Considering that the old versions of ICQ are ten times better than the bloated adware that now passes for an ICQ client, I'd say quite a few. I think AOL's been deliberately trying to kill ICQ, anyway --- why would they want to keep two IM systems operating at once?
"I haven't used Netscape since version 5 because I don't like the way it works"
I don't much like the way Netscape 5 works, either, but that's probably just because it doesn't exist. (Netscape skipped the 5.x versions completely and went from 4.7x to 6.0.)
What about those little "tape-in" antennas they're advertising on TV all the time these days? Do they do anything at all? What I see in the ads makes me highly doubt they change anything. It seems like some good old-fashioned snake oil to me --- something for the suckers.
Anybody know the physics (or lack thereof) behind these things?
As long as we have the option to not use the filter if we don't want it, I think it's probably a good thing. Anything that has the potential to increase the relevance of my search results is good.
Of course, it could also be used to keep you from seeing things they don't want you to see. Then again, most technologies carry that risk, I think.
It was posted today; I saw it on their home page earlier, and was actually going to sumbit it to/. except that I'd already seen a copyright-related article on here today.
Actually, from what I've read of comments here, I'd say that the Slashdot community tends to have more of a libertarian bent than anything, with perhaps a liberal bent in some issues.
Really, it's very difficult to pigeonhole people into just "liberal" and "conservative" camps. People's ideologies just aren't that easy to label because each person brings different beliefs and philosophies to the table. Personally, I find myself siding with the Republicans on most issues, but I also nearly always disagree with them on "big business" issues. If I had to categorize myself, I'd have to say I'm a right-leaning libertarian.
"Studies have suggested (I wish I could find a reference now;-) that with the first listen to a song, a person may not like it - but with each subsequent listening, the chance that they will like the song actually goes up."
You need a study to figure that out? My own listening habits tend to reflect that principle very closely. Heck, I just bought the latest Jars of Clay CD Tuesday and didn't like it very much the first two or three times through, but it's really starting to grow on me now. Same thing's happened for an awful lot of music I've heard. Heck yeah the industry exploits that. They'd have to be complete idiots not to (although a good argument could be made that they are, in fact, complete idiots anyway...)
About the breakage charges... I think a good way to settle it would be to take 15% percent of the CDs they press and break them over the heads of the record executives. That'll justify the 15% fast enough.
There's a good article on Fox News about this whole copyright flap. It's a pretty decent summary of the political ramifications of the CD copy-protection debate. It can only help our cause to see these things debated more in the mainstream press. The average customer cares about himself and is likely to oppose measures he perceives as putting him at a disadvantage. Certainly, if people were more aware of what the MPAA/RIAA/etc are up to, they'd be more inclined to make a major issue of it, and I really doubt public opinion would favor the RIAA.
I'm sure the parent comment was made in jest, but I recall reading an article a while back in which somebody did a feasibility study on Noah's Ark and determined that there would actually be room to spare on it.
The trick is that you wouldn't have to worry about sea creatures or most insects, which could probably survive on their own, and there are really very few very large animals that would require lots of room.
Regardless of whether or not one is of a religious persuasion or believes in the Ark story, it was an interesting read. *shrug*
Part of the problem is determining exactly what constitutes a "species". Exactly where do the boundaries between different forms of life lie? That question is not nearly as easy to answer as it might appear at first glance, and it's easy to mislabel some creatures.
If you were to see, for the first time, a chihuahua and a St. Bernard next to each other, you might be tempted to label them as separate species at first, when in reality they're just different breeds of the same species. It would take a lot of study to determine how closely they were actually related.
If you draw the lines differently, you could probably get some extremely wild variations in the count for the number of species on Earth.
It's 25% of the 50% figure, which translates to 12.5% of the whole (.25 *.50 =.125). 53-13 = 40. When it says a 25% decline, it's relating the new number (40%) to the original (50%) rather than to 100%.
"Software makers are slowly figuring out how to make it more attractive for students to buy their products than to steal them"
I'm surprised they haven't been doing this earlier. It doesn't take rocket science to figure out that you're more likely to make money by giving people something they want than by trying to take things away from them.
