It is because it can be time consuming, and people don't feel like paying $15/month when they are going to get into $15 worth of play. I got the game for my birthday, two days after it was released, and including the first free month, I have only played 5 months. I paid for one month immediately following my free month, and then I bought one month the for the following December, and the same the following December, and the one after that. Now that I graduated college, I actually bought three months, of which I am in my first month still.
It just happens. I have an "addictive" personality, according to my wife (I call it goal-oriented). So, I get into times when I am not interested in playing because I have other goals I am working on, and I put everything into them. Last month, I decided to read the last four Michael Crichton books, and that was fun. This month, I was going to try and get to lvl 70, but instead I am focusing some work on a new side job that may become my new full-time job by May.
Some WoW players have lives... although I am convinced that we are a severely rare exception.
I believe the removal of Public Folders in Exchange 2007 is a result of integration with Sharepoint. The functionality is supposed to still exist, just outside of Exchange, itself. I haven't tried it out yet, as I do not have a 64-bit server to install on, but I do like a lot of the features in Sharepoint, and I can see how they would be better than Public Folders (and considering that Outlook pulls data in from Sharepoint, it should be fairly seamless from the user perspective).
Look at what happened to France's 10% unemployment after it started its protection policies.... it's still 10%. Has not improved, at all... and they had riots!
I fully agree... we are an ASP and we are the Internet connection for our entire building (12 floors) and several remote clients that have leased lines to us. That being said, we have a T1 to one provider, and a 100MB fiber link from our datacenter to our colocation facility which has a 4MB connection to the net with a different provider.
With that redundancy, we still use outside DNS and we have a spam/virus filtering service that all email passes through, which has a spool in case our email servers are inaccessible.
We don't have hot-failover enabled, but we have a plan in place that would allow us to change everything over within half an hour. You would have been in the same boat if you have at least had outsourced your DNS... and why not do it... there are inexpensive providers out there that can offer instant replication between their servers and let you have a TTL of as little as 5 seconds (we use 5 minutes, unless we are planning a change, then we switch it to 5 seconds about 10 minutes before the change).
Here in Indiana, we are on a big ethanol kick. We are building several ethanol refineries and they have recently inked a deal with local dairies to take their manure and use the methane to power the ethanol refineries. Pretty sweet.
Here is the issue with that reasoning, and why most people turn away from those statements and just ignore you:
1) You act as if there is a switch that the POTUS just have to flip and all of our energy problems would go away. Some would like to think that switch is the Kyoto Treaty, others would think it is hydrogen fuel cells... The point is, there is no switch. Nothing we do today, about alternative energy, is going to have a drastic effect tomorrow; it is going to take years, and nearly 99% of the population will welcome that day, but they are generally just being realistic about the situation.
2) We are talking about electricity powered by manure, but you segway into a political rant about war. Yes, we are war; war sucks, people die, however, you will likely get more attention to your opinions if don't act like everyone is stupid evil hate mongerers... because if you actually used rational thinking, you would realize that they aren't. This electricity has absolutely nothing to do with oil today. Electricity will only have something to do with oil when we are either running electric only vehicles or using sources of energy created from electical output. We aren't there and we won't be there for years. The rational connection would be "This feces power is great! Now, if we could find some more ways to produce excess electricity, we would have more incentive to get our vehicles to use it instead of oil!"
3) If you focused your attention toward creating more civility, you would have a better impact on society as whole. One can only assume (which can be a dangerous thing) that you would like to think your are a societal thinker; Act like it.
Here is the real deal. We are not going to be off of oil today. It is sad, because we have so many reasons to not use oil, but it is reality. Further, we will not be off of oil tomorrow, next year, next decade, or likely the decade after that; this is all sad for the same reasons, but further compounded by the effects of time.
So, what can be done? Get off of your butt and do something productive about it. Stop using so much energy. As much as you might like to rant, it is highly likely that you use a considerable amount of energy, but you are speaking as if you are on a pedestal of energy greatness. If you are comparable to the absolute vast majority of the civilized world, then you are using too much energy. Further, you are wasting energy sitting around whining about everybody else while you are not doing anything.
