When stuff is outsourced, products/services generally become cheaper and worse. The problem is that most Americans would rather have a lot of cheap crap than a moderate amount of good stuff, hence McDonald's and Walmart. Until you can convince Americans that it is better to buy one good toaster every 20 years than a crappy one every 2, that it is better to buy one bicycle that can be maintained for 25 years than a cheap one that will be junked in 5, that it is better to buy and enjoy one good gadget than buy the latest fad piece of junk every year, and that it is better to go out and get a nice entree once a month than to get what McDonald's passes off as food every week - until you convince Americans that quality is more important than quantity, this trend will continue.
I don't know about Ottawa, Toronto, or New York, but Buffalo should not be on that list. The city is simply not that large (population), the mass transit is not that good, too many of the destinations are out in the suburbs, and the weather is not conducive to walking around downtown for 5 months a year.
Results don't matter. Budgets matter. If the administrators can increase the budget by buying new stuff, they can justify higher pay for themselves. End of story.
You do not have a right to have a product delivered to you in the way you want. The company does not have an obligation to package the product the way you want.
Would you sneak into a movie theater to watch half of a movie just because they wouldn't sell you a ticket to watch half of it at half price? Would you break into a museum to look at one piece because the museum wouldn't give you a discount to only look at one piece? Would you download a cracked copy of a CAD package because they wouldn't sell you just the 2D portion for half price?
If they go out of business because they aren't selling what people want, great. But that they don't sell what you want does not give you the right to break the law.
Most of their product follows those guidelines, but not all. They do that because people buy it. Blame the people buying it. Their model is not to sell bad music, it is to sell a lot of music. If bad music sells, they'll keep selling it.
As for the price, if the price is too high, don't buy it. (A price that you think is too high does not justify breaking the law to get it.)
As for the compensation, their upstream suppliers and their contractors are willing to sell or work for that price. They don't have to. They are completely within their rights to raise their rates and see if anybody will buy.
If you just don't like paying the middle man's markup, buy directly from the musicians.
The industry's business model (make music, sell it) is fine. Except that the people it wants to sell its product to are breaking the law to get their product by other means.
The industry has two options. It can try to get law enforcement to go after a huge number of its customers until the enforcement is a deterrent to the law breaking. Or it can try to make it harder for people to break the law.
Trying the first method is very problematic, as I'm sure you all know, because you can't figure out exactly who was doing the law breaking. The second is incredibly inefficient and causes a huge amount of collateral damage.
I'm not a shill. I dislike the industry enough that I only buy music directly from musicians. But come on, the only problem with their business model is that it is easy to break the law and people are willing to do it.
You may not like that they are doing terrible things to try to stop people from breaking the law, but their business model is not the problem.
In section 3, United States v. Miller is upheld, and supports its limit of the right to bear arms to those "in common use at the time".
Limitations on the possession of arms not in common use ensures that the arms in common use when gun control legislation began are the only arms that will ever be allowed. Thus, as the government gets more and more advanced weapons to use against the people, the people's arms will become less and less effective.
While the ruling does overturn D.C.'s handgun ban, it does not do enough to preserve the right granted by the 2nd amendment. "In common use at the time" must be explicitly defined to include the arms issued to US military and law enforcement.
WinAmp - Windows Amplifier Slashdot - A geek joke for a site read only by geeks. Outlook Express - An express version of Outlook that users were already familiar with because it came with Office, which is an office suite. AutoCAD - It has C.A.D. right in it.
I don't dislike it because it is new. I dislike it because it takes more key strokes to do things that it did with the old bar. I understand that it works well for some browsing patterns; in fact it works pretty well for what I do at home. But for some patterns, like what I do at work, it sucks.
The look isn't the problem. It is the behavior. They keep telling me that it will learn as I use it. I've been using it since beta 2, and it still annoys me. I'm using Konqueror more and more and FF3 less and less over that issue alone.
This is precisely why Oracle created Resource Manager. Figure out how much it would cost you to acquire the proper licenses (if you don't already have them), add hardware to handle the added load, and set up and administer the resources. Add your profit markup. Present the cost to the customer.
If the customer balks, you got your wish. If your customer puts up the money, you make profit. win-win.
This is not quite an issue of what people are doing in private. Anybody is free to make up their own ceremony and apply some words to what they did. This is an issue of the government doing paperwork and recognizing a legal arrangements which has far reaching consequences, affecting other people (e.g. employers).
"Either let any human being marry any other human being." Can an adult marry an infant? Can siblings marry?
"do away with the concept of legal marriages completely." A fine idea. Many of those against removing the opposite sex restriction from the definition of marriage are against it because their religious beliefs hold marriage to be a sacred issue contingent upon that restriction. Why should the government be involved at all (excepting the cases of religious governments, which we thankfully do not have.)?
Slashdot Mirror
When stuff is outsourced, products/services generally become cheaper and worse. The problem is that most Americans would rather have a lot of cheap crap than a moderate amount of good stuff, hence McDonald's and Walmart. Until you can convince Americans that it is better to buy one good toaster every 20 years than a crappy one every 2, that it is better to buy one bicycle that can be maintained for 25 years than a cheap one that will be junked in 5, that it is better to buy and enjoy one good gadget than buy the latest fad piece of junk every year, and that it is better to go out and get a nice entree once a month than to get what McDonald's passes off as food every week - until you convince Americans that quality is more important than quantity, this trend will continue.