One would think that business would understand that if you want people to buy your products as opposed to copy them, you need to make them want to buy your products. You have to offer something that makes people feel they get something more for spending their money than they would from simply copying the products.
All this copy-protection and legislation is the wrong approach. If they want to fight it, they should fight it by offering things you can't get from copying so people will want to buy the "official" product. Cracking down on people and introducing copy protection schemes that hinder their ability to make legal copies (i.e. backups and similar things) just makes them resent you.
This new strategy has the advantage of encouraging purchases and gaining support from the user community, so I think it's probably a good thing.
If I understand correctly, that would be because, when you're downloading something, you're connected directly to the other computer(s). Anything going on on the FastTrack network is irrelevant to that, since the network isn't involved in the actial download. It's just used to find the computers for you to connect to. So if KaZaa managed to block your access to the FastTrack network, it won't affect your downloads that are already in progress.
If I'd caught the kid doing that, I'd probably have offered to stand guard for him while he finished the job. Maybe even bought him a mouse pad with a Jolly Roger on it.
Actually my mother (who is VERY computer-naive) would probably call me and say "Can you install Windows on here?" At that point, I'd dig out my old Windows98 install CD, go to her house, and put Windows on her computer.
Against MS's EULA? You bet, but I don't consider EULAs to be valid anyway. I have a Win98 disk which I actually bought. If I should choose to install it on two of my own computers (or in this case, the computer of an immediate family member), MS shouldn't be able to stop me. I bought that CD, and as long as I'm doing it privately, I'll use it however I darn well please.
I think a lot of folks would do the same: install an older copy of Windows or ask the local alpha geek to install it for them.
You're right about that, but it's a little bit different when the region is a state of the United States, and when it's a sovereign nation like Germany. Commerce between states is a little easier than commerce between the U.S. and Germany.
I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it's not particularly feasible and not something they probably want to pursue.
Yeah, your points are good. I wasn't really thinking only about the secession issue, though. I was thinking more along the lines that the war, and the issues surrounding it, set a precedent that the federal government can pretty much overrule the states at its leisure. True, secession was a big part of setting that precedent (for whatever reasons), but regardless of the justifications (or lack thereof) for secession, the precedent was set.
Well, I assembled my PCs from parts, too, and one of them DOES have a copy of Win98 on it, which I bought legally several years ago. And any computer I get in the foreseeable future will have that same copy of Win98 on it. I have absolutely no intention of upgrading to XP or any other MS OS.
I think a lot of other people would do the same thing if they already have, say, a Win98 install disk lying around somewhere. If they understood that they actually ARE paying for Windows when they buy their new system, they might be a lot more open to the idea of saving some money by installing an earlier copy of Windows which they already own. Most of the money MS makes off of XP is going to be from OEM sales. There aren't all that many people who'll pay to upgrade.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering that the old versions of ICQ are ten times better than the bloated adware that now passes for an ICQ client, I'd say quite a few. I think AOL's been deliberately trying to kill ICQ, anyway --- why would they want to keep two IM systems operating at once?
I don't much like the way Netscape 5 works, either, but that's probably just because it doesn't exist. (Netscape skipped the 5.x versions completely and went from 4.7x to 6.0.)
Yup. Gadgets like that really prove that Barnum was right.
That's what I thought. I couldn't think of ANY physical reason why those things should work.
Anybody know the physics (or lack thereof) behind these things?
Of course, it could also be used to keep you from seeing things they don't want you to see. Then again, most technologies carry that risk, I think.
It was posted today; I saw it on their home page earlier, and was actually going to sumbit it to /. except that I'd already seen a copyright-related article on here today.
Help! The world is ending!!
Really, it's very difficult to pigeonhole people into just "liberal" and "conservative" camps. People's ideologies just aren't that easy to label because each person brings different beliefs and philosophies to the table. Personally, I find myself siding with the Republicans on most issues, but I also nearly always disagree with them on "big business" issues. If I had to categorize myself, I'd have to say I'm a right-leaning libertarian.
You need a study to figure that out? My own listening habits tend to reflect that principle very closely. Heck, I just bought the latest Jars of Clay CD Tuesday and didn't like it very much the first two or three times through, but it's really starting to grow on me now. Same thing's happened for an awful lot of music I've heard. Heck yeah the industry exploits that. They'd have to be complete idiots not to (although a good argument could be made that they are, in fact, complete idiots anyway...)
