And who precisely was it who placed an open cup of coffee between her legs in a moving vehicle? Could she have been more stupid? Why is it that I continually have to pay for your stupidity? Products liability litigation does not lead to safer products, only more expensive ones.
I think this is a bad idea as much as anyone, but let's not go overboard. "Affiliate" has a very specific meaning in the legal world. Two entities are affiliates only if, directly or indirectly, (a) either one has the power to control the other, or (b) a third party controls or has the power to control both.
In practical terms, this generally means companies within the same corporate family. So, Verizon could sell my records to Verizon Wireless. Unless the CIA becomes a subsidiary of Verizon (or a large shareholder with voting shares, I suppose), it's not an affiliate. It's a far narrower term for lawyers than for the unwashed masses.
So I'm thinking of a whole new product - take the cellphone optical mouse, add the mousephone and the Cymouse - "Cymouse knows the exact location of your head in a 3-D space. In the Cymouse world, we call this the 'direction'" - and you get a input device that uses lasers to create external cavities, monitors the position of your head, and lets you use the phone and get on the INTERNET at the same time! I'll be rich, damn you!
Of course,you could always just hit reload in your browser to get the adserver to serve you a new ad. Then agin, how many variations on the Sourceforge ad do you really need to see?
It's more like, customers steal the service (allegedly), call in the FBI, seize the computers, then publish a big ol' article in the newspaper that the ISP owns, as a warning to other wannabe service-takers. That's right, the ISP and the Toledo Blade are both owned by the same company. Safer with TW, unless they print an article in Time, People or Entertainment Weekly. Or maybe hook you up with Larry King.
...btw... I've heard Nautilus is much improved for 2.0....
It's improved and faster, and I don't like it. I used to be able to get a cuppajoe while it started, and now it starts too fast. At least OOo is still slow-as-molasses.
Re:the story came from...
on
Is Linux Dead?
·
· Score: 1
First, you obviously didn't read the article, or you wouldn't say something so obviously stupid (this being/., even that's probably wrong). Of the media conglomerates, MSNBC is more even-handed than most. They've recently praised a Linux distro (Lycoris) and 2 non-MS office suites (Abiword and openoffice.org). They've been critical of MS and haven't pulled any punches when it comes to MS security issues. Compare this to CNN shilling Netscape and AOL or ABC/ESPN/Disney pushing their "converged" properties. I'd trust an MSNBC story about Linux a hell of a lot more than a CNN story about IE. Or the NYT or Washington Post covering the entities that they own.
Exactly. However, like I said in a previous comment, IAAL, and in my experience the only way the RBOCs cooperated with the CLECs was to line the pockets of the CLECs' lawyers. Not that I'm complaining, personally (although I don't do that anymore - the Telecom Act just got to be too damn frustrating).
The asbestos lawsuits have caused me personal harm. Peter Angelos made millions from the asbestos cases, which enabled him to buy the Baltimore Orioles. Because he thinks it might cause him to lose a couple of bucks, he is the sole reason the Expos haven't been allowed to move to my hometown.
These cases are always handled on a contingency fee basis, so the lawyer gets a percentage of the award, so the second example is right. In consumer class actions, that's often why you see settlements for coupons. The settlement provides the lawyer cash, but all the plaintiffs get are coupons that the defendant knows will probably never be redeemed.
Damn straight. In the late 90s, I was a telecom attorney and represented one of the long distance carriers trying to provide local service under the 1996 Telecommunications Act competing against the old Bell Atlantic. At the time, these were deep pockets (pretty shallow these days, huh Bernie?), but Bell Atlantic fought absolutely everything to the death. In the end, it just wasn't worth it, and prospects for local competition died a painful death. I can't imagine a class action for consumers handled on contingency as a successful endeavor. An antitrust case by state AGs maybe, but not by consumers.
Do you honestly believe that P2P networks cause people to buy more music? Or are you merely arguing that it's possible?
Yes, I believe that most p2p users buy more music after using the network than they would have in the absence of the network. Some don't, of course, but many do. Anecdotal evidence seems to support this - CD sales increased when Napster was alive and kicking, and only started to decrease after Napster was killed. Some of this is due to changes in the economy, but not all. My (unsupported) theory? The p2p=CD sales connection is strongest in the casual user, who downloads occasionally. Napster was easier to use, so it had more causal users. Me, for instance. My Napsterized MP3 collection numbers in the dozens, not thousands, but 90% led to the purchase of a CD. Kazaa et al are a pain in the ass. I don't use them, and I rarely buy CDs.
I have a whole lot of data about the way humans act. They tend to not pay for something when they can get it for free unless they have a reasonable chance of getting caught and getting "in trouble".
No, you are wrong. Humans pay for something when the value of an item exceeds its cost. All items have costs, even "free" ones. Take a downloaded MP3 burned to a CD. It has opportunity costs, since it takes me time to (a) find (b) download and (c) burn. It also has "will I get busted?" costs. It has loss of quality costs. How you value these things is a personal matter. In my case, the costs of making my own CDs from "free" p2p networks>regular RIAA-supplied CDs. The costs would still be higher if I had a letter signed in blood by Hillary Rosen that the RIAA would leave me alone. YMMV. It is way too simplistic to say people won't pay for "free" stuff if they don't think they'll get busted.
Re:Sometimes smaller is not better
on
Sony PCG-U1
·
· Score: 1
Right. So I spend 2 grand on the WIA and another 200 bucks on the input device and I'm left with what? A gizmo out of a bad sci-fi flick that has 32 MB of RAM and runs CE 3.0. Probably OK for reading/. but not much use for the sort of actually useful applications that I can run on my laptop.
