The technology is pretty sweet, but really. If you can stand, you should be walking. If you can stand but can't walk, then okay. But how much of the population fits that profile?
My first response to this news was: "assurance"? WTF? That's like, "My dear, I assure you that I will pull out in time."
But then I read the post about this action being promissory estoppel. And I am most definitely not a lawyer, but in the link provided, all the cases included "the court decided". So it is not some magical binding spell put on Microsoft. If it is in their best interest to suck portions of the community into their trap and then bring legal action later, they can. And probably will. And they have the money to buy lawyers who can find ways around their previous "assurance" and their promises.
"But if Apple dominated the OS market they could control the hardware market too. If Apple got every PC user hooked to OS X as much as every Mac fanboy, Apple could switch architectures and take the hardware market with it...."
Did I miss something? Didn't Apple switch over to Intel in 2006?
Every time I read about a CEO being paid millions, I think 'wow, there have to be lots of people out there who could do the job just as well for a lot less'. Then I read Slashdot comments and wonder if I am mistaken. A large percentage of Slashdotters seem to be of the opinion that if they were in charge of Apple, they would gleefully join in that race to the bottom that is PC manufacturing.
And they tend to forgive the fact that running Apple means there is a very long list of things they can't do either because the app exists only for Windows or because Apple doesn't approve of it which is something of a puzzle to me but I guess buying into an image calls for some sacrifice to maintain that image... rather like all the trouble women go through with their hair and make-up.
You know, the other day I heard that Macs would be using Intel processors, so you could like, you know, run a copy of Windows on it and stuff. Yeah, that day was 2006.
"He asked me not to use her name, saying she probably never again will be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause "difficulties" if she travels abroad. He never suggested to me that Wilson's wife or anybody else would be endangered. If he had, I would not have used her name."
See, this is the part I don't get. I don't style myself an intellectual pundit with my finger on the pulse of Washington, but Good God! What kind of "difficulties" does Novak think known CIA operatives are subject to in other countries? Unable to get good wifi spots? Not able to attract the attention of waiters? I'm thinking...hmmm...it'll come to me... oh yeah. The people who hate us might try to kill her and every asset she ever ran. And I don't even get paid to put in the maybe ten microseconds of logic it took to get there.
If Sam Adams was alive, he would come in the dead of night for Mr. Novak - with the Sons of Liberty, some pitch, some feathers, and a rail.
I know what you mean here, but consider that if you wanted to learn Newtonian mechanics, you would start out with a modern Physics 101 text- because it is presented to the modern sensibility. You might certainly go and read the Principia, but it would be as a novel supplement.
The rules of thumb are not inviolate. More like what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.
Although I do not adhere to it strictly (for one instance, I keep a copy of Herodotus by the hopper for intermittant rereading), I have rules of thumb that I go by when considering books worth my while:
1. Read fiction by the dead 2. Read nonfiction by the living.
Infosinger has a very good point. The Kindle and its descendants will be a lousy way to read a paper in the traditional format. The news industry has to invent a new way to present its data given the new venue that is opening up.
Kind of like when motion pictures began, the way to use that medium was not to set up a camera and record a stage play.
1. Give electronic reading devices to all your subscribers. 2. Other content producers figure out how to feed the device. 3. Subscribers start to read news on reader from alternate, free sources. 4. Subscribers cancel subscriptions. 5. What, no profit?
In a fully capitalist society, all points of Internet access would be owned or controlled by John D. Rockefeller. All the ISPs would be charging the same inflated price for the same deflated products.
You could start your own ISP, but there would be a sudden drop in all your competitors' prices to $0 until you went out of business.
I object to using the term debunk when referring to disproving a scientific hypothesis that was put forth in good faith by those willing to have it tested. The word debunk means to expose bunkum - which originally meant empty speech and which came to mean claims made by people who knew they were spewing crap.
The proposed model may turn out to exist only in the brain of a couple of overcaffeinated physicists, but it is not bunkum and cannot be debunked.
Slashdot Mirror
My friend S.A. Scoggin wrote a screenplay once about this subject:
www.whoosh.com
Geothermal technology. Green thinking. Add on 10% to asking price.
Last one there makes slightly less of a profit in the next quarter!
The technology is pretty sweet, but really. If you can stand, you should be walking. If you can stand but can't walk, then okay. But how much of the population fits that profile?
It makes me think of the humans in Wall-E.
aka the Eight-Foot Bride
Yeah, like when he was the only voice of Ren.
My first response to this news was: "assurance"? WTF? That's like, "My dear, I assure you that I will pull out in time."
