How pathetic is it that the first thought the original poster had was what kind of environmental impact this would have. He assumes they were not recycled (I scanned the article, didn't see that). This is non-impacting for me. I suffer from OCD, so frankly using pay phones were always a source of anxiety.
>
I think MS needs Mono to legitimize itself in the standards department. I also feel that eventually, they (MS) will pull the patent and copyright reigns to curb the extent to which Mono and other competing entities can compete. Look, if Miguel thinks this won't happen, he's an idiot at most and naïve at least. Someone said "there is no evidence MS will do this." I wonder how many people thought they wouldn't bastardize Java? Or give their browser away to kill Netscape? Or gobble up competing innovations just to kill them? MS is the single most destructive entity in technology today. They are not going to be happy unless they dominate. They've bought all the players they need and now they are getting patents on as many plays as they can. The rest are reduced to running single plays and offensively just cannot score. Open Source has found a way to compete via numbers. Now we're going to throw much of our team away because MS has decided to let us "borrow" some formations from their playbook? When this all goes down, I hope Miguel posts a HUGE apology on Slashdot. Frankly, anyone working on Mono is wasting valuable time, but hey it's a free country (depending on where they live). Until we're willing to take an US/Them approach we'll be pissing traces of the MS cool-aide from now on.
>
More laws that apply to you and me but not them. Anyone who thinks this law has any real merit is an idiot. This is designed to prevent gun ownership. The technology will drive the price of a gun out of reach of the average citizen. If you disagree with it, you come off as someone who wants a gun that CAN be fired by anyone. Well, what's wrong with that? As someone who saw his mother kidnapped when he was 13, I am totally against this. People who commit crimes at gun point deserve to be shot. Period. You rape, attempt to murder, hold hostages, you deserve to be shot....through the head. Frankly, those who support such legislation as this should have to sit and talk with victims of crimes or even those who's lives have been saved by guns.
>
I'm shocked that more in the Linux community don't avoid this whole thing. Why Ximian is having anything to do with this is beyond me. I think any links with MS right now is a mistake. Linux has no reason to attempt to suckle any of the many teats of MS. Compatibility is one thing, but to think the lion is just going to let you sleep beside him forever is non-sense. When he get's hungry or pissed enough, it's your ass. Mono will eventually find this out..Net is still largely only a reality in the programming world. Which means technically, it's still not a reality. It's all marketing hype at this point. Until a user can see it, and cyberly touch it it's useless. Frankly, I believe it's a means for MS to spread its code in an attempt to shackle competitors later with licensing. Unfortunately, Mono is just an example of how the bait is working.
>
I think if MS doesn't uphold this portion of the EULA then it is in fact void. The problem is finding a lawyer to fight this. What would be appropriate would be to attempt the refund, get the denial, then sell the copy outright and blatent. If any litigation comes about, then take your documentation to court. The problem is that a "little guy" can't really do this, though. This needs to be tackled at a high level (EFF?).
>
Why should I pay a tax to skip ads? This guy is nuts. What's more scary, he's successful. People like him are what's wrong with this country. Who's to say when to pay? Would every household be taxed based on a percentage because how can they truly know? Advertising is a risk. You risk that the commercial is going to be viable. You risk that those who like the commercial are even going to buy the product. Most importantly, you risk that it will even be seen. Are you going to tax me for getting up and taking a crap during the commercial? Will you take into consideration the average time it takes for the average person to crap and tax him/her by the number of commercials they would miss? Again, this guy is nuts. I lament that he shares breathing space with my people.
>
THe above responses just prove my point. Letting the locality decide is just a cop-out. If you don't let minors go into porn brick-and-mortar establishments, they shouldn't be able to access porn at the library. It's a sad f*cking state in this country when people are lobbying for children's rights to porn. You can cleavorly frame your arguments all you want, and you may not intentionly be doing so, but the result is the same.
>
I hear so much about free speech violations but very little better ideas. I'm all for this. This is not censorship in the classic sense. Why should my tax dollars be funding access to porn? That's rediculous. I'll agree that the filters need work, but someone should be taking the time to build a better filter as opposed to pissing and moaning that this is inhibiting free speech.
It's already done in the streets. Children are "filtered" from the market based on their inability to enter porn extablishments. The same should be included on the Net (and has as best they can) and definitely in the libraries.
>
Why is it followed that Global Warming is the direct result of commercial entities as opposed to natural eb and flow? I mean, if the fabled "Northern Passage" once existed, then the world must have been warmer at least once before, right? Was that once warmer globe America's fault as well?
>
This guy is a flake. He's a marketing rep, at best. He repesents the worst of computing. Remember when all the marketing reps started flooding Comdex, Net+Op, and the like? Bringing us such nuggets of joy as "solutions." You didn't write applications, or code, you were provided "solutions." The idea of having someone stream my data to me appeals to me about as much as existential meditation. We're all going to set our "devices" up on the mountain and through telepathy only OUR data will be pumped down to it. Oh and the device won't matter nor will it's code-base. I thought these people died with the dot-com bust? How does this dribble get mistaken for a column!?
>
With all the wasted CPU cycles gumming up the environment this had to happen. We only have so many CPU cycles and with the present administration sqandering them I'm glad to see IBM taking the lead as a big corporation in helping save the cycles! Finally all the donations to Greenpeace are paying off!
It's my planet too!
>
All good points above (except for the "alot" comment. Slashdot is hardly a literary pinnacle so back off ). My point is, Toyota will be taking themselves from holding a decent market share to focusing on a niche market. Can you get decent driving power from a hybrid, yes. Mainly for the city, though. For the 'burbs you need good excelleration I feel. Another point is that hybrids shouldn't be considered the end-all. Someone's already mentioned hydrogen fuel cells. We could also be burning hybrid fuels instead like alcohol from corn. This would put farmers to work and help the environment. I personally don't want to give up the power. I like V8's and V6's and frankly prefer them, though I own a 4 cyl. too. Everyone is different. I will say I am glad no one in this thread has taken the "we should all own hybrids or we're evil people" approach. Good thread.
>
for this to become a reality. That 2012 deadline will likely be pushed back. Until they can get power output up Americans just aren't going to buy these things in droves. Then again, maybe Toyota is just tired of making all that money.
>
Cool! Caldera v.4! or is it RansomLovix v.1?
"In keeping with the Ransom Love tradition, your ISP will automatically bill you for each attempted and completed ISO download."
>
While the client license is abit different in that it uses simultaneous logins as the basis, the initial cost is not much lower for the server OS. The original article I saw a week ago gave a $1295 price tag. A base Exchange 5.5 price tag runs about $1495. Based on that, and the fact that there is still a price-per-client license (albeit different in structure), I don't see this as a MS killer unless you factor in that most Exchange sites are being hit with upgrades to Exchange2K.
>
Like we didn't see this coming? The market for pay radio has got to be slim. Who wants to pay a monthly fee for radio sat or no sat? This would be a great service if it weren't for one small, tiny miscalculation: THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF FREE RADIO STATIONS ALL OVER AMERICA! Hey, when interplanetary travel becomes commonplace, then this shit will be the bomb! Never underestimate a venture capitalist with more money than brains. Hey, I realize some of you subscribe and love it. That's great. Most of us just won't buy it. The upfront investment coupled with the subscription just make it impractical.
>
The "Big Three" do this all the time. Remember "f*ck you" becoming "thank you" on The Breakfast Club? If it can be "Editted for Television" why can't it be done so privately? Shit on the customer...they're hooked anyway.
>
Exactly. Until HDTV boxes are cheaper than a new carburetor for a '72 Ford Pickup, the rednecks of the land aren't going to buy them. Let's face it, that's who Bud and Miller are targetting all those beer adds to anyway. Take out that demographic, lose 99% of Wal-Mart's target audience with it, and voila the FCC will extend or repeal that deadline quicker than you can say "city-folk!"
