As a direct result of that accident, the use of the safety system in question is now directly required and you cannot drive without one.
But there were no senate hearings, no public outcry, and it is not required by an act of Congress. And there have been a number of other racing deaths that have nothing to do with the seatbelt controversy. The point is that it is not the public that is concerned with the relative safety of space exploration.
In this case, the blame lies on those who should know better than to make idiotic statements of the sort they make.
The public has this idea that spaceflight is or should be risk-free, or at least as much as driving to work or flying commercially.
It's a combination of Congress and the media that whip up a frenzy about spaceflight dangers and accidents. The public goes to NASCAR races expecting to see a fiery death or two. It's strange that we don't have senate hearings and demands for new safety initiatives after people die while driving 500 miles at Daytona.
Something tells me that the re-entry is going to be watched by more people than any other re-entry in recent history...
Good prediction, Kreskin. That would match the most-watched shuttle launch in recent history.
*Places hand over eyes* I see the news media proclaiming protruding filler material as "dangling objects from the shuttle" and predicting dire consequences for all onboard. Oh, wait, that was CNN this morning.
A C&D would be utterly groundless. They may hate the GPL, they may have violated it for the Linux kernel, they might club baby seals, but for these apps, they aren't violating it.
So I suppose a post or three stating, "SCO claimed PETA's charges that CEO Darl McBride violated baby seals for a living were groundless," wouldn't get indexed by Google. Too bad.
of course, microsoft is perceived as the only dealer - but you must also take into account reasons why is it so. are there legacy applications ? are there compatibility issues ? or is it simply a lack of information about other dealers ?
for mentioned most people that probably would be the latter.
Agreed. If you don't know there are choices, you don't have a choice, and that's what Microsoft wants and is how it maintains unbelievable profit margins. That doesn't make its operating system worth $200.
i wouldn't say there is an extreme lack of choice - you just have to know what to choose.
For non-techies, there is no choice. Microsoft a) makes sure that Windows is the OS installed on your new computer, and b) that you are afraid to use that Linux thing if you do hear about it.
given that he does not depend on legacy apps, his needs are relatively simple - there are a lot of 'dealers' that he can go to. and that's where i'm taking him;)
Good. He's one of the lucky ones. Most Windows users don't have anyone able or willing to help them through a transition to a different OS, so they are stuck paying a ridiculous amount for a license to use a broken product.
You know im no Microsoft apologist, but it seems very odd that we bash microsoft left and right but never even mention IBM, which indeed is always number 1 every year in getting the most patents! What do we make of this bias here at slashdot?
The fact that IBM released 500-some patents to OSS might have something to do with it. How many patents has MS released to OSS?
Have you even seen a group of fans stoic during an exciting event? They're probably all screaming their heads off, and the announcer probably sounds like he's about to have a coronary.
Ever been to a chess match? (Well, the fans consider them exciting.)
The latest ruling determined that the loading of software into a machine makes it into a new machine, and thus, patentable, but it didn't go so far as to say that software, by itself, is patentable- the USPTO has held that software is primarily a series of mathematical algorithms, and as such cannot be patented.
From what I've read, it is the USPTO that allowed software patents on its own. The SCOTUS ruled that genetically-engineered organisms were patentable. Apparently, the patent office leadership thinks software is a man-made organism.
It's pretty trivial to identify when baseball is exciting:
They can stop working on that patent. Baseball stopped being exciting in 1981. Two lockouts and two other strikes in the previous ten years. A bunch of guys making more money than some small countries GDP crying and refusing to play ball. Geez, their plight tore me up as much as Bernie Ebbers' weeping at his sentencing. I haven't followed baseball since.
Microsoft doesn't exist to be nice, they exist to profit. Welcome to Capitalism.
We don't have capitalism, we have a regulated economy that seems closer to corporate welfare. Even so, as Dan Gillmore said, capitalism should be about honest competition - not a knife fight.
The current solution is to add it in small amounts at frequent intervals. The new proposal is to add an extra hour every few centuries. It is clearly a better solution. Just because the US government is proposing the changes, that doesn't make it automatically evil.