But then I read the post about this action being promissory estoppel. And I am most definitely not a lawyer, but in the link provided, all the cases included "the court decided". So it is not some magical binding spell put on Microsoft. If it is in their best interest to suck portions of the community into their trap and then bring legal action later, they can. And probably will. And they have the money to buy lawyers who can find ways around their previous "assurance" and their promises.
Usually the student/teacher package is available on the honor system
Robot ferret stymied by robot Bucky Katt.
How are there even 2% that don't consider it an invasion of privacy?
They're the trolls who loudly proclaim "if you're not doing anything wrong then you have nothing to hide" regarding every privacy issue.
Senator Ensign being among them, in spirit if not in fact.
There is a roll of Clemson diplomas down in the men's room.
"But if Apple dominated the OS market they could control the hardware market too. If Apple got every PC user hooked to OS X as much as every Mac fanboy, Apple could switch architectures and take the hardware market with it...."
Did I miss something? Didn't Apple switch over to Intel in 2006?
Every time I read about a CEO being paid millions, I think 'wow, there have to be lots of people out there who could do the job just as well for a lot less'. Then I read Slashdot comments and wonder if I am mistaken. A large percentage of Slashdotters seem to be of the opinion that if they were in charge of Apple, they would gleefully join in that race to the bottom that is PC manufacturing.
And they tend to forgive the fact that running Apple means there is a very long list of things they can't do either because the app exists only for Windows or because Apple doesn't approve of it which is something of a puzzle to me but I guess buying into an image calls for some sacrifice to maintain that image... rather like all the trouble women go through with their hair and make-up.
You know, the other day I heard that Macs would be using Intel processors, so you could like, you know, run a copy of Windows on it and stuff. Yeah, that day was 2006.
One idea, based on what I have seen work abroad, is to mandate, for a limited time, a fee of $1 on all Internet connections.
It wouldn't stay limited, it wouldn't stay at $1, and we would end up having to pay extra at sites anyway.
Remember how we were paying for TV to come in to your house in a cable - so there wouldn't have to be any commercials?
I have nothing to add. I just thought my sig belonged in this thread.
Ah, money. Is there anything it can't buy?
I knew this had the ring of truth about it
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13855395/Weaseljumper-Read-Me-First/
"He asked me not to use her name, saying she probably never again will be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause "difficulties" if she travels abroad. He never suggested to me that Wilson's wife or anybody else would be endangered. If he had, I would not have used her name."
See, this is the part I don't get. I don't style myself an intellectual pundit with my finger on the pulse of Washington, but Good God! What kind of "difficulties" does Novak think known CIA operatives are subject to in other countries? Unable to get good wifi spots? Not able to attract the attention of waiters? I'm thinking...hmmm...it'll come to me... oh yeah. The people who hate us might try to kill her and every asset she ever ran. And I don't even get paid to put in the maybe ten microseconds of logic it took to get there.
If Sam Adams was alive, he would come in the dead of night for Mr. Novak - with the Sons of Liberty, some pitch, some feathers, and a rail.
I know what you mean here, but consider that if you wanted to learn Newtonian mechanics, you would start out with a modern Physics 101 text- because it is presented to the modern sensibility. You might certainly go and read the Principia, but it would be as a novel supplement.
The rules of thumb are not inviolate. More like what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.
Although I do not adhere to it strictly (for one instance, I keep a copy of Herodotus by the hopper for intermittant rereading), I have rules of thumb that I go by when considering books worth my while:
1. Read fiction by the dead
2. Read nonfiction by the living.
Infosinger has a very good point. The Kindle and its descendants will be a lousy way to read a paper in the traditional format. The news industry has to invent a new way to present its data given the new venue that is opening up.
Kind of like when motion pictures began, the way to use that medium was not to set up a camera and record a stage play.
1. Give electronic reading devices to all your subscribers.
2. Other content producers figure out how to feed the device.
3. Subscribers start to read news on reader from alternate, free sources.
4. Subscribers cancel subscriptions.
5. What, no profit?
In a fully capitalist society, all points of Internet access would be owned or controlled by John D. Rockefeller. All the ISPs would be charging the same inflated price for the same deflated products.
You could start your own ISP, but there would be a sudden drop in all your competitors' prices to $0 until you went out of business.
I object to using the term debunk when referring to disproving a scientific hypothesis that was put forth in good faith by those willing to have it tested. The word debunk means to expose bunkum - which originally meant empty speech and which came to mean claims made by people who knew they were spewing crap.
The proposed model may turn out to exist only in the brain of a couple of overcaffeinated physicists, but it is not bunkum and cannot be debunked.