Slashdot Mirror
And who precisely was it who placed an open cup of coffee between her legs in a moving vehicle? Could she have been more stupid? Why is it that I continually have to pay for your stupidity? Products liability litigation does not lead to safer products, only more expensive ones.
In practical terms, this generally means companies within the same corporate family. So, Verizon could sell my records to Verizon Wireless. Unless the CIA becomes a subsidiary of Verizon (or a large shareholder with voting shares, I suppose), it's not an affiliate. It's a far narrower term for lawyers than for the unwashed masses.
But would you want to add a laser that creates cavities to your ToothPhone?
So I'm thinking of a whole new product - take the cellphone optical mouse, add the mousephone and the Cymouse - "Cymouse knows the exact location of your head in a 3-D space. In the Cymouse world, we call this the 'direction'" - and you get a input device that uses lasers to create external cavities, monitors the position of your head, and lets you use the phone and get on the INTERNET at the same time! I'll be rich, damn you!
Of course,you could always just hit reload in your browser to get the adserver to serve you a new ad. Then agin, how many variations on the Sourceforge ad do you really need to see?
It's more like, customers steal the service (allegedly), call in the FBI, seize the computers, then publish a big ol' article in the newspaper that the ISP owns, as a warning to other wannabe service-takers. That's right, the ISP and the Toledo Blade are both owned by the same company. Safer with TW, unless they print an article in Time, People or Entertainment Weekly. Or maybe hook you up with Larry King.
It's improved and faster, and I don't like it. I used to be able to get a cuppa joe while it started, and now it starts too fast. At least OOo is still slow-as-molasses.
First, you obviously didn't read the article, or you wouldn't say something so obviously stupid (this being /., even that's probably wrong). Of the media conglomerates, MSNBC is more even-handed than most. They've recently praised a Linux distro (Lycoris) and 2 non-MS office suites (Abiword and openoffice.org). They've been critical of MS and haven't pulled any punches when it comes to MS security issues. Compare this to CNN shilling Netscape and AOL or ABC/ESPN/Disney pushing their "converged" properties. I'd trust an MSNBC story about Linux a hell of a lot more than a CNN story about IE. Or the NYT or Washington Post covering the entities that they own.
Can you imagine what a pain in the ass it would be to play a non-CGI Ent? MAKEUP!
Exactly. However, like I said in a previous comment, IAAL, and in my experience the only way the RBOCs cooperated with the CLECs was to line the pockets of the CLECs' lawyers. Not that I'm complaining, personally (although I don't do that anymore - the Telecom Act just got to be too damn frustrating).
The asbestos lawsuits have caused me personal harm. Peter Angelos made millions from the asbestos cases, which enabled him to buy the Baltimore Orioles. Because he thinks it might cause him to lose a couple of bucks, he is the sole reason the Expos haven't been allowed to move to my hometown.
These cases are always handled on a contingency fee basis, so the lawyer gets a percentage of the award, so the second example is right. In consumer class actions, that's often why you see settlements for coupons. The settlement provides the lawyer cash, but all the plaintiffs get are coupons that the defendant knows will probably never be redeemed.
Damn straight. In the late 90s, I was a telecom attorney and represented one of the long distance carriers trying to provide local service under the 1996 Telecommunications Act competing against the old Bell Atlantic. At the time, these were deep pockets (pretty shallow these days, huh Bernie?), but Bell Atlantic fought absolutely everything to the death. In the end, it just wasn't worth it, and prospects for local competition died a painful death. I can't imagine a class action for consumers handled on contingency as a successful endeavor. An antitrust case by state AGs maybe, but not by consumers.
Of course, we need to convert 120,000 km to Miami-LA trips, so thats 27.95 MiaLAs.
The speed should be converted into either the speed of light or, among geeks, the air speed velocity of a swallow.
So, in addition to being ironic in the dictionary sense, it is ironic in the Alanis Morissette sense?
Do you honestly believe that P2P networks cause people to buy more music? Or are you merely arguing that it's possible?
Yes, I believe that most p2p users buy more music after using the network than they would have in the absence of the network. Some don't, of course, but many do. Anecdotal evidence seems to support this - CD sales increased when Napster was alive and kicking, and only started to decrease after Napster was killed. Some of this is due to changes in the economy, but not all. My (unsupported) theory? The p2p=CD sales connection is strongest in the casual user, who downloads occasionally. Napster was easier to use, so it had more causal users. Me, for instance. My Napsterized MP3 collection numbers in the dozens, not thousands, but 90% led to the purchase of a CD. Kazaa et al are a pain in the ass. I don't use them, and I rarely buy CDs.
I have a whole lot of data about the way humans act. They tend to not pay for something when they can get it for free unless they have a reasonable chance of getting caught and getting "in trouble".
No, you are wrong. Humans pay for something when the value of an item exceeds its cost. All items have costs, even "free" ones. Take a downloaded MP3 burned to a CD. It has opportunity costs, since it takes me time to (a) find (b) download and (c) burn. It also has "will I get busted?" costs. It has loss of quality costs. How you value these things is a personal matter. In my case, the costs of making my own CDs from "free" p2p networks>regular RIAA-supplied CDs. The costs would still be higher if I had a letter signed in blood by Hillary Rosen that the RIAA would leave me alone. YMMV. It is way too simplistic to say people won't pay for "free" stuff if they don't think they'll get busted.
Right. So I spend 2 grand on the WIA and another 200 bucks on the input device and I'm left with what? A gizmo out of a bad sci-fi flick that has 32 MB of RAM and runs CE 3.0. Probably OK for reading /. but not much use for the sort of actually useful applications that I can run on my laptop.