We need to keep working on alternative energy; that is quite simple to understand, and we are actually doing that. Private industrial is doing that, research groups are doing that, it is in the works... quite acting as if it isn't. We also need to diversify our current supply of oil. This is for economic and geopolitical reasons. That certainly does mean ANWAR. There is great debate about how much oil is available, and that a good thing. However, there is a point when debate gets in the way of productivity, and I think we have reached it. I am not going to debate it here, as it has been done ad nauseum. There is a potential for reduced demand on oil from places that we should not wish to send money; we ought to use it while we can. Further, we should all work to reduce our usage of energy. You seem to be among those who think we are doing nothing. I am going to disagree. We have a new tax credit that was put in place by our current Congress, with the advise of the current Administration (who is run by a guy who actually uses alternative energy in his real life... he doesn't play a guy, who does, on TV). This tax credit gives incentive to be energy efficient. Light bulbs, appliances, building materials, solar panels, hybrid vehicles... they are all part of it. Every light bulb in my house has been switched to CFL bulbs; we are in the process of buying a new front-load wash machine paired with a NG dryer with a moisture sensor as well as an on demand, tankless water heater; we are purchasing solar s
I cannot possibly conceive how nationalized Internet would be a good thing. If you take a look at ANYTHING the government does, it is always very poor. About the only thing they are good for is defense... and we know what kind of mess that is.
Further, you may want to think about the implications of just forcing the telcos out... while you are just blindly calling it big evil corporations, they are employers, community stewards, and the retirement vehicles of many individuals, wealthy and not so wealthy. While you may have something against them, you have the ability to not subscribe to their service... and I am sure there will be neutrality availble... it will spawn a new market.
Honestly, the telcos are not doing the right thing... but it is a mistake, and they will likely see that. What may be a better option is for them to offer some a la carte services. They could have true firewall service for a monthly price where you are behing an industrial class firewall and NAT, they could offer special transparent proxy child protection services to parents, the could offer certain subscriber benefits to websites in packages... kinda like cable TV packages. Get "subscriber"-level access to Slashdot, New York Times, etc for $5/mo. Then, the telcos could go in with a large base and pay these websites a small amount per subscriber.
I like the idea of finding your own method around a problem. However, the second paragraph that is quoted in the post is about the most asinine thing I have read all week... and that is saying something.
Don't whine about it. Just do it. I work 50-60 hours per week, and I do 12-15 credit hours at school to get my degree. Any free time I have goes to my family (wife and three kids). Don't tell me about no free time. I just switched jobs a couple of months ago (one that was 65-70 hours per week).
How did I do it? I decided that I was going to do it. I took time off of work, if necessary. Of course, I only interviewed for one job that I really liked, and got it.
And therein lies the problem. You are calling people who believe in Creation "idiots" and treating them like they are stupid. You seem to forget, there is no actual proof of macroevolution. It is simply a belief... that does have some sense behind it, but nonetheless, a belief. Why don't you just get over it, and stop criticizing people. Different strokes for different folks. I honestly don't think it is going to hurt the world, in any way whatsoever, if people believe in Creation and it turns out to be false. Really, it is a debate that happened very far in the past, and it does not change the fact that we are here.
Again, those criteria are only used in the hiring process, and are virtually thrown out the door once tenure is met. I had an adjunct professor that had a day job as a professor at another university. He was outspoken, and extremely biased, in his adjunct position. I actually sat in on one of his day classes and he was extremely mild. Why? He had not yet earned tenure. He didn't care much about his adjunct role (to the extent that he didn't care if he lost it); he used it to express his point of view, which was very often off topic. He tried to used the "I wield great power because I can give you an F" crap. We had what I would call a civilized conversation in the course, and we were certainly coming at the situation from different viewpoints. I actually like the discussion. Neither of us raised our voices. But, the next day, he sent an email to the dean of the school, and CC'd me, and he said I was disruptive and out of line. I just ignored it. Apparently, that made him very angry and he wrote me a letter and mailed it to me (and I actually mean via the postal service). Finally, I went and talked to the dean and she suggested we work it out like adults, which was what I was trying to do. By the next week, he came up to me and was very apologetic. We have had many discussions since then, very rarely discussing politics, and we get along quite well, now.
Indiana is the second most conservative state in the Union...
