Microsoft spokeswoman Stacy Drake hailed the ruling. "As an intellectual property company, we are committed to respecting the intellectual property of others, but we also invest heavily in R&D and we will defend our intellectual property when necessary,"
She continued "We be payin props ta doz silly azz mofos intalectual propertiez, but they'ze disrespectin' ours. Whats up with that shiznat dogz?"
HAH, better pot, I don't think so... The pot out in BC was being traded pound for pound with heroine from Seattle for a while.
When I was at the Rolling Stones concert here in Toronto me and my girlfriend met these three guys from Florida. They smoked us one of their joints and it didn't do a thing to me or my girlfriend. And I am not exagerating here, not a thing. Then we smoked a Canadian joint, about 10 minutes later one of the American guys passed out on the ground. That is not the only time I have smoked American weed either, I have smoked it multiple times well in various parts of the States. It has never gotten me nearly as high as the stuff we have up here.
I used to know a dealer that lived in NYC. Every couple months he would make his way to Toronto and take a bunch of weed back with him. He said that he could sell it for around 1/3 more than his regular stuff and it sold like crazy.
To be so close to having a computer accessible by all. It is hard to estimate what the implications could have been if everyone, every where had access to a computer. But of course the inventors yet again failed to factor in corporate greed.
"While hardware vendors whine about the levy, consumers seem fairly indifferent. Why? Arguably because the levy is fairly invisible - just another tax in an overtaxed country. And because it makes copying music legal in Canada."
To tell you the truth I don't mind paying high taxes here, yes of course I like paying fewer taxes but I think the general consensus among Canadians is that we don't mind being taxed so heavily. But that is only because we get direct return on our tax dollars.
In the States you pay very few taxes and a major selling point in elections is tax cuts. That is mainly because in the States, taxes don't get used for anything that directly benefits the public. It goes to supporting a massive standing military, nuclear arsenal, etc... So Americans perceive tax as just some guy coming and taking their money. That is why the IRS is given so much power in the states, have you ever heard of a government revenue agency in any other country that had its own swat teams?
So although it may appear to Americans that we pay very high taxes here, you must keep in mind we get a lot more in return from our government as well.
n. [mythically from a traditional Czech assasination method, via SF fandom] 1. Proper karmic retribution for an incorrigible punster. "Oh, ghod, that was _awful_!" "Quick! Defenestrate him!" 2. The act of exiting a window system in order to get better response time from a full-screen program. This comes from the dictionary meaning of `defenestrate', which is to throw something out a window. 3. The act of discarding something under the assumption that it will improve matters. "I don't have any disk space left." "Well, why don't you defenestrate that 100 megs worth of old core dumps?" 4. Under a GUI, the act of dragging something out of a window (onto the screen). "Next, defenestrate the MugWump icon." 5. The act of completely removing Micro$oft Windows from a PC in favor of a better OS (typically Linux)."
All this is very interesting, but in light of recent events it seems most/.ers think SCO will roll over and die when IBM gets them in court. However I think the thing that most/.ers also seems to be over looking is that SCO has Microsoft behind them. And judging by Microsoft's business history I doubt they have any major problem with taking down IBM if it is going to rid them of that annoying Linux disease.
"News.com: Do corporations right now have too much power to investigate alleged copyright infringement online? Where should the line be drawn?"
"Oppenheim: How does this have anything to do with corporations? This has to do with artists and creators. Artists and creators, like anybody else who creates something, should have the right to sell what they create..."
Correct me if I am wrong, but the artists are not the ones running around suing people.
I already get treated like a criminal in many stores I visit. When the store clerks follow you around watching your every move what do you think they are doing, trying to get their heads in your ass?
I used to take Ritalin when I was younger so don't give me that "you don't know what you're talking about" stuff. I am not trying to be the devil's advocate and egg on the person whos original post this was in reply to but I have to say I agree with him. When I was forced to take Ritalin I didn't see it as something that was being given to me to try and help me do better at school, etc. I saw it as me not fitting into a certain model that had been predetermined for me so they made me fit. And that was not what I wanted, I wanted to be myself, not the person that everyone else wanted me to be.
I have grown out of my ADHD, but I still have trouble accepting the fact that our society is setup in such a way that you either follow the predetermined steps set out for you or you live a life of poverty and suffering.
"Good for fuckin' you. Now shut up and let people who want to take medication because they want to feel sane and have a normal life do so without having to deal with your opinion."
Woah buddy, if you don't want to "deal" with his opinion then don't read it, geeze, maybe you need to be going to anger managment classes instead of taking those pills.
If every innovator with technologies affecting content must bear the burden of a lawsuit before his innovation can be allowed, there will be many fewer innovations in the distribution and creation of content. That in turn will harm artists and technologists alike.
What on Gods green earth makes you think that any respectable company would have any interest in doing something like protecting the people or groups that make them money? Why do that when you can simply get laws passed to enforce the way you want things to work?
Don't think that just because France was against the war on Iraq that it was for completly respectable reasons. France was against the war mainly because they are the main distributors of the oil coming out of there, the pipes go directly to them and they sell it, and they didn't want to lose the deal they had with Saddam.
Similar to the Russian situation, they had just lent Saddam a whole load of money, billions of dollars. Now the Russians are telling the Iraqis they expect their money back. Tell me, why should a nation have to pay back debts incured by a previous dictator that used the money to fund his lifestyle, build a military to protect himself and torture the very people that are now being told they must pay the Russians back?
I am not against paying for the music I listen to through the system currently in place. I AM however, very against giving my money to large corporations that seem to think they have the right to mandate laws that force me to buy their product.
I am tired of listening to the RIAA bitch and whine about how they are just trying to protect the copyright holders. The copyright holders don't need protection, they need to bring their business model out of the stone age and adapt to a new market.
If every time the market for a certain product went through a drastic change, and the companies in those markets simply refused to adapt. And instead used the government to revert the market back to the way they were used to operating. Where would we be?
Nortel used to have this program, before they blew up and disappeared off the face of the earth, where any employee could work from home and the company would provide the furniture and equipment (including coffee machine).
In all the time my uncle worked there he never once worked from home, yet they gave him thousands of dollars worth of computer equipment and essentially furnished his entire apartment.
I submitted this story a month ago, except it wasn't asking just about printers, it was asking about all electronics devices in general. Guess what, it got rejected!
This revenue stream is so lucrative that some manufacturers have gone so far as to include encrypted signatures encoded in their cartridges sutch that competing vendors can't produce cartridghes for their printers. As I recall, some would-be cartridge vendors have sued printer manufactuters claimin that this practice is anti-competitive.
"Plus thats not what they are doing, read carefully:
Xtra does not claim ownership of any content or material you provide or make available through the Services ("Customer Material"). However, by placing any Customer Material on our Websites or Systems (including posting messages, uploading files, importing data or engaging in any other form of communication), you grant to Xtra a perpetual, royalty-free, non-exclusive, irrevocable, unrestricted, worldwide licence to do the following in respect of the Customer Materials:"
Do all these things take place soley on "THEIR website forum and stuff"?
"Microsoft has said its been searching for ways to capitalize on its various technologies, for example data retrieval and analysis, by entering new markets. It has also targeted security software."
Slashdot Mirror
the hair puts coal on your mine!
... wait, what?
Microsoft spokeswoman Stacy Drake hailed the ruling. "As an intellectual property company, we are committed to respecting the intellectual property of others, but we also invest heavily in R&D and we will defend our intellectual property when necessary,"
She continued "We be payin props ta doz silly azz mofos intalectual propertiez, but they'ze disrespectin' ours. Whats up with that shiznat dogz?"
------
HAH, better pot, I don't think so... The pot out in BC was being traded pound for pound with heroine from Seattle for a while.
When I was at the Rolling Stones concert here in Toronto me and my girlfriend met these three guys from Florida. They smoked us one of their joints and it didn't do a thing to me or my girlfriend. And I am not exagerating here, not a thing. Then we smoked a Canadian joint, about 10 minutes later one of the American guys passed out on the ground. That is not the only time I have smoked American weed either, I have smoked it multiple times well in various parts of the States. It has never gotten me nearly as high as the stuff we have up here.
I used to know a dealer that lived in NYC. Every couple months he would make his way to Toronto and take a bunch of weed back with him. He said that he could sell it for around 1/3 more than his regular stuff and it sold like crazy.
-----------
To be so close to having a computer accessible by all. It is hard to estimate what the implications could have been if everyone, every where had access to a computer. But of course the inventors yet again failed to factor in corporate greed.
"While hardware vendors whine about the levy, consumers seem fairly indifferent. Why? Arguably because the levy is fairly invisible - just another tax in an overtaxed country. And because it makes copying music legal in Canada."
To tell you the truth I don't mind paying high taxes here, yes of course I like paying fewer taxes but I think the general consensus among Canadians is that we don't mind being taxed so heavily. But that is only because we get direct return on our tax dollars.
In the States you pay very few taxes and a major selling point in elections is tax cuts. That is mainly because in the States, taxes don't get used for anything that directly benefits the public. It goes to supporting a massive standing military, nuclear arsenal, etc... So Americans perceive tax as just some guy coming and taking their money. That is why the IRS is given so much power in the states, have you ever heard of a government revenue agency in any other country that had its own swat teams?
So although it may appear to Americans that we pay very high taxes here, you must keep in mind we get a lot more in return from our government as well.
Definition of defnestration from dictionary.com
/.?
"defenestration
n. [mythically from a traditional Czech
assasination method, via SF fandom] 1. Proper karmic retribution for
an incorrigible punster. "Oh, ghod, that was _awful_!" "Quick!
Defenestrate him!" 2. The act of exiting a window system in order
to get better response time from a full-screen program. This comes
from the dictionary meaning of `defenestrate', which is to throw
something out a window. 3. The act of discarding something under
the assumption that it will improve matters. "I don't have any disk
space left." "Well, why don't you defenestrate that 100 megs worth
of old core dumps?" 4. Under a GUI, the act of dragging something
out of a window (onto the screen). "Next, defenestrate the MugWump
icon." 5. The act of completely removing Micro$oft Windows from a
PC in favor of a better OS (typically Linux)."