About the breakage charges ... I think a good way to settle it would be to take 15% percent of the CDs they press and break them over the heads of the record executives. That'll justify the 15% fast enough.
Send that idea to ThinkGeek. They'll run with it!
There's a good article on Fox News about this whole copyright flap. It's a pretty decent summary of the political ramifications of the CD copy-protection debate. It can only help our cause to see these things debated more in the mainstream press. The average customer cares about himself and is likely to oppose measures he perceives as putting him at a disadvantage. Certainly, if people were more aware of what the MPAA/RIAA/etc are up to, they'd be more inclined to make a major issue of it, and I really doubt public opinion would favor the RIAA.
We don't have to imagine that. George Lucas already did it for us.
I've read excerpts from it. They're actually what I had in mind when I posted.
The trick is that you wouldn't have to worry about sea creatures or most insects, which could probably survive on their own, and there are really very few very large animals that would require lots of room.
Regardless of whether or not one is of a religious persuasion or believes in the Ark story, it was an interesting read. *shrug*
If you were to see, for the first time, a chihuahua and a St. Bernard next to each other, you might be tempted to label them as separate species at first, when in reality they're just different breeds of the same species. It would take a lot of study to determine how closely they were actually related.
If you draw the lines differently, you could probably get some extremely wild variations in the count for the number of species on Earth.
It's 25% of the 50% figure, which translates to 12.5% of the whole (.25 * .50 = .125). 53-13 = 40. When it says a 25% decline, it's relating the new number (40%) to the original (50%) rather than to 100%.
I'm surprised they haven't been doing this earlier. It doesn't take rocket science to figure out that you're more likely to make money by giving people something they want than by trying to take things away from them.
One would think that business would understand that if you want people to buy your products as opposed to copy them, you need to make them want to buy your products. You have to offer something that makes people feel they get something more for spending their money than they would from simply copying the products.
All this copy-protection and legislation is the wrong approach. If they want to fight it, they should fight it by offering things you can't get from copying so people will want to buy the "official" product. Cracking down on people and introducing copy protection schemes that hinder their ability to make legal copies (i.e. backups and similar things) just makes them resent you.
This new strategy has the advantage of encouraging purchases and gaining support from the user community, so I think it's probably a good thing.
If I understand correctly, that would be because, when you're downloading something, you're connected directly to the other computer(s). Anything going on on the FastTrack network is irrelevant to that, since the network isn't involved in the actial download. It's just used to find the computers for you to connect to. So if KaZaa managed to block your access to the FastTrack network, it won't affect your downloads that are already in progress.
If I'd caught the kid doing that, I'd probably have offered to stand guard for him while he finished the job. Maybe even bought him a mouse pad with a Jolly Roger on it.
Man, there are a lot of big differences in the "revised" settlement. They've gone from a slap on the wrist to a slap on the wrist with a wet noodle.
Against MS's EULA? You bet, but I don't consider EULAs to be valid anyway. I have a Win98 disk which I actually bought. If I should choose to install it on two of my own computers (or in this case, the computer of an immediate family member), MS shouldn't be able to stop me. I bought that CD, and as long as I'm doing it privately, I'll use it however I darn well please.
I think a lot of folks would do the same: install an older copy of Windows or ask the local alpha geek to install it for them.
I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it's not particularly feasible and not something they probably want to pursue.
Yeah, your points are good. I wasn't really thinking only about the secession issue, though. I was thinking more along the lines that the war, and the issues surrounding it, set a precedent that the federal government can pretty much overrule the states at its leisure. True, secession was a big part of setting that precedent (for whatever reasons), but regardless of the justifications (or lack thereof) for secession, the precedent was set.
I think a lot of other people would do the same thing if they already have, say, a Win98 install disk lying around somewhere. If they understood that they actually ARE paying for Windows when they buy their new system, they might be a lot more open to the idea of saving some money by installing an earlier copy of Windows which they already own. Most of the money MS makes off of XP is going to be from OEM sales. There aren't all that many people who'll pay to upgrade.