>
Did anyone see Jim McKay's "They don't want revenge, they wanna be loved" speech during Monday Night Football? Peter Jennings must have written this for him. I for one want revenge. It's the responsibility of the government to protect and distribute justice. They should pay with their lives and all who chanted in support of them should pay with them. They stand united, so should we. ABC TV would have us believe that we should "understand" them better to come to reason. They hate us, they attacked us, they should die.
>
Look, Caldera did much the same thing. Now RH is going to do this? I have no problem with them offering subscription services per se' as long as I get a shot at the desktop without support for myself. I hope this doesn't turn into a "corp user only" thing like Open Linux became in practice. Caldera went gunning for the enterprise at the expense of the average user. If Red Hat does this, they'll shoot themselves in the foot too.
>
Both Evolution and Creationism are systems of faith. The word "faith" has been distorted in our language. What it meant in the original text of biblical times, and in other cultures, is simply belief based on discernment. It can be as equally based on evidence as science. Infact, strictly speaking it should be. Anyone who has "blind faith" is neither being true to Christianity, science, nor himself. We would have no respect for a scientist who has blind faith and we shouldn't respect any religious person with it either. It is saying "I have no evidence, I just think it's true." There is alot of evidence to support Creationism, and a good portion of it is scientific. There is also evidence to support Evolution, either on a macro or micro scale. The evidence must be examined and decisions to believe one or the other or some form of both lie in the hands of the reader, or researcher. Being a Creationist doesn't negate being scientific, but having blind faith does. Whatever you believe, believe it because in your determination the preponderance of the evidence supports it. That, is your faith.
>
Slashdot Mirror
How pathetic is it that the first thought the original poster had was what kind of environmental impact this would have. He assumes they were not recycled (I scanned the article, didn't see that). This is non-impacting for me. I suffer from OCD, so frankly using pay phones were always a source of anxiety. >
I think MS needs Mono to legitimize itself in the standards department. I also feel that eventually, they (MS) will pull the patent and copyright reigns to curb the extent to which Mono and other competing entities can compete. Look, if Miguel thinks this won't happen, he's an idiot at most and naïve at least. Someone said "there is no evidence MS will do this." I wonder how many people thought they wouldn't bastardize Java? Or give their browser away to kill Netscape? Or gobble up competing innovations just to kill them? MS is the single most destructive entity in technology today. They are not going to be happy unless they dominate. They've bought all the players they need and now they are getting patents on as many plays as they can. The rest are reduced to running single plays and offensively just cannot score. Open Source has found a way to compete via numbers. Now we're going to throw much of our team away because MS has decided to let us "borrow" some formations from their playbook? When this all goes down, I hope Miguel posts a HUGE apology on Slashdot. Frankly, anyone working on Mono is wasting valuable time, but hey it's a free country (depending on where they live). Until we're willing to take an US/Them approach we'll be pissing traces of the MS cool-aide from now on. >
More laws that apply to you and me but not them. Anyone who thinks this law has any real merit is an idiot. This is designed to prevent gun ownership. The technology will drive the price of a gun out of reach of the average citizen. If you disagree with it, you come off as someone who wants a gun that CAN be fired by anyone. Well, what's wrong with that? As someone who saw his mother kidnapped when he was 13, I am totally against this. People who commit crimes at gun point deserve to be shot. Period. You rape, attempt to murder, hold hostages, you deserve to be shot....through the head. Frankly, those who support such legislation as this should have to sit and talk with victims of crimes or even those who's lives have been saved by guns. >
I'm shocked that more in the Linux community don't avoid this whole thing. Why Ximian is having anything to do with this is beyond me. I think any links with MS right now is a mistake. Linux has no reason to attempt to suckle any of the many teats of MS. Compatibility is one thing, but to think the lion is just going to let you sleep beside him forever is non-sense. When he get's hungry or pissed enough, it's your ass. Mono will eventually find this out. .Net is still largely only a reality in the programming world. Which means technically, it's still not a reality. It's all marketing hype at this point. Until a user can see it, and cyberly touch it it's useless. Frankly, I believe it's a means for MS to spread its code in an attempt to shackle competitors later with licensing. Unfortunately, Mono is just an example of how the bait is working.