Is dictionary.com run by
All this is very interesting, but in light of recent events it seems most /.ers think SCO will roll over and die when IBM gets them in court. However I think the thing that most /.ers also seems to be over looking is that SCO has Microsoft behind them. And judging by Microsoft's business history I doubt they have any major problem with taking down IBM if it is going to rid them of that annoying Linux disease.
Had water bottles and other assorted garbage thrown at him when he was performing on stage at the Rolling Stones concert in Toronto last week.
-1 Offtopic (Sorry)
Cocaine
"News.com: Do corporations right now have too much power to investigate alleged copyright infringement online? Where should the line be drawn?"
"Oppenheim: How does this have anything to do with corporations? This has to do with artists and creators. Artists and creators, like anybody else who creates something, should have the right to sell what they create..."
Correct me if I am wrong, but the artists are not the ones running around suing people.
I already get treated like a criminal in many stores I visit. When the store clerks follow you around watching your every move what do you think they are doing, trying to get their heads in your ass?
I used to take Ritalin when I was younger so don't give me that "you don't know what you're talking about" stuff. I am not trying to be the devil's advocate and egg on the person whos original post this was in reply to but I have to say I agree with him. When I was forced to take Ritalin I didn't see it as something that was being given to me to try and help me do better at school, etc. I saw it as me not fitting into a certain model that had been predetermined for me so they made me fit. And that was not what I wanted, I wanted to be myself, not the person that everyone else wanted me to be.
I have grown out of my ADHD, but I still have trouble accepting the fact that our society is setup in such a way that you either follow the predetermined steps set out for you or you live a life of poverty and suffering.
"Good for fuckin' you. Now shut up and let people who want to take medication because they want to feel sane and have a normal life do so without having to deal with your opinion."
Woah buddy, if you don't want to "deal" with his opinion then don't read it, geeze, maybe you need to be going to anger managment classes instead of taking those pills.
If every innovator with technologies affecting content must bear the burden of a lawsuit before his innovation can be allowed, there will be many fewer innovations in the distribution and creation of content. That in turn will harm artists and technologists alike.
What on Gods green earth makes you think that any respectable company would have any interest in doing something like protecting the people or groups that make them money? Why do that when you can simply get laws passed to enforce the way you want things to work?
You guys are getting it ALL wrong, "secure computing" doesn't mean secure for the user.
It means financial security for Microsoft.
Don't think that just because France was against the war on Iraq that it was for completly respectable reasons. France was against the war mainly because they are the main distributors of the oil coming out of there, the pipes go directly to them and they sell it, and they didn't want to lose the deal they had with Saddam.
Similar to the Russian situation, they had just lent Saddam a whole load of money, billions of dollars. Now the Russians are telling the Iraqis they expect their money back. Tell me, why should a nation have to pay back debts incured by a previous dictator that used the money to fund his lifestyle, build a military to protect himself and torture the very people that are now being told they must pay the Russians back?
I am not against paying for the music I listen to through the system currently in place. I AM however, very against giving my money to large corporations that seem to think they have the right to mandate laws that force me to buy their product.
I am tired of listening to the RIAA bitch and whine about how they are just trying to protect the copyright holders. The copyright holders don't need protection, they need to bring their business model out of the stone age and adapt to a new market.
If every time the market for a certain product went through a drastic change, and the companies in those markets simply refused to adapt. And instead used the government to revert the market back to the way they were used to operating. Where would we be?
It is not about marketing, etc...
It's about control.
Nortel used to have this program, before they blew up and disappeared off the face of the earth, where any employee could work from home and the company would provide the furniture and equipment (including coffee machine).
In all the time my uncle worked there he never once worked from home, yet they gave him thousands of dollars worth of computer equipment and essentially furnished his entire apartment.
In conclusion, ViewSonics are great monitors.
I submitted this story a month ago, except it wasn't asking just about printers, it was asking about all electronics devices in general. Guess what, it got rejected!
This revenue stream is so lucrative that some manufacturers have gone so far as to include encrypted signatures encoded in their cartridges sutch that competing vendors can't produce cartridghes for their printers. As I recall, some would-be cartridge vendors have sued printer manufactuters claimin that this practice is anti-competitive.
Lest forget how usefull the DMCA is for being anti-competitive.
"Plus thats not what they are doing, read carefully:
Xtra does not claim ownership of any content or material you provide or make available through the Services ("Customer Material"). However, by placing any Customer Material on our Websites or Systems (including posting messages, uploading files, importing data or engaging in any other form of communication), you grant to Xtra a perpetual, royalty-free, non-exclusive, irrevocable, unrestricted, worldwide licence to do the following in respect of the Customer Materials:"
Do all these things take place soley on "THEIR website forum and stuff" ?
I believe this is Yahoo!'s new search page.
The servers been /.ed