how did i know her 'prize' was going to be a/.ing of lame pickup attempts from every pasty rastor-burned geek in the U.S.
For her sake, I wish they'd skewed the results.
This is only true if there are reasonable alternatives. Given the way business works, once one lawyer has a.pro domain all the lawyers/accountants will need to have one b/c customers will expect to be able to find them that way. Not having.pro would be like getting.net for your or my company if.com can't be had. Not really a real option.
The catch is that nobody will use this or everybody will have to use it just to stay in business, and if that becomes the case then this is a license to print money and that's why we are upset.
i would normally be very opposed to this sort of thing since it seems to set yet another precedent for increased governmental control.
however, i will never forget a couple of years back when i was walking by the mall arcade and i lilterally saw a five year old jumping up and down in front of the mortal kombat machine screaming 'die! die! die!' hardly even touching the buttons, and obviously with no knowledge of how to play the game.
that kind of thing that can scare you for life (and i am not making it up).
myabe this could be a good thing...
How does a song that you don't know, from a band that you've never heard, expose itself to you on any of the P2P programs?
Simple. Word of mouth. A friend of mine mentions a band they like or I read something on a message board. Am I going to plunk down $20 on the off chance I might like the music? No. I d/l a track or two of p2p and sometimes friend/poster X was right on.
I've actually bought music this way.
You can't expect every band out there to be in the little preview station at the cd store.
Has anyone ever had an audio/data CD stop working on them? I haven't... and certainly have never felt the need to back them up.
That's like saying 'has your house actually ever been broken into? why buy a lock?'.
No, my apartment has never been robbed but it's about security and protecting yourself against what if's. I have a few cd's I picked up at used music shops etc. which are either guaranteed out of print/imported/otherwise rare and I would be devastated if some of these albums were scratched/stolen or lost in some other fashion.
Don't I have a right to secure myself against this possibility even if it never happens?
Don't most unix users build their own pcs anyways? for the 1337ness factor?
Yes. Of course. Why I wouldn't even own a PC if I didn't think it made me c00l.
Why can't people seem to understand that many of us don't want to use MS but still want something that's quick to set up and easy to use?
Most nights I don't have anywhere near the time I would need to be sitting in a pile of chips just so I can surf the web later on.
Hats off to Microtel for filling a growing hole in the PC market. I plan on buying one of these as soon as I can up my savings account some (the main reason I don't have any time to sit around h4x0ring my 0wn b0x3n).
Re:You'd think someone would have figured it out
on
The Magic Box Hoax
·
· Score: 1
With all of the tech-savvy people around
Apparently you don't work in management/investments...
God, I am so sick of seeing anyone who wildy yells that advertising doesn't work get modded up as a genius, when in fact the opposite is true.
Saying that advertising doesn't work is completely delusional.
Let's review a few things here:
A) The overt advertising model has been in place for over 100 years. And nobody has noticed this 'not working' (except for you) yet? Well then that would certainly explain all the successful businesses that exist (or maybe those are all a crock too?).
B) I sincerely doubt that you have NEVER bought ANYTHING that you first heard about in an advertisement. And if you have in fact bought at least one thing then your entire argument is hypocritical.
C) I'm not sure what you do for a living, but it would seem that you don't have much contact with the advertising department because click-through advertising is actually doing pretty well. Not on the same level of TV etc. but it can in fact be profitable. If not, then apparantly Slashdot keeps those banners up top just to annoy you and IBM is in on the gag.
I am happy for you that you have resigned yourself to be a the modern day Thoreau and reject all advertising media but blindly claiming that it has no effect is completely ignorant and should be recognized as such.
I suppose typing apt-get install $APP_NAME is too much work?
Yes.
Yes it is. That's the whole point here, for the average end user typing anything at all is too much work, less enjoyable and actually influences their purchase decisions.
Not everybody is a) Good at remembering command line commands b) Knows the name of every app they want/what it does
Remember mac os? And how a certain other company ripped it off? (yeah I know Apple stole it first, etc.)
Regardless, it's because they knew how to interact w/ clueless users scared to turn on the machine for the first time i.e. one mouse button and double click on everything.
First rule of converting other people to linux: learn to recognize reality and don't be elitest.