>
I think if MS doesn't uphold this portion of the EULA then it is in fact void. The problem is finding a lawyer to fight this. What would be appropriate would be to attempt the refund, get the denial, then sell the copy outright and blatent. If any litigation comes about, then take your documentation to court. The problem is that a "little guy" can't really do this, though. This needs to be tackled at a high level (EFF?). >
Why should I pay a tax to skip ads? This guy is nuts. What's more scary, he's successful. People like him are what's wrong with this country. Who's to say when to pay? Would every household be taxed based on a percentage because how can they truly know? Advertising is a risk. You risk that the commercial is going to be viable. You risk that those who like the commercial are even going to buy the product. Most importantly, you risk that it will even be seen. Are you going to tax me for getting up and taking a crap during the commercial? Will you take into consideration the average time it takes for the average person to crap and tax him/her by the number of commercials they would miss? Again, this guy is nuts. I lament that he shares breathing space with my people. >
Imaging the power, Captain! Slam two overweight, in-bred rednecks in that and there will be no place for their beer, let alone their brood. >
Okay, it looks like a car with cool solar-panel center-hub knock-offs! No shocks, though. Hang on, Spaceboys! It's gonna be a bumping ride! >
The success of most of these shows is usually measured in how many t-shirts I get. >
THe above responses just prove my point. Letting the locality decide is just a cop-out. If you don't let minors go into porn brick-and-mortar establishments, they shouldn't be able to access porn at the library. It's a sad f*cking state in this country when people are lobbying for children's rights to porn. You can cleavorly frame your arguments all you want, and you may not intentionly be doing so, but the result is the same. >
I hear so much about free speech violations but very little better ideas. I'm all for this. This is not censorship in the classic sense. Why should my tax dollars be funding access to porn? That's rediculous. I'll agree that the filters need work, but someone should be taking the time to build a better filter as opposed to pissing and moaning that this is inhibiting free speech. It's already done in the streets. Children are "filtered" from the market based on their inability to enter porn extablishments. The same should be included on the Net (and has as best they can) and definitely in the libraries. >
Why is it followed that Global Warming is the direct result of commercial entities as opposed to natural eb and flow? I mean, if the fabled "Northern Passage" once existed, then the world must have been warmer at least once before, right? Was that once warmer globe America's fault as well? >
This guy is a flake. He's a marketing rep, at best. He repesents the worst of computing. Remember when all the marketing reps started flooding Comdex, Net+Op, and the like? Bringing us such nuggets of joy as "solutions." You didn't write applications, or code, you were provided "solutions." The idea of having someone stream my data to me appeals to me about as much as existential meditation. We're all going to set our "devices" up on the mountain and through telepathy only OUR data will be pumped down to it. Oh and the device won't matter nor will it's code-base. I thought these people died with the dot-com bust? How does this dribble get mistaken for a column!? >
With all the wasted CPU cycles gumming up the environment this had to happen. We only have so many CPU cycles and with the present administration sqandering them I'm glad to see IBM taking the lead as a big corporation in helping save the cycles! Finally all the donations to Greenpeace are paying off! It's my planet too! >
All good points above (except for the "alot" comment. Slashdot is hardly a literary pinnacle so back off ). My point is, Toyota will be taking themselves from holding a decent market share to focusing on a niche market. Can you get decent driving power from a hybrid, yes. Mainly for the city, though. For the 'burbs you need good excelleration I feel. Another point is that hybrids shouldn't be considered the end-all. Someone's already mentioned hydrogen fuel cells. We could also be burning hybrid fuels instead like alcohol from corn. This would put farmers to work and help the environment. I personally don't want to give up the power. I like V8's and V6's and frankly prefer them, though I own a 4 cyl. too. Everyone is different. I will say I am glad no one in this thread has taken the "we should all own hybrids or we're evil people" approach. Good thread. >