However, there are certain area that are controlled by liberal politicians... Indianapolis and Gary. It was in Indianapolis where it was first attempted. Also, our nice socialist senator, Bayh, is pushing it on a larger scale. That is what happens when you have a socialist, nanny-state.
Seems simple to me. Pay the EU $2.4M/day. Increase the cost of all Microsoft products within the EU so that you may an extra $2.4M/day. Loosen the belt at night, and relax. Rinse and repeat.
Microsoft is not the government... you have a choice to purchase their products, or not. If you live within the jurisdiction of a government, you are required to live within those constraints... it is a big difference, and you have a bad comparison.
it should be % based on their global income
That's the ticket! Fine all businesses into oblivion and see how everyone does when their entire way of life is changed.... I sure everyone will pick you as their best friend.
That is the whole point. And no, American companies do not have to obey foreign laws if they do business there... they choose to. If they do not choose to, there are a couple of options: 1) pay the price, 2) use strongarm tactics, or 3) get out. I think that when it comes to stupid crap like this... numbers 2 and 3 or the better options. For all I care, we could just become a bunch of isolationists... and it would be fine by me. If I recall correctly, that is what gave America the advantage over Europe in the first place... having better resources. It would sure impact the oil industry (and we have plenty of oil in the U.S.... we are just waiting till it dries up everywhere else...).
I would be among the first to point fingers at Microsoft when the mess up (and I do it every day), but this is ridiculous. I would tell the EU fine... fine us $2.4M a day... and I would not pay it. And if they didn't like it, then close up all European operations, and do not sell any products in Europe anymore.
Now, this would not happen, but, it would send a message. I am not for monopolies or anything, but I am not for government intervention in such things, either. I love Linux, and I could probably get by without M$, if I chose... so could the EU... but, the job loss would not help their economy, and it doesn't need any more problems.
It is strongarm tactics, and Microsoft should use them right back.
Someone mentioned the shareholders not liking the loss of European business... I am pretty sure the shareholders would like paying a $2.4M/day fine or opening up IP to competitors either. At least if they offer to close down EU ops... they lose the overhead and the headaches, too. Seems like the lesser of two evils, from the shareholder perspective. And considering that I own mutual funds that have Microsoft, I guess that is from the horse's mouth.
The females just have more common sense and realize that CompSci is a dying degree that is better served by more specialized degrees in eiterh CompEng or InfoSys.
This happens all the time, in all industries. For technology, look at ISPs and web hosts. Reselling is the cause here. For other industries, look at automotive. Are you doing to try and tell me a GMC Envoy is different than a Chevy Trailblazer? Or that a Chevy Cavalier is different than a Pontiac Sunfire? GM owns Chevy, GMC, Pontiac, Buick, Cadillac, Oldsmobile, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab. Ford does it with Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Jaguar, Mazda, Volvo, Land Rover, and Aston Martin. Daimler Chrysler does it with Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep (Not to mention the German cars). Then you have the same thing with Japanese vehicles... Toyota owns Lexus. Did you know that the snazzy Lexus RX300 SUV is actually a Toyota Camry with a different body? Mitsubishi and Infiniti...
The all do it. You are being suckered every day, if that is what you wanna think of it as. These companies are just marketing to different niches. If you ran a business, wouldn't you try to get your products to the right channels? I don't think that there is anything ethical here... Although, the idea of the VCR and the walkie-talkies is in the unethical arena.
Just know what you are buying. Plain and simple. If you cannot put enough time and effort into figuring out what it actually is that you are buying, then it is either not worth buying, or you should expect the potential for being ripped off.
People need to realize, there is no such thing as international "law." There certainly are things that are called international law, but it is not actually law. They are parts of treaties and agreements built between nations, and they are broken by all nations when it is in their best interest. The U.S. does it; Canada does it; Mexico does it; Japan does it; China does it; They ALL do it. There are no legal implications, unless the U.S. decides that they will allow some other nation to bring legal charges. I really don't see that happening.
Of course, that does not mean there are no other implications... like retaliation.
Slashdot Mirror
It is because it can be time consuming, and people don't feel like paying $15/month when they are going to get into $15 worth of play. I got the game for my birthday, two days after it was released, and including the first free month, I have only played 5 months. I paid for one month immediately following my free month, and then I bought one month the for the following December, and the same the following December, and the one after that. Now that I graduated college, I actually bought three months, of which I am in my first month still.
It just happens. I have an "addictive" personality, according to my wife (I call it goal-oriented). So, I get into times when I am not interested in playing because I have other goals I am working on, and I put everything into them. Last month, I decided to read the last four Michael Crichton books, and that was fun. This month, I was going to try and get to lvl 70, but instead I am focusing some work on a new side job that may become my new full-time job by May.
Some WoW players have lives... although I am convinced that we are a severely rare exception.
I believe the removal of Public Folders in Exchange 2007 is a result of integration with Sharepoint. The functionality is supposed to still exist, just outside of Exchange, itself. I haven't tried it out yet, as I do not have a 64-bit server to install on, but I do like a lot of the features in Sharepoint, and I can see how they would be better than Public Folders (and considering that Outlook pulls data in from Sharepoint, it should be fairly seamless from the user perspective).
Exactly.
Look at what happened to France's 10% unemployment after it started its protection policies.... it's still 10%. Has not improved, at all... and they had riots!
I fully agree... we are an ASP and we are the Internet connection for our entire building (12 floors) and several remote clients that have leased lines to us. That being said, we have a T1 to one provider, and a 100MB fiber link from our datacenter to our colocation facility which has a 4MB connection to the net with a different provider.
With that redundancy, we still use outside DNS and we have a spam/virus filtering service that all email passes through, which has a spool in case our email servers are inaccessible.
We don't have hot-failover enabled, but we have a plan in place that would allow us to change everything over within half an hour. You would have been in the same boat if you have at least had outsourced your DNS... and why not do it... there are inexpensive providers out there that can offer instant replication between their servers and let you have a TTL of as little as 5 seconds (we use 5 minutes, unless we are planning a change, then we switch it to 5 seconds about 10 minutes before the change).
Here in Indiana, we are on a big ethanol kick. We are building several ethanol refineries and they have recently inked a deal with local dairies to take their manure and use the methane to power the ethanol refineries. Pretty sweet.
Here is the issue with that reasoning, and why most people turn away from those statements and just ignore you:
1) You act as if there is a switch that the POTUS just have to flip and all of our energy problems would go away. Some would like to think that switch is the Kyoto Treaty, others would think it is hydrogen fuel cells... The point is, there is no switch. Nothing we do today, about alternative energy, is going to have a drastic effect tomorrow; it is going to take years, and nearly 99% of the population will welcome that day, but they are generally just being realistic about the situation.
2) We are talking about electricity powered by manure, but you segway into a political rant about war. Yes, we are war; war sucks, people die, however, you will likely get more attention to your opinions if don't act like everyone is stupid evil hate mongerers... because if you actually used rational thinking, you would realize that they aren't. This electricity has absolutely nothing to do with oil today. Electricity will only have something to do with oil when we are either running electric only vehicles or using sources of energy created from electical output. We aren't there and we won't be there for years. The rational connection would be "This feces power is great! Now, if we could find some more ways to produce excess electricity, we would have more incentive to get our vehicles to use it instead of oil!"
3) If you focused your attention toward creating more civility, you would have a better impact on society as whole. One can only assume (which can be a dangerous thing) that you would like to think your are a societal thinker; Act like it.
Here is the real deal. We are not going to be off of oil today. It is sad, because we have so many reasons to not use oil, but it is reality. Further, we will not be off of oil tomorrow, next year, next decade, or likely the decade after that; this is all sad for the same reasons, but further compounded by the effects of time.
So, what can be done? Get off of your butt and do something productive about it. Stop using so much energy. As much as you might like to rant, it is highly likely that you use a considerable amount of energy, but you are speaking as if you are on a pedestal of energy greatness. If you are comparable to the absolute vast majority of the civilized world, then you are using too much energy. Further, you are wasting energy sitting around whining about everybody else while you are not doing anything.
We need to keep working on alternative energy; that is quite simple to understand, and we are actually doing that. Private industrial is doing that, research groups are doing that, it is in the works... quite acting as if it isn't. We also need to diversify our current supply of oil. This is for economic and geopolitical reasons. That certainly does mean ANWAR. There is great debate about how much oil is available, and that a good thing. However, there is a point when debate gets in the way of productivity, and I think we have reached it. I am not going to debate it here, as it has been done ad nauseum. There is a potential for reduced demand on oil from places that we should not wish to send money; we ought to use it while we can. Further, we should all work to reduce our usage of energy. You seem to be among those who think we are doing nothing. I am going to disagree. We have a new tax credit that was put in place by our current Congress, with the advise of the current Administration (who is run by a guy who actually uses alternative energy in his real life... he doesn't play a guy, who does, on TV). This tax credit gives incentive to be energy efficient. Light bulbs, appliances, building materials, solar panels, hybrid vehicles... they are all part of it. Every light bulb in my house has been switched to CFL bulbs; we are in the process of buying a new front-load wash machine paired with a NG dryer with a moisture sensor as well as an on demand, tankless water heater; we are purchasing solar s
I cannot possibly conceive how nationalized Internet would be a good thing. If you take a look at ANYTHING the government does, it is always very poor. About the only thing they are good for is defense... and we know what kind of mess that is.
Further, you may want to think about the implications of just forcing the telcos out... while you are just blindly calling it big evil corporations, they are employers, community stewards, and the retirement vehicles of many individuals, wealthy and not so wealthy. While you may have something against them, you have the ability to not subscribe to their service... and I am sure there will be neutrality availble... it will spawn a new market.
Honestly, the telcos are not doing the right thing... but it is a mistake, and they will likely see that. What may be a better option is for them to offer some a la carte services. They could have true firewall service for a monthly price where you are behing an industrial class firewall and NAT, they could offer special transparent proxy child protection services to parents, the could offer certain subscriber benefits to websites in packages... kinda like cable TV packages. Get "subscriber"-level access to Slashdot, New York Times, etc for $5/mo. Then, the telcos could go in with a large base and pay these websites a small amount per subscriber.
I like the idea of finding your own method around a problem. However, the second paragraph that is quoted in the post is about the most asinine thing I have read all week... and that is saying something.
It is counter to their culture to use Intel.
Don't whine about it. Just do it. I work 50-60 hours per week, and I do 12-15 credit hours at school to get my degree. Any free time I have goes to my family (wife and three kids). Don't tell me about no free time. I just switched jobs a couple of months ago (one that was 65-70 hours per week).
How did I do it? I decided that I was going to do it. I took time off of work, if necessary. Of course, I only interviewed for one job that I really liked, and got it.
And therein lies the problem. You are calling people who believe in Creation "idiots" and treating them like they are stupid. You seem to forget, there is no actual proof of macroevolution. It is simply a belief... that does have some sense behind it, but nonetheless, a belief. Why don't you just get over it, and stop criticizing people. Different strokes for different folks. I honestly don't think it is going to hurt the world, in any way whatsoever, if people believe in Creation and it turns out to be false. Really, it is a debate that happened very far in the past, and it does not change the fact that we are here.
Again, those criteria are only used in the hiring process, and are virtually thrown out the door once tenure is met. I had an adjunct professor that had a day job as a professor at another university. He was outspoken, and extremely biased, in his adjunct position. I actually sat in on one of his day classes and he was extremely mild. Why? He had not yet earned tenure. He didn't care much about his adjunct role (to the extent that he didn't care if he lost it); he used it to express his point of view, which was very often off topic. He tried to used the "I wield great power because I can give you an F" crap. We had what I would call a civilized conversation in the course, and we were certainly coming at the situation from different viewpoints. I actually like the discussion. Neither of us raised our voices. But, the next day, he sent an email to the dean of the school, and CC'd me, and he said I was disruptive and out of line. I just ignored it. Apparently, that made him very angry and he wrote me a letter and mailed it to me (and I actually mean via the postal service). Finally, I went and talked to the dean and she suggested we work it out like adults, which was what I was trying to do. By the next week, he came up to me and was very apologetic. We have had many discussions since then, very rarely discussing politics, and we get along quite well, now.
One time I did this, and I was sick for a week! Good thing it wasn't human-to-human contagious yet.
Indiana is the second most conservative state in the Union...