Gateway ought to be focusing on consolidating their business instead of trying wacky new ventures?
Cutting costs isn't going to increase sales, and that's what they really need to stay alive since they can't rely on contracts/repeat customers.
Now let me ask you, did you give a damn about Gateway before all this started? Probably not. How about now that they seem to be fighting for the little guy? If you're like most/.'s then you probably have a much kinder opinion of the company now, meaning you are much more likely to purchase from them.
This could turn out to be one of the most genius marketing strategies ever used to win over the young/Napster crowd (college kids w/ LOADS of (their parents) money) and revive a failing business.
I just hope they stay sincere if it works...
People don't like choices. People don't like spending the time choosing between products and comparing them to see which one is the best.
Yes. If only our government could work this way. Or maybe the way we choose doctors. That would make us all happy I'm sure.
I think if you do some research you'll find that the right to choose has been the major motivating force in most significant social events in recent history. Including the diversification of the PC desktop.
And second chances, my friends, is what America is all about.
The CDBTA(sp?) was his second chance. His first was the
Communications Decency Act (see
here), a bill so restrictive that it was struck down by the supreme court.
Trust me, this guy is never going to repent and see the error of his ways or other some romantic BS. He needs to leave, now.
In the summary it mentions he tries to use the fear of reduced market competition as a reason not to hurt Microsoft, b/c then they wouldn't be able to fight AOL etc.
Essentially he's using the fear of creating a monopoly to preserve... a monopoly!
He also seems to mention that it's important we threaten the Unix market w/ hordes of cheap windows boxes (also to promote competition), yet AFAIK the Unix market has some of the healthiest competition of any industry out there.
Pure blatant FUD, I seriously hope no one in the court room fell for this...
So much for large development teams... It is the game design that matters
Matters? For who? For you? Well unfortunately, this isn't the goal of most for profit game companies. Now let me ask you, which is a more profitable company, ID or Nintendo? (Even disregarding the consoles and all their other titles, Pokemon absolutely dwarfs and offering from ID for sales/market saturation).
The point is, Nintendo exists for one reason, to make money, and apparently their bloated development teams make them very very good at their jobs. While it's not as romantic as we might like, business will always follow the path that brings the most profit...
does this remind anyone else of Amadou Diallo where they 'predicted' he was going for a gun b/c he reached into his jacket?
i have a feeling this system would generate an incredible amount of false 'crimes' because it cannot predict intent.
imagine i'm joking around and i grab my girlfriends handbag (and even run away?). you think this system wouldn't set off all kinds of alarms?
this is just another tool to further the current trend of guilty until proven innocent...
This kind of thinking is what gives us bridges that don't collapse
Unfortunately, no it isn't. I've said it once, and I'll say it before, if someone goes out of their way to blow up the bridge, are the construction workers liable?
No. Similarily, when discussing computer security we are dealing with people actively and maliciously trying to break it. This is why software makers/vendors can never be held 'liable'.
If the bridge collapses of it's own accord then the makers are liable, likewise if a piece of software I make actively takes your sensitive data and spews it out all over the place then I am liable. However, the moment an attack/attacker is involved it is impossible to pin liability on the creators since you would be asking them to proof against all possible methods of break in both past/present and unthought of.
It's the same with Firestone (his dramatic finishing example). If someone was running around sabotaging (sp?) all those tires would people be suing Firestone? I doubt it.
what on earth is going on?
this is an article on how to move a slider. i would hope the fact that sliders are moveable is not news to any nerds.
the only thing this article did for me was confirm that WinXP is ugly as hell which I don't think is really groundbreaking news either...
The company typically code-names its chips after geographical features.
is this the code name or the release name? i thought the word 'Pentium' came to be by way of researchers determining that it wasn't a real word in any language and therefore could be copyrighted (same with 'Itanium' i suppose as well)...
why do we need laws to tell us what information is too sensitive and what isn't?
you know what? if you get asked about your religion and it offends you... DON"T ANSWER.
if you know of a site that tracks you and you don't want them to sell that information... DON'T SHOP THERE.
and you know what? maybe, just maybe, the free market will regulate itself when people stop shopping at intrusive vendors.
this is _not_ government's job. this bill will not stop spam. most legit companies already have well defined privacy policies on their websites so you know what you're getting yourself into.
all in all, this bill accomplishes actively nothing, and yes it is nothing more than a front to appease opponents of his other bills...
Intellectual-property experts said the patent clearly should have not been issued, but that such mistakes were inevitable from an underfunded government agency that issues 3,000 patents each week.
What mistake? Temporary illiteracy? Did the possessed hand from Evil Dead get control of the 'APPROVED' stamp? I'm sorry, just don't get it.
Slashdot Mirror
Shazbot! My secret identity is revealed!
how did i know her 'prize' was going to be a /.ing of lame pickup attempts from every pasty rastor-burned geek in the U.S.
For her sake, I wish they'd skewed the results.
The catch is that nobody will use this or everybody will have to use it just to stay in business, and if that becomes the case then this is a license to print money and that's why we are upset.
however, i will never forget a couple of years back when i was walking by the mall arcade and i lilterally saw a five year old jumping up and down in front of the mortal kombat machine screaming 'die! die! die!' hardly even touching the buttons, and obviously with no knowledge of how to play the game.
that kind of thing that can scare you for life (and i am not making it up).
myabe this could be a good thing...
Simple. Word of mouth. A friend of mine mentions a band they like or I read something on a message board. Am I going to plunk down $20 on the off chance I might like the music? No. I d/l a track or two of p2p and sometimes friend/poster X was right on.
I've actually bought music this way.
You can't expect every band out there to be in the little preview station at the cd store.
That's like saying 'has your house actually ever been broken into? why buy a lock?'.
No, my apartment has never been robbed but it's about security and protecting yourself against what if's. I have a few cd's I picked up at used music shops etc. which are either guaranteed out of print/imported/otherwise rare and I would be devastated if some of these albums were scratched/stolen or lost in some other fashion.
Don't I have a right to secure myself against this possibility even if it never happens?
Yes. Of course. Why I wouldn't even own a PC if I didn't think it made me c00l.
Why can't people seem to understand that many of us don't want to use MS but still want something that's quick to set up and easy to use?
Most nights I don't have anywhere near the time I would need to be sitting in a pile of chips just so I can surf the web later on.
Hats off to Microtel for filling a growing hole in the PC market. I plan on buying one of these as soon as I can up my savings account some (the main reason I don't have any time to sit around h4x0ring my 0wn b0x3n).
Apparently you don't work in management/investments...
Either this is a typo or Kirsten Dunst was getting blazed the whole movie...
Their both good in their own way I suppose...
in a related story, a $300 million economic boost was seen in the tech sector when /.'s servers went down for a day.
Saying that advertising doesn't work is completely delusional.
Let's review a few things here:
A) The overt advertising model has been in place for over 100 years. And nobody has noticed this 'not working' (except for you) yet? Well then that would certainly explain all the successful businesses that exist (or maybe those are all a crock too?).
B) I sincerely doubt that you have NEVER bought ANYTHING that you first heard about in an advertisement. And if you have in fact bought at least one thing then your entire argument is hypocritical.
C) I'm not sure what you do for a living, but it would seem that you don't have much contact with the advertising department because click-through advertising is actually doing pretty well. Not on the same level of TV etc. but it can in fact be profitable. If not, then apparantly Slashdot keeps those banners up top just to annoy you and IBM is in on the gag.
I am happy for you that you have resigned yourself to be a the modern day Thoreau and reject all advertising media but blindly claiming that it has no effect is completely ignorant and should be recognized as such.
Yes.
Yes it is. That's the whole point here, for the average end user typing anything at all is too much work, less enjoyable and actually influences their purchase decisions.
Not everybody is a) Good at remembering command line commands b) Knows the name of every app they want/what it does
Remember mac os? And how a certain other company ripped it off? (yeah I know Apple stole it first, etc.)
Regardless, it's because they knew how to interact w/ clueless users scared to turn on the machine for the first time i.e. one mouse button and double click on everything.
First rule of converting other people to linux: learn to recognize reality and don't be elitest.
yes sir, i'd like the turkey and Mild Zaurus on rye please
Cutting costs isn't going to increase sales, and that's what they really need to stay alive since they can't rely on contracts/repeat customers. /.'s then you probably have a much kinder opinion of the company now, meaning you are much more likely to purchase from them.
Now let me ask you, did you give a damn about Gateway before all this started? Probably not. How about now that they seem to be fighting for the little guy? If you're like most
This could turn out to be one of the most genius marketing strategies ever used to win over the young/Napster crowd (college kids w/ LOADS of (their parents) money) and revive a failing business.
I just hope they stay sincere if it works...
Yes. If only our government could work this way. Or maybe the way we choose doctors. That would make us all happy I'm sure.
I think if you do some research you'll find that the right to choose has been the major motivating force in most significant social events in recent history. Including the diversification of the PC desktop.
The CDBTA(sp?) was his second chance. His first was the Communications Decency Act (see here), a bill so restrictive that it was struck down by the supreme court.
Trust me, this guy is never going to repent and see the error of his ways or other some romantic BS. He needs to leave, now.
In the summary it mentions he tries to use the fear of reduced market competition as a reason not to hurt Microsoft, b/c then they wouldn't be able to fight AOL etc.
Essentially he's using the fear of creating a monopoly to preserve... a monopoly!
He also seems to mention that it's important we threaten the Unix market w/ hordes of cheap windows boxes (also to promote competition), yet AFAIK the Unix market has some of the healthiest competition of any industry out there.
Pure blatant FUD, I seriously hope no one in the court room fell for this...
Matters? For who? For you? Well unfortunately, this isn't the goal of most for profit game companies. Now let me ask you, which is a more profitable company, ID or Nintendo? (Even disregarding the consoles and all their other titles, Pokemon absolutely dwarfs and offering from ID for sales/market saturation).
The point is, Nintendo exists for one reason, to make money, and apparently their bloated development teams make them very very good at their jobs. While it's not as romantic as we might like, business will always follow the path that brings the most profit...
does this remind anyone else of Amadou Diallo where they 'predicted' he was going for a gun b/c he reached into his jacket?
i have a feeling this system would generate an incredible amount of false 'crimes' because it cannot predict intent.
imagine i'm joking around and i grab my girlfriends handbag (and even run away?). you think this system wouldn't set off all kinds of alarms?
this is just another tool to further the current trend of guilty until proven innocent...
Unfortunately, no it isn't. I've said it once, and I'll say it before, if someone goes out of their way to blow up the bridge, are the construction workers liable?
No. Similarily, when discussing computer security we are dealing with people actively and maliciously trying to break it. This is why software makers/vendors can never be held 'liable'.
If the bridge collapses of it's own accord then the makers are liable, likewise if a piece of software I make actively takes your sensitive data and spews it out all over the place then I am liable. However, the moment an attack/attacker is involved it is impossible to pin liability on the creators since you would be asking them to proof against all possible methods of break in both past/present and unthought of.
It's the same with Firestone (his dramatic finishing example). If someone was running around sabotaging (sp?) all those tires would people be suing Firestone? I doubt it.
what on earth is going on?
this is an article on how to move a slider. i would hope the fact that sliders are moveable is not news to any nerds.
the only thing this article did for me was confirm that WinXP is ugly as hell which I don't think is really groundbreaking news either...
is this the code name or the release name? i thought the word 'Pentium' came to be by way of researchers determining that it wasn't a real word in any language and therefore could be copyrighted (same with 'Itanium' i suppose as well)...
why do we need laws to tell us what information is too sensitive and what isn't?
you know what? if you get asked about your religion and it offends you... DON"T ANSWER.
if you know of a site that tracks you and you don't want them to sell that information... DON'T SHOP THERE.
and you know what? maybe, just maybe, the free market will regulate itself when people stop shopping at intrusive vendors.
this is _not_ government's job. this bill will not stop spam. most legit companies already have well defined privacy policies on their websites so you know what you're getting yourself into.
all in all, this bill accomplishes actively nothing, and yes it is nothing more than a front to appease opponents of his other bills...
What mistake? Temporary illiteracy? Did the possessed hand from Evil Dead get control of the 'APPROVED' stamp?
I'm sorry, just don't get it.
pretty soon when vulnerabilities like this come out, we can say 'don't worry... you're an AOL user'. ;)
did i just see a pig fly by my window?