That means you Hotmail!
New York?
I don't know about Ottawa, Toronto, or New York, but Buffalo should not be on that list. The city is simply not that large (population), the mass transit is not that good, too many of the destinations are out in the suburbs, and the weather is not conducive to walking around downtown for 5 months a year.
Results don't matter. Budgets matter. If the administrators can increase the budget by buying new stuff, they can justify higher pay for themselves. End of story.
How are they artificially restraining supply? They'll make as much product as people will buy.
You do not have a right to have a product delivered to you in the way you want. The company does not have an obligation to package the product the way you want.
Would you sneak into a movie theater to watch half of a movie just because they wouldn't sell you a ticket to watch half of it at half price? Would you break into a museum to look at one piece because the museum wouldn't give you a discount to only look at one piece? Would you download a cracked copy of a CAD package because they wouldn't sell you just the 2D portion for half price?
If they go out of business because they aren't selling what people want, great. But that they don't sell what you want does not give you the right to break the law.
They can't adapt. People are breaking the law to get their product for free. You can't compete with your own product for free.
Most of their product follows those guidelines, but not all. They do that because people buy it. Blame the people buying it. Their model is not to sell bad music, it is to sell a lot of music. If bad music sells, they'll keep selling it.
As for the price, if the price is too high, don't buy it. (A price that you think is too high does not justify breaking the law to get it.)
As for the compensation, their upstream suppliers and their contractors are willing to sell or work for that price. They don't have to. They are completely within their rights to raise their rates and see if anybody will buy.
If you just don't like paying the middle man's markup, buy directly from the musicians.
The industry's business model (make music, sell it) is fine. Except that the people it wants to sell its product to are breaking the law to get their product by other means.
The industry has two options. It can try to get law enforcement to go after a huge number of its customers until the enforcement is a deterrent to the law breaking. Or it can try to make it harder for people to break the law.
Trying the first method is very problematic, as I'm sure you all know, because you can't figure out exactly who was doing the law breaking. The second is incredibly inefficient and causes a huge amount of collateral damage.
I'm not a shill. I dislike the industry enough that I only buy music directly from musicians. But come on, the only problem with their business model is that it is easy to break the law and people are willing to do it.
You may not like that they are doing terrible things to try to stop people from breaking the law, but their business model is not the problem.
WinAmp - True, it isn't exactly an amplifier, but people looking for a music playing program will make the connection.
AutoCAD - Somebody looking for a music playing program might not know what CAD stands for, but anybody looking for a CAD program certainly will.
In section 3, United States v. Miller is upheld, and supports its limit of the right to bear arms to those "in common use at the time".
Limitations on the possession of arms not in common use ensures that the arms in common use when gun control legislation began are the only arms that will ever be allowed. Thus, as the government gets more and more advanced weapons to use against the people, the people's arms will become less and less effective.
While the ruling does overturn D.C.'s handgun ban, it does not do enough to preserve the right granted by the 2nd amendment. "In common use at the time" must be explicitly defined to include the arms issued to US military and law enforcement.
WinAmp - Windows Amplifier
Slashdot - A geek joke for a site read only by geeks.
Outlook Express - An express version of Outlook that users were already familiar with because it came with Office, which is an office suite.
AutoCAD - It has C.A.D. right in it.
He was impeached. He was not convicted.
I don't dislike it because it is new. I dislike it because it takes more key strokes to do things that it did with the old bar. I understand that it works well for some browsing patterns; in fact it works pretty well for what I do at home. But for some patterns, like what I do at work, it sucks.
The look isn't the problem. It is the behavior. They keep telling me that it will learn as I use it. I've been using it since beta 2, and it still annoys me. I'm using Konqueror more and more and FF3 less and less over that issue alone.
It is not the job of SCOTUS to be safe and responsible. It is the job of SCOTUS to knock down unconstitutional laws.
"This is normal and fine behavior."
No, it isn't.
"Something the majority Democrat Congress has been unable to do."
Not unable, but unwilling.
At least not in their role as ISPs.
What has she changed?
Can OO.o, KOffice, or Symphony read _any_ valid ODF document properly and properly save any changes made to the document that ODF supports?
If not, they are correct in stating that there is no fully compliant ODF implementation.
djbdns is now in the public domain (as of December 2007). Before that, there was no license.
http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html
This is precisely why Oracle created Resource Manager. Figure out how much it would cost you to acquire the proper licenses (if you don't already have them), add hardware to handle the added load, and set up and administer the resources. Add your profit markup. Present the cost to the customer.
If the customer balks, you got your wish. If your customer puts up the money, you make profit. win-win.
This is not quite an issue of what people are doing in private. Anybody is free to make up their own ceremony and apply some words to what they did. This is an issue of the government doing paperwork and recognizing a legal arrangements which has far reaching consequences, affecting other people (e.g. employers).
"Either let any human being marry any other human being." Can an adult marry an infant? Can siblings marry?
"do away with the concept of legal marriages completely." A fine idea. Many of those against removing the opposite sex restriction from the definition of marriage are against it because their religious beliefs hold marriage to be a sacred issue contingent upon that restriction. Why should the government be involved at all (excepting the cases of religious governments, which we thankfully do not have.)?