Well I can't speak for the OP - and I haven't heard the $30 figure before. If it's true, it's about double the per-device cost of WP7, which is about $15 (for HTC anyway). Others pay more - estimates are between $20 and $30, and ZTE (in the UK) has revealed their WP7 license is between $23 and $30.
What should strike any justice-minded person as repugnant is the entire idea that Microsoft, through legal coercion, market dominance and government sanction, can make so much money on something that they did no real productive work to earn, but obtain purely through rent-seeking. AND they actually make MORE money from that than they do their own crappy software that nobody wants.
This is slick PR, but completely inaccurate. B&N's tablet, their service, their brick-and-morter presence are all major advantages of "I own the one-click ordering" Amazon. Apple is a technology company, so they are not B&N competitors. The Nook tablet is awesome, BTW, but they should really back off on the lock-down if they want to sell more.
B&N also is NOT a publishing company - they are a book retailer. There is no need or reason for them to "provide tools for publishing books" - other people do that, and the B&N Nook supports those formats. And some of those tools allow you to actually control your work, unlike Apple's tool that takes ownership of your entire publishing and marketing chain just for using their tool.
Yes, good point. It's pretty clear that things have been good for the people of the US for quite some time, which led to a mostly apathetic populace and far too much trust of those in the government. It is ending.
But the other side of this is that, when some effort is made, the US system works for the people very well. It's simply designed to allow that to happen, and in a peaceful manner, which is much different from just about every other government on earth, where power is rarely overturned without violent and bloody conflict. Even ousting the Egyptian president wasn't accomplished without bloodshed, although it was probably one of the least deadly transitions of government by historical standards.
The US system was designed to avoid any person or small group being able to consolidate too much controlling authority. The Constitution is supposed to be a check on the Federal government, sovereign states were supposed to enforce that compact, the houses of congress and the President, it was viewed, would often have conflicting interests and ideas (and often do). And of course all bodies are subject to common law and courts, which were accessible to all the people.
The Founding fathers were universally, Rich, Owned land and property, and slaves...
Not accurate. Some owned slaves, others were devout abolitionists. Benjamin Franklin founded the first antislavery society in 1774. While I think they probably all owned land, not all were "rich", but they were leaders of their communities, and well to do. But then I've never heard of any country being founded, led, or taken over by any poor or indigent people, so that's entirely irrelevant.
It was called the "Great Society", and it was the most destructive set of policies since FDR. Where FDR created Social Security, LBJ decided to raid the SS trust fund and spend it social engineering programs that basically ended most of the progress of black communities since the turn of the century. I have to wonder if his reversal on Civil Rights legislation (which he blocked during his entire tenure in the Senate) was because he had come up with a more effective way of suppressing them - making them depending on Federal government and hand-outs, while subtly intimating that they would never be "good enough" to make it on their own.
At most, the 'A' tag was created at CERN. The rest of HTML is nothing more than SGML, which had been in use for decades before HTML was 'created'. SGML, incidentally, was create by IBM - in the good old USA.
That's what they tell you - when in fact it was stolen from the poor.
Exactly right. The same thing came up last election cycle with McCain getting sued for use of a song, but that was used in an ad. Same thing with David Byrne's suit against Charlie Crist. Both of those were settled. But, frankly, I think since ASCAP laws mean that composers don't have standing to sue for performances.
Do you really think that the government can coordinate an international seizure operation involving authorities in New Zealand and Virginia in the space of 12 hours?
What do you mean 12 hours? The investigation, and the planning / writing / introduction of SOPA has been going on for years. That's why it couldn't be stopped like the vote on SOPA was - it was already laid out. SOPA didn't pass, but they couldn't stop the bust.
I'd like to say there is some hope for educating people like this person you know, but I'm afraid the PR machine is massive, and the rabbit hole goes much deeper than anyone suspects. Think for a minute about the SOPA/PIPA timing and the seizure of MegaUpload. Think it's coincidence? I don't. The only thing I think didn't work out right was the unexpected response to black-out day, which got the SOPA vote delayed. It would have been better marketing if the bill had passed and the arrests used to justify it.
If you read the indictment, you'll notice a lot of emails (unencrypted) with damning evidence, including a lot of "users" from places like Northern Virginia, Norfolk Virginia, Alexandria Virginia, etc. And Kim Dotcom was the obvious "ne'er do well" criminal kingpin type, with her castle-like mansion and staff of 12 to run the place. A very movie-like villain in the Scarface drug lord tradition. Except the Great Evil that the heroes at the Justice department were combating is IP Infringement - the great Internet-enabled scourge of our time that is OMG! costing jobs!
I don't believe for a minute that this is anything but a well-orchestrated PR stunt. The actors playing the MegaUpload executive are not going to prison - more likely they'll be given new identities and left in nice little homes in Paraguay to serve out their "sentence". The public is being completely duped with this thing. Sorry, but, please, I'm not buying it.
I think you're a little brainwashed by the MSM and the POTUS rhetoric. Yes, there is far too much collaboration among the CEO / Washington Administrator club (same guys, moving back and forth), but don't forget that only the government has the monopoly on force. And, yep, there are armed bureaucrats all over the place.
I'm not really worried about corporate power until they have government backing.
While I can relate with your sentiment, it should be clear by now that private interests have acquired the scope of influence of governments should have,
Not to me, it isn't. I get what I want from Verizon - they don't hesitate as long as I'm willing to pay the rates. They certainly don't suggest that there are protocols or destinations that they may block from access. They DO comply with government requests for information (what they have), and regulations and crap that the Washington tyrants impose. I can't blame them for that - they're not going guard my local loop against armed bureaucrats.
I've been experimenting with a few commodity routers (that can support open-wrt or dd-wrt) for just such a purpose. Do you have any good references? I'm envisioning some roof-top and tree-mounted self-contained set of router/repeaters than can run off a small battery and solar charger...
They must be catching plenty of terrorists, and just not telling anyone. After all, they catch three terrorist per day at some Canadian border crossings!
Some people can't tell the difference between war and tyranny. Not that Lincoln wasn't a tyrant, but at least he declared war, and the Confederates declared war, they raised an army, they wore uniforms.
Al-Awlaki may have done what you claim, but I haven't seen the evidence of it. There wasn't a battle at Fort Sumter (or anywhere else). We never declared war on Yemen, either. But it was in Yemen where Al-Awlaki was driving his pick-up truck down the road when the unmