First there is no such thing as AOL stock. When they dropped the AOL from the name they changed the ticker back to TWX.
Second, AOL never purchased TW. As I mention in a post above they merged by exchanging stock 55%/45% and formed a new company called AOLTW of which the ISP known as AOL was a division. They have since dropped AOL from the name.
Finally, I wouldn't be too concerned with your Time Warner stock. Analysts long ago valued the AOL portion of the stock as zero. If anything the death of AOL might actually raise the stock as most analysts consider it just a burden on an otherwise strong company.
Sorry but you are wrong. AOL and Time Warner exchanged stock 55%/45%, respectively, and formed a new company that is now called Time Warner. AOL is a subdivision of this company as is Warner Bros., HBO, New Line Cinema, etc.
Actually a business usually restructures to eliminate redunancy and money losing businesses. Being a broadband ISP is onbviously not making them money. And they have been moving towards providing digital content since the merger with Time Warner. They recognized long ago that dial-up was dying and now they are just betting that being strictly a content provider is the best way to go.
Is RoadRunner available in those areas? I also think that AOL's broadband is DSL so wouldn't it make sense to refer customers to another DSL provider instead of Cable?
I think he is pretty safe with telling in general how things are done but there are certain things that just can't be taught. A lot of what he does is "intuition" meaning that he recognizes things subconciously based on years of experience. You can't learn to drive or even program a computer by reading a book.
It is one thing to when your enemies have a low opinion of you and another thing when your allies do. And even at that we didn't enter the war until after the Japanese had attacked. Ethnocentric isolationism has never served this country very well. You can't try to control the world and then be surprised when the world gets pissed and tried to fight back.
Did I say we were winning or losing? If you believe we are winning then the election is important to you because you think that Bush is needed to keep us winning. If you think we are losing then the election is important to you because you think Kerry can do a better job. Winning or losing doesn't affect the importance of the decision.
Like it or not we are part of the world. I live in a small neighborhood. I don't particularly like my neighbors but I sure as hell don't want them to hate me. If somebody tries to break in my house it would be nice if a neighbor who saw them would call the police.
And good luck on Bush putting a strict interpretationalist on the court.
I don't think that foreign powers should dominate our policy at all. This country was formed on being different from Europe and I have no problem staying that way. I do think it is important to be respected by our neighbors, though. My issue is that poor voter turnout followed by constant bitching about who is elected just makes us seem like a laughing stock.
Also we are only part of a global economy. Having good reputations and relations with foreign powers are essentially to making sure that we aren't getting the short end of the stick. If people from other companies don't respect us then will they continue to buy our products?
1) We are at war. 2) World opinion of the US is at an all time low. 3) At least one Supreme Court justice will be replaced in the next 4 years. 4) The world is watching these elections.
And the comment about "of our lifetime" is typically meant as retroactively only. When I say that this was the best day of my life I mean my life to this point. Hard to say what things will be like in the future.
Not at all. Horror movies need to be rated R to make any money. The most popular horror movies (Friday the 13th, Halloween, Exorcist, Shining, Psycho, etc.) were all rated R.
Michael Jackson owns the publishing rights to most of the Beatles' library not the actual recordings. He can control (or 50% control with Sony now) who covers the songs and who uses them in ads but he can't control the recordings. For those who don't know there are two copyrights on songs - the recording and the music itself.
You don't need to turn them off. How about just forcing them to silent/vibrate mode and turning the receiver volume all the way up so that people don't feel inclined to scream into them. I have a long train ride each day and nothing is worse than digital Fur Elise at ear-shattering volume wrenching you out of a caffeine withdrawal snooze.
This may be taken as a troll but it really is to compete with Apple. Apple long ago learned that some people just want a machine without having to know every spec.
I think this is a pretty good idea. It is a lot better than the current naming scheme or Super Gaming Machine, Ultra Gaming Machine, Ultra-Super gaming machine. I just don't see the vendors going with it. A level 5 machine just doesn't have the zip and screams mediocre.
Copyrights hinder things from becoming 'common' in our culture, and life becomes bland. Imagine if noone knew the words to 'happy birthday' or common Christmas carols...
How does copyright prevent somebody from learning the words to a song? I happen to know the words to many songs that are copyrighted. I can think of dozens of copyrighted songs that most people probably know at least some words to.
Otherwise I agree that 50 years is plenty. When I do something at work, no matter how great it is, I don't expect to continue getting paid for it when I am in my 80's.
You misunderstand how copyrights work. The life of a copyright is not determined by the country it was created in but differs for each country. This is why you can get Orwell's 1984, Animal Farm, etc. in Australia but not in the US.
Are you saying that Homosexuality is a sin? In that case we can end the debate right there. If it is a sin then it is a sin created by God. What he meant means nothing. When you have a position of power such as his even suggesting something like that is dangerous. You never know what his followers will think.
I am not sure how you can say that christian religion is not allowed in schools. Last time I checked you still get Christmas off but not everybody gets off Rosh Hoshana, Yom Kippur, or Ramadan. And I have never heard of a teacher taking action against a child praying in his head. I think it is great that schools teach Islam and wish they tought more world religions. It very important that children realize that there is no one "correct" religion and that there is a choice. It is also important to understand different culture and not despise what you don't understand.
Finally, religion is not being pushed out of anywhere. The display of individual religions without giving fair representation to other religions is being removed from government buildings. While this country may have been founded by Christians there is a much greater diversity here now and the founding fathers believed it very important that no religion should be the national religion (as the Church of England was).
You know I thought the same thing about cell phones until I got my Samsung. The color screen is much easier to read in bright sunlight as well as pitch black night. The battery life obviously suffers but I have a charger at work and at home.
The iRiver says it has a 16 hour life so figure 10-12 hours realistically. Unless you are flying half-way across the globe I think that should get you to and from work.
A zealot would be somebody who blames their problems on somebody else's religion or lack of religion which is what this girl did. If you read what she posted of that essay I think even the most religous among us would still be generous giving her a D.
And the right likes to call the left communists. Calling them zealots wouldn't make much sense.
And I had nothing to do with making this girl think there are anti-christian views in this country. She gets plenty of that from the preachers. If you don't think that zealotry is very real in this country then I suggest you listen to Jimmy Swaggarts opinion of gay marraige. He said something along the lines that if a gay man looked at him wrong he would kill him and the crowd cheered. That is zealotry plain and simple.
Finally, I don't know how you can say religion is being removed from the public eye. You obviously don't watch much TV or visit the bookstore. Religion has had a huge resurgence since September 11. You can't watch a Yankees game without hearing God bless America. In my opinion America the Beautiful would be much more appropriate.
You left the best part out. She was upset because she got a D on the paper (from which that came) and she thinks she is a good writer. Her explanation, of course, is not that she has a greatly inflated opinion of her abilities but that he teacher is anti-Christian.
We laugh about this but the really scary part is that there are a lot of people who think like her. People hate Bush so much because of the war but I am much more scared about his connection to the zealots of the religous right. The war in Iraq will end someday but these zealots will continue to try to take control of this country.
Yeah. That sample size will give me an accuracy with +-14%. Where am I asking the question? What age group is responding? If it is mostly people under 30 then I agree with you.
Then again I bet if you ask 50 people on the street who the secretary of state is in the US you would probably have about the same success.
And whether people know the name or not does not affect the financial status of the company (which is the real point of the grandparent's post).
Why is it that people think that because they haven't heard of something that is isn't very well known? Did you ever stop to think that you don't know everything?
Widget could sue Widget! if Widget! went into the music business. The size of a company does not matter when it comes to Trademarks. You could be a mom and pop company in bumblefuck Kansas.
If it took fraud to be trademark infringement then we wouldn't need trademark laws. There are already fraud laws. And those Gucci bags are illegal. You don't have to be actively trying to deceive somebody in order for their to be possible confusion.
Slashdot Mirror
You're wrong. Refer to one of my posts below.
Comcast owns 21% (actually think it is 17% now) of Time Warner Cable not Time Warner or AOL.
First there is no such thing as AOL stock. When they dropped the AOL from the name they changed the ticker back to TWX.
Second, AOL never purchased TW. As I mention in a post above they merged by exchanging stock 55%/45% and formed a new company called AOLTW of which the ISP known as AOL was a division. They have since dropped AOL from the name.
Finally, I wouldn't be too concerned with your Time Warner stock. Analysts long ago valued the AOL portion of the stock as zero. If anything the death of AOL might actually raise the stock as most analysts consider it just a burden on an otherwise strong company.
Sorry but you are wrong. AOL and Time Warner exchanged stock 55%/45%, respectively, and formed a new company that is now called Time Warner. AOL is a subdivision of this company as is Warner Bros., HBO, New Line Cinema, etc.
Actually a business usually restructures to eliminate redunancy and money losing businesses. Being a broadband ISP is onbviously not making them money. And they have been moving towards providing digital content since the merger with Time Warner. They recognized long ago that dial-up was dying and now they are just betting that being strictly a content provider is the best way to go.
Is RoadRunner available in those areas? I also think that AOL's broadband is DSL so wouldn't it make sense to refer customers to another DSL provider instead of Cable?
I think he is pretty safe with telling in general how things are done but there are certain things that just can't be taught. A lot of what he does is "intuition" meaning that he recognizes things subconciously based on years of experience. You can't learn to drive or even program a computer by reading a book.
It is one thing to when your enemies have a low opinion of you and another thing when your allies do. And even at that we didn't enter the war until after the Japanese had attacked. Ethnocentric isolationism has never served this country very well. You can't try to control the world and then be surprised when the world gets pissed and tried to fight back.
Did I say we were winning or losing? If you believe we are winning then the election is important to you because you think that Bush is needed to keep us winning. If you think we are losing then the election is important to you because you think Kerry can do a better job. Winning or losing doesn't affect the importance of the decision.
Like it or not we are part of the world. I live in a small neighborhood. I don't particularly like my neighbors but I sure as hell don't want them to hate me. If somebody tries to break in my house it would be nice if a neighbor who saw them would call the police.
And good luck on Bush putting a strict interpretationalist on the court.
I don't think that foreign powers should dominate our policy at all. This country was formed on being different from Europe and I have no problem staying that way. I do think it is important to be respected by our neighbors, though. My issue is that poor voter turnout followed by constant bitching about who is elected just makes us seem like a laughing stock.
Also we are only part of a global economy. Having good reputations and relations with foreign powers are essentially to making sure that we aren't getting the short end of the stick. If people from other companies don't respect us then will they continue to buy our products?
It is an important election for several reasons:
1) We are at war.
2) World opinion of the US is at an all time low.
3) At least one Supreme Court justice will be replaced in the next 4 years.
4) The world is watching these elections.
And the comment about "of our lifetime" is typically meant as retroactively only. When I say that this was the best day of my life I mean my life to this point. Hard to say what things will be like in the future.
Not at all. Horror movies need to be rated R to make any money. The most popular horror movies (Friday the 13th, Halloween, Exorcist, Shining, Psycho, etc.) were all rated R.
Michael Jackson owns the publishing rights to most of the Beatles' library not the actual recordings. He can control (or 50% control with Sony now) who covers the songs and who uses them in ads but he can't control the recordings. For those who don't know there are two copyrights on songs - the recording and the music itself.
You don't need to turn them off. How about just forcing them to silent/vibrate mode and turning the receiver volume all the way up so that people don't feel inclined to scream into them. I have a long train ride each day and nothing is worse than digital Fur Elise at ear-shattering volume wrenching you out of a caffeine withdrawal snooze.
If his is anything like mine then they don't care what you do inside the house as long as the outside is consistent with their code.
This may be taken as a troll but it really is to compete with Apple. Apple long ago learned that some people just want a machine without having to know every spec.
I think this is a pretty good idea. It is a lot better than the current naming scheme or Super Gaming Machine, Ultra Gaming Machine, Ultra-Super gaming machine. I just don't see the vendors going with it. A level 5 machine just doesn't have the zip and screams mediocre.
Copyrights hinder things from becoming 'common' in our culture, and life becomes bland. Imagine if noone knew the words to 'happy birthday' or common Christmas carols...
How does copyright prevent somebody from learning the words to a song? I happen to know the words to many songs that are copyrighted. I can think of dozens of copyrighted songs that most people probably know at least some words to.
Otherwise I agree that 50 years is plenty. When I do something at work, no matter how great it is, I don't expect to continue getting paid for it when I am in my 80's.
You misunderstand how copyrights work. The life of a copyright is not determined by the country it was created in but differs for each country. This is why you can get Orwell's 1984, Animal Farm, etc. in Australia but not in the US.
Are you saying that Homosexuality is a sin? In that case we can end the debate right there. If it is a sin then it is a sin created by God. What he meant means nothing. When you have a position of power such as his even suggesting something like that is dangerous. You never know what his followers will think.
I am not sure how you can say that christian religion is not allowed in schools. Last time I checked you still get Christmas off but not everybody gets off Rosh Hoshana, Yom Kippur, or Ramadan. And I have never heard of a teacher taking action against a child praying in his head. I think it is great that schools teach Islam and wish they tought more world religions. It very important that children realize that there is no one "correct" religion and that there is a choice. It is also important to understand different culture and not despise what you don't understand.
Finally, religion is not being pushed out of anywhere. The display of individual religions without giving fair representation to other religions is being removed from government buildings. While this country may have been founded by Christians there is a much greater diversity here now and the founding fathers believed it very important that no religion should be the national religion (as the Church of England was).
You know I thought the same thing about cell phones until I got my Samsung. The color screen is much easier to read in bright sunlight as well as pitch black night. The battery life obviously suffers but I have a charger at work and at home.
The iRiver says it has a 16 hour life so figure 10-12 hours realistically. Unless you are flying half-way across the globe I think that should get you to and from work.
A zealot would be somebody who blames their problems on somebody else's religion or lack of religion which is what this girl did. If you read what she posted of that essay I think even the most religous among us would still be generous giving her a D.
And the right likes to call the left communists. Calling them zealots wouldn't make much sense.
And I had nothing to do with making this girl think there are anti-christian views in this country. She gets plenty of that from the preachers. If you don't think that zealotry is very real in this country then I suggest you listen to Jimmy Swaggarts opinion of gay marraige. He said something along the lines that if a gay man looked at him wrong he would kill him and the crowd cheered. That is zealotry plain and simple.
Finally, I don't know how you can say religion is being removed from the public eye. You obviously don't watch much TV or visit the bookstore. Religion has had a huge resurgence since September 11. You can't watch a Yankees game without hearing God bless America. In my opinion America the Beautiful would be much more appropriate.
You left the best part out. She was upset because she got a D on the paper (from which that came) and she thinks she is a good writer. Her explanation, of course, is not that she has a greatly inflated opinion of her abilities but that he teacher is anti-Christian.
We laugh about this but the really scary part is that there are a lot of people who think like her. People hate Bush so much because of the war but I am much more scared about his connection to the zealots of the religous right. The war in Iraq will end someday but these zealots will continue to try to take control of this country.
Yeah. That sample size will give me an accuracy with +-14%. Where am I asking the question? What age group is responding? If it is mostly people under 30 then I agree with you.
Then again I bet if you ask 50 people on the street who the secretary of state is in the US you would probably have about the same success.
And whether people know the name or not does not affect the financial status of the company (which is the real point of the grandparent's post).
Why is it that people think that because they haven't heard of something that is isn't very well known? Did you ever stop to think that you don't know everything?
Widget could sue Widget! if Widget! went into the music business. The size of a company does not matter when it comes to Trademarks. You could be a mom and pop company in bumblefuck Kansas.
If it took fraud to be trademark infringement then we wouldn't need trademark laws. There are already fraud laws. And those Gucci bags are illegal. You don't have to be actively trying to deceive somebody in order for their to be possible confusion.