Doesn't this proposal pretty much screw up the new Holy Daylight Savings Time for about 250 years out of every 500? And as a US citizen, I can say everything supported or proposed by the government is automatically suspect with good reason. These glad-handing used-car salesmen that claim to be leaders need to get out of the time business altogether and stick with the things they know about - petty theft and bribery.
Actually Security updates are exempt! (for now anyway...)
And just how do you separate out the security updates included in a service pack? And it still doesn't explain the policy of why updates have to be done online instead of via executable program.
Not quite yet, but it does make exploration a lot easier. The water can be used to make rocket fuel, air to breathe, hydrogen or methane for fuel, irrigate crops, flush toilets and drink.
Could you please put "drink" on the list before "flush toilets"? Thanks.
Jump through hoops? I was verified in under thirty seconds with two clicks, and every download since has been simple and trouble free.
And why do you have to expose yourself on the 'net if you have a virgin Windows installation? It used to be that you could download service packs with any browser or OS, and that's a good way to do it. Using Linux, I got SP2 for my brother before MS clamped down. Now, they force you to try to update online, with a probably unprotected box.
Now they are denying updates to possibly illegal Windows boxes. Does that really serve anyone's interests? The illegal installations remain wide open and are a black eye for Microsoft as well as major problem and source of crapfloods for the rest of us. Microsoft should be focused on fixing its borked software, no matter what the heritage is. Watching a convicted monopolist trying to disclaim responsibility because it hasn't been paid for the product is a joke - but it certainly is not funny. If Microsoft isn't willing to allow security updates for all of its software, no matter where it resides, then the company should be regulated out of business as a danger to society. These so-called upgrades are patches to a defective product, not something that provides new value to the end user.
what the hell? if you use windows pay for it! it's a goddamn product not free beer.
That's got some validity, but would you pay full price for a new car that had doors that wouldn't lock, the engine stopped at random times and required a minute to restart, and whenever you stopped at a gas station, strange heavy things were loaded into the trunk and you had to take it in for service to get them out? More likely you'd be suing the manufacturer under the lemon law. Cars come with a warranty that gives rights to the buyer; Windows comes with a EULA that gives rights to the seller.
microsoft is only doing what any company would do
Most companies don't have the ability to abuse a monopolistic position, because most companies don't have a monopoly. Even Intel has been very careful to try not to cross that line, but perhaps not careful enough according to AMD. So no, Microsoft != any company. To paraphrase Dan Gillmore, American capitalism should be about honest, tough competition, not a knife fight.
If customers don't have all of that information, they can still fill out a counterfeit report and receive a copy of Windows XP Home Edition for $99 or a copy of Windows XP Professional Edition for $149, Lazar said."
So looks like even if you dealt in a shady off-the-truck operation, you would still be eliglble for OEM pricing.
Such a deal! I'm building a dual-boot box for a relative and picked up the real deal OEM Windows XP Home with COA and snazzy holograms for around $75 (with the required hardware of course - a dead 64MB SIMM at no charge). Let's face it, $100 dollars for Windows is no deal. The profit margin on the product is over 80%, while the competition's product can be had for the price of a download.
Okay, let me rephrase that: Before WallyWorld became the only retail store in half the world and the single largest source of the US trade deficit, sales clerks were taught how to spot fake currency. That was in a different age, when normal retailers made modest profits, paid employees a living wage, and couldn't afford to accept Monopoly money. I know that dates me.
Really? Is that why the presumably printed on an inkjet at home thirty dollar bill was successfully passed at Wal-Mart?
Anyone who would accept a thirty-dollar bill would probably be fooled by a counterfeit done with a crayon. Most sales clerks receive some training on spotting fakes.
What possible legal interest could Microsoft have in what you send to your printer? If they are really doing this (and I'd like to see some proof) they are way beyond looking for seafaring vagabonds raping and pillaging honest wayfarers and townsfolks. That would be more like big brother.
Slashdot Mirror
As a direct result of that accident, the use of the safety system in question is now directly required and you cannot drive without one.
But there were no senate hearings, no public outcry, and it is not required by an act of Congress. And there have been a number of other racing deaths that have nothing to do with the seatbelt controversy. The point is that it is not the public that is concerned with the relative safety of space exploration.
In this case, the blame lies on those who should know better than to make idiotic statements of the sort they make.
Indeed. :)
I agree with what you say except for:
The public has this idea that spaceflight is or should be risk-free, or at least as much as driving to work or flying commercially.
It's a combination of Congress and the media that whip up a frenzy about spaceflight dangers and accidents. The public goes to NASCAR races expecting to see a fiery death or two. It's strange that we don't have senate hearings and demands for new safety initiatives after people die while driving 500 miles at Daytona.
Something tells me that the re-entry is going to be watched by more people than any other re-entry in recent history...
Good prediction, Kreskin. That would match the most-watched shuttle launch in recent history.
*Places hand over eyes* I see the news media proclaiming protruding filler material as "dangling objects from the shuttle" and predicting dire consequences for all onboard. Oh, wait, that was CNN this morning.
Next time we do a "suckiest job" poll, we should include "Linux Engineer at SCO".
I'll bet that's one title that is not used at SCO.
A C&D would be utterly groundless. They may hate the GPL, they may have violated it for the Linux kernel, they might club baby seals, but for these apps, they aren't violating it.
So I suppose a post or three stating, "SCO claimed PETA's charges that CEO Darl McBride violated baby seals for a living were groundless," wouldn't get indexed by Google. Too bad.
of course, microsoft is perceived as the only dealer - but you must also take into account reasons why is it so. are there legacy applications ? are there compatibility issues ? or is it simply a lack of information about other dealers ? for mentioned most people that probably would be the latter.
Agreed. If you don't know there are choices, you don't have a choice, and that's what Microsoft wants and is how it maintains unbelievable profit margins. That doesn't make its operating system worth $200.
i wouldn't say there is an extreme lack of choice - you just have to know what to choose.
For non-techies, there is no choice. Microsoft a) makes sure that Windows is the OS installed on your new computer, and b) that you are afraid to use that Linux thing if you do hear about it.
given that he does not depend on legacy apps, his needs are relatively simple - there are a lot of 'dealers' that he can go to. and that's where i'm taking him ;)
Good. He's one of the lucky ones. Most Windows users don't have anyone able or willing to help them through a transition to a different OS, so they are stuck paying a ridiculous amount for a license to use a broken product.
You know im no Microsoft apologist, but it seems very odd that we bash microsoft left and right but never even mention IBM, which indeed is always number 1 every year in getting the most patents! What do we make of this bias here at slashdot?
The fact that IBM released 500-some patents to OSS might have something to do with it. How many patents has MS released to OSS?
Now where are my patent royalties?
They were given to A-Rod as part of his contract. Hey, we all have to pitch in a little.
Have you even seen a group of fans stoic during an exciting event? They're probably all screaming their heads off, and the announcer probably sounds like he's about to have a coronary.
Ever been to a chess match? (Well, the fans consider them exciting.)
The latest ruling determined that the loading of software into a machine makes it into a new machine, and thus, patentable, but it didn't go so far as to say that software, by itself, is patentable- the USPTO has held that software is primarily a series of mathematical algorithms, and as such cannot be patented.
From what I've read, it is the USPTO that allowed software patents on its own. The SCOTUS ruled that genetically-engineered organisms were patentable. Apparently, the patent office leadership thinks software is a man-made organism.
It's pretty trivial to identify when baseball is exciting:
They can stop working on that patent. Baseball stopped being exciting in 1981. Two lockouts and two other strikes in the previous ten years. A bunch of guys making more money than some small countries GDP crying and refusing to play ball. Geez, their plight tore me up as much as Bernie Ebbers' weeping at his sentencing. I haven't followed baseball since.
Microsoft doesn't exist to be nice, they exist to profit. Welcome to Capitalism.
We don't have capitalism, we have a regulated economy that seems closer to corporate welfare. Even so, as Dan Gillmore said, capitalism should be about honest competition - not a knife fight.
The current solution is to add it in small amounts at frequent intervals. The new proposal is to add an extra hour every few centuries. It is clearly a better solution. Just because the US government is proposing the changes, that doesn't make it automatically evil.
Doesn't this proposal pretty much screw up the new Holy Daylight Savings Time for about 250 years out of every 500? And as a US citizen, I can say everything supported or proposed by the government is automatically suspect with good reason. These glad-handing used-car salesmen that claim to be leaders need to get out of the time business altogether and stick with the things they know about - petty theft and bribery.
Actually Security updates are exempt! (for now anyway...)
And just how do you separate out the security updates included in a service pack? And it still doesn't explain the policy of why updates have to be done online instead of via executable program.
Not quite yet, but it does make exploration a lot easier. The water can be used to make rocket fuel, air to breathe, hydrogen or methane for fuel, irrigate crops, flush toilets and drink.
Could you please put "drink" on the list before "flush toilets"? Thanks.
let's see... i would by another car. will this do ?
No. For most people, Microsoft is the only car dealer there is, and that's the way Microsoft wants it.
Jump through hoops? I was verified in under thirty seconds with two clicks, and every download since has been simple and trouble free.
And why do you have to expose yourself on the 'net if you have a virgin Windows installation? It used to be that you could download service packs with any browser or OS, and that's a good way to do it. Using Linux, I got SP2 for my brother before MS clamped down. Now, they force you to try to update online, with a probably unprotected box.
Now they are denying updates to possibly illegal Windows boxes. Does that really serve anyone's interests? The illegal installations remain wide open and are a black eye for Microsoft as well as major problem and source of crapfloods for the rest of us. Microsoft should be focused on fixing its borked software, no matter what the heritage is. Watching a convicted monopolist trying to disclaim responsibility because it hasn't been paid for the product is a joke - but it certainly is not funny. If Microsoft isn't willing to allow security updates for all of its software, no matter where it resides, then the company should be regulated out of business as a danger to society. These so-called upgrades are patches to a defective product, not something that provides new value to the end user.
Moderate it as funny? Why? I'd bet you that's exactly Microsoft's line of thinking.
It's funny because a recent fix for certain malware was not to trust Microsoft. Well, I thought it was funny.
what the hell? if you use windows pay for it! it's a goddamn product not free beer.
That's got some validity, but would you pay full price for a new car that had doors that wouldn't lock, the engine stopped at random times and required a minute to restart, and whenever you stopped at a gas station, strange heavy things were loaded into the trunk and you had to take it in for service to get them out? More likely you'd be suing the manufacturer under the lemon law. Cars come with a warranty that gives rights to the buyer; Windows comes with a EULA that gives rights to the seller.
microsoft is only doing what any company would do
Most companies don't have the ability to abuse a monopolistic position, because most companies don't have a monopoly. Even Intel has been very careful to try not to cross that line, but perhaps not careful enough according to AMD. So no, Microsoft != any company. To paraphrase Dan Gillmore, American capitalism should be about honest, tough competition, not a knife fight.
If customers don't have all of that information, they can still fill out a counterfeit report and receive a copy of Windows XP Home Edition for $99 or a copy of Windows XP Professional Edition for $149, Lazar said."
So looks like even if you dealt in a shady off-the-truck operation, you would still be eliglble for OEM pricing.
Such a deal! I'm building a dual-boot box for a relative and picked up the real deal OEM Windows XP Home with COA and snazzy holograms for around $75 (with the required hardware of course - a dead 64MB SIMM at no charge). Let's face it, $100 dollars for Windows is no deal. The profit margin on the product is over 80%, while the competition's product can be had for the price of a download.
Okay, let me rephrase that: Before WallyWorld became the only retail store in half the world and the single largest source of the US trade deficit, sales clerks were taught how to spot fake currency. That was in a different age, when normal retailers made modest profits, paid employees a living wage, and couldn't afford to accept Monopoly money. I know that dates me.
The code name for that project is Operation Turd Blossum.
Could they get any more devious? They even misspelled blossom to try to cover it up.
Really? Is that why the presumably printed on an inkjet at home thirty dollar bill was successfully passed at Wal-Mart?
Anyone who would accept a thirty-dollar bill would probably be fooled by a counterfeit done with a crayon. Most sales clerks receive some training on spotting fakes.
I like all of these. I'm going to keep a copy of them in my chester drawers.
Pulling them up a bit too high, aren't you? :) We always said that as kids, too.
What possible legal interest could Microsoft have in what you send to your printer? If they are really doing this (and I'd like to see some proof) they are way beyond looking for seafaring vagabonds raping and pillaging honest wayfarers and townsfolks. That would be more like big brother.