get the PHBs out there who sign expense checks to understand that it's not just some hobbyist project that couldn't possibly be taken seriously like Microsoft's business products.
Don't be so quick to dismiss what I'm saying. Microsoft is creating opportunities left and right for you guys (blaster, MyDoom, etc), and you're doing a terrible job of taking advantage of them.
" have yet to see a scientist prove that the Red Sea was parted..."
You should watch Discovery Channel. They talked about the parting seas and what could have caused it. It was a while ago, so the details I remember are a little vauge. Something along the lines of a volcano erupting. This caused a geological disturbance that caused the waters to recede. After things settled down, the waters came rushing back. It's possible that during these events, a group of people could have crossed at the moment of the parting, and when the people chasing them started to cross, the water came back with a vengence.
It is not the point of my post to say it was proven, but rather there are investigations of events that might have inspired the bible.
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the truth were somewhere in the middle.
"Somehow, I have trouble applying the concept of 'left' to an elliptical orbit."
Try clicking the link.
"Reducing him and many others to the equal of garbage is disrespectful to say the least."
Only if he said "don't send me into space."
"The RFID readers can do it passively, and can identify the customer based on what they're wearing/carrying - UPC codes can't be used for that passively."
Okay. So what you're saying is somebody could walk through a store and have everything on them be read, right? How do they link what they're carrying to that particular person?
"A "clearing house" for RFID-based tracking data could be set up, where partner retailers submit their data about when a customer purchases an item, what identification they provided (be it "discount card" or identifying the customer based on them carrying past purchases), for data warehousing and consumer tracking."
Why does RFID open this door? Why can't UPC codes be used the same way?
"The paranoid in me would also suggest that they could pay off Waste Management et al to install RFID readers so the retailers could figure out how long you keep your items before tossing them (which may actually be interesting information, but not something I am seeking to share with said retailers..) "
Fair point. For that to happen, the serial number of each item would have to be embedded in the code as well in order to link it to you. Yes, that would be a new capability that RFID would be able to incorporate. I think you'd run out of numbers pretty quick though. (Well.. bad assumption, one can only expect the technology to get better.)
I can't say I'm quaking in fear of them getting that info, though. I have a difficult time imagining that they'd be able to find all the places that the trash ends up at.
"If the goal is to steal one sheet of information, take a picture, memorize it, copy it, etc... all valid ways to subvert this system."
Without the RFID, you cannot prove that you didn't just make up the info.
"A great musician once said... "Silence is also music."
That reminds me of something that happened over at an art forum a couple of years ago. A dude there had a really good reputation for generating interesting art. Unfortunately, over time, people started getting maliciously nitpicky about some of the details of his work. He invited this form of nastiness as certain subject matter caused him to respond rather negatively. The last pic I remember him releasing was all black. The title: "The Nitpick Proof Image". Almost immediately after it, somebody responded "Put credits on it!"
"But then how would you know they were silent? "
Because there's an animated icon of a tree falling in the woods.
"Scary."
Why? What's a realistic scenario where this could be abused?
Let me define realistic:
1.) Not something that'd be against the law.
2.) Not something that would be way too expensive to implement.
3.) Not something that a company wouldn't want exposed. (I.e. They'd be exposed if they started calling people and saying "I'll tell the world you bought a porn DVD if you don't come to our sale on Saturday.")
I'm not trying to bust your chops here, I just haven't heard anything but really extreme examples that are borderline science fiction.
I take it you've never been to Utah? And no, that's not a joke, the rock formations out there are breath-taking. Parts of Galaxy Quest were filmed there for that reason.
These pics are cool. It's an interesting mix of alien and familiar. Wish I had something more insightful to say, but I'm a little too startled for that.
"Are we at a state where social skills are more important than intellectual skills? Often, the more intelligent ones are the ones with really poor social skills."
:)"
;) Seriously, though, one would probably find that 'geeks' are fewer in number than jocks. If women don't find geekier types as attractive, then yeah there'll be fewer babies born to these folks. Does this fly in the face of what I just said? No, I don't think so. Farther down the line, people get more responsible. A 30 year old is less likely to become pregnant 'accidentally' than a 20 year old. But at the young age, you get caught up in hormones, find an attractive mate and...
This may be true at the age of 20, but how about 40? I had a terrible time in high school, but now I'm in my mid-20's, and I'm not having anywhere near the problems with women that I used to. I think when women reach a certain phase in their lives, it's less about looks and more about "Can I stand this guy?"
"And if this is the case, the *intelligent* ones are actually being beaten by the less capable ones. The more intellectual ones are the ones who are single."
Not to rehash what I said before, but I really think this situation only really occurs in the younger age brackets. I have a tough time imagining that when most of the people that frequent here reach 40, they're not married or at least have a very significant relationship.
"Does this not fly in the face of Darwinism? Just wondering, as someone who had a bad breakup the day before Valentine's day
Not if smart people use condoms.
On a side note, diversity is more important than brains. Would it be so bad if genetics made us a little less smart and a little more physical? Having brains is probably nice, but it sure makes opening pickle jobs needlessly difficult.
Troll? Oh come on! The dude's all pissed off, but doesn't explain why. Why am I in trouble for challenging him to strengthen his point? Why was he modded up as +5 insightful? Product placement == evil? Whatever.
I really hope a more sensible mod will come by and give me a re-evaluation.