However, there are certain area that are controlled by liberal politicians... Indianapolis and Gary. It was in Indianapolis where it was first attempted. Also, our nice socialist senator, Bayh, is pushing it on a larger scale. That is what happens when you have a socialist, nanny-state.
Seems simple to me. Pay the EU $2.4M/day. Increase the cost of all Microsoft products within the EU so that you may an extra $2.4M/day. Loosen the belt at night, and relax. Rinse and repeat.
Microsoft is not the government... you have a choice to purchase their products, or not. If you live within the jurisdiction of a government, you are required to live within those constraints... it is a big difference, and you have a bad comparison.
Uh, this is the typical socialist response to calling governemtn regulation captialism. It is a load of B.S.
Why would you blaim them?
it should be % based on their global income That's the ticket! Fine all businesses into oblivion and see how everyone does when their entire way of life is changed.... I sure everyone will pick you as their best friend.
That is the whole point. And no, American companies do not have to obey foreign laws if they do business there... they choose to. If they do not choose to, there are a couple of options: 1) pay the price, 2) use strongarm tactics, or 3) get out. I think that when it comes to stupid crap like this... numbers 2 and 3 or the better options. For all I care, we could just become a bunch of isolationists... and it would be fine by me. If I recall correctly, that is what gave America the advantage over Europe in the first place... having better resources. It would sure impact the oil industry (and we have plenty of oil in the U.S.... we are just waiting till it dries up everywhere else...).
I love it... that is the answer... Win FU!
I would have to agree.
I would be among the first to point fingers at Microsoft when the mess up (and I do it every day), but this is ridiculous. I would tell the EU fine... fine us $2.4M a day... and I would not pay it. And if they didn't like it, then close up all European operations, and do not sell any products in Europe anymore.
Now, this would not happen, but, it would send a message. I am not for monopolies or anything, but I am not for government intervention in such things, either. I love Linux, and I could probably get by without M$, if I chose... so could the EU... but, the job loss would not help their economy, and it doesn't need any more problems.
It is strongarm tactics, and Microsoft should use them right back.
Someone mentioned the shareholders not liking the loss of European business... I am pretty sure the shareholders would like paying a $2.4M/day fine or opening up IP to competitors either. At least if they offer to close down EU ops... they lose the overhead and the headaches, too. Seems like the lesser of two evils, from the shareholder perspective. And considering that I own mutual funds that have Microsoft, I guess that is from the horse's mouth.
The females just have more common sense and realize that CompSci is a dying degree that is better served by more specialized degrees in eiterh CompEng or InfoSys.
This happens all the time, in all industries. For technology, look at ISPs and web hosts. Reselling is the cause here. For other industries, look at automotive. Are you doing to try and tell me a GMC Envoy is different than a Chevy Trailblazer? Or that a Chevy Cavalier is different than a Pontiac Sunfire? GM owns Chevy, GMC, Pontiac, Buick, Cadillac, Oldsmobile, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab. Ford does it with Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Jaguar, Mazda, Volvo, Land Rover, and Aston Martin. Daimler Chrysler does it with Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep (Not to mention the German cars). Then you have the same thing with Japanese vehicles... Toyota owns Lexus. Did you know that the snazzy Lexus RX300 SUV is actually a Toyota Camry with a different body? Mitsubishi and Infiniti...
The all do it. You are being suckered every day, if that is what you wanna think of it as. These companies are just marketing to different niches. If you ran a business, wouldn't you try to get your products to the right channels? I don't think that there is anything ethical here... Although, the idea of the VCR and the walkie-talkies is in the unethical arena.
Just know what you are buying. Plain and simple. If you cannot put enough time and effort into figuring out what it actually is that you are buying, then it is either not worth buying, or you should expect the potential for being ripped off.
None.
People need to realize, there is no such thing as international "law." There certainly are things that are called international law, but it is not actually law. They are parts of treaties and agreements built between nations, and they are broken by all nations when it is in their best interest. The U.S. does it; Canada does it; Mexico does it; Japan does it; China does it; They ALL do it. There are no legal implications, unless the U.S. decides that they will allow some other nation to bring legal charges. I really don't see that happening.
Of course, that does not mean there are no other implications... like retaliation.