for this to become a reality. That 2012 deadline will likely be pushed back. Until they can get power output up Americans just aren't going to buy these things in droves. Then again, maybe Toyota is just tired of making all that money. >
Cool! Caldera v.4! or is it RansomLovix v.1? "In keeping with the Ransom Love tradition, your ISP will automatically bill you for each attempted and completed ISO download." >
They were what many Rap artists are today: talentless yet managing to be passed off as art. >
While the client license is abit different in that it uses simultaneous logins as the basis, the initial cost is not much lower for the server OS. The original article I saw a week ago gave a $1295 price tag. A base Exchange 5.5 price tag runs about $1495. Based on that, and the fact that there is still a price-per-client license (albeit different in structure), I don't see this as a MS killer unless you factor in that most Exchange sites are being hit with upgrades to Exchange2K. >
Like we didn't see this coming? The market for pay radio has got to be slim. Who wants to pay a monthly fee for radio sat or no sat? This would be a great service if it weren't for one small, tiny miscalculation: THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF FREE RADIO STATIONS ALL OVER AMERICA! Hey, when interplanetary travel becomes commonplace, then this shit will be the bomb! Never underestimate a venture capitalist with more money than brains. Hey, I realize some of you subscribe and love it. That's great. Most of us just won't buy it. The upfront investment coupled with the subscription just make it impractical. >
The "Big Three" do this all the time. Remember "f*ck you" becoming "thank you" on The Breakfast Club? If it can be "Editted for Television" why can't it be done so privately? Shit on the customer...they're hooked anyway. >
Exactly. Until HDTV boxes are cheaper than a new carburetor for a '72 Ford Pickup, the rednecks of the land aren't going to buy them. Let's face it, that's who Bud and Miller are targetting all those beer adds to anyway. Take out that demographic, lose 99% of Wal-Mart's target audience with it, and voila the FCC will extend or repeal that deadline quicker than you can say "city-folk!" >
Did anyone see Jim McKay's "They don't want revenge, they wanna be loved" speech during Monday Night Football? Peter Jennings must have written this for him. I for one want revenge. It's the responsibility of the government to protect and distribute justice. They should pay with their lives and all who chanted in support of them should pay with them. They stand united, so should we. ABC TV would have us believe that we should "understand" them better to come to reason. They hate us, they attacked us, they should die. >
Look, Caldera did much the same thing. Now RH is going to do this? I have no problem with them offering subscription services per se' as long as I get a shot at the desktop without support for myself. I hope this doesn't turn into a "corp user only" thing like Open Linux became in practice. Caldera went gunning for the enterprise at the expense of the average user. If Red Hat does this, they'll shoot themselves in the foot too. >
Both Evolution and Creationism are systems of faith. The word "faith" has been distorted in our language. What it meant in the original text of biblical times, and in other cultures, is simply belief based on discernment. It can be as equally based on evidence as science. Infact, strictly speaking it should be. Anyone who has "blind faith" is neither being true to Christianity, science, nor himself. We would have no respect for a scientist who has blind faith and we shouldn't respect any religious person with it either. It is saying "I have no evidence, I just think it's true." There is alot of evidence to support Creationism, and a good portion of it is scientific. There is also evidence to support Evolution, either on a macro or micro scale. The evidence must be examined and decisions to believe one or the other or some form of both lie in the hands of the reader, or researcher. Being a Creationist doesn't negate being scientific, but having blind faith does. Whatever you believe, believe it because in your determination the preponderance of the evidence supports it. That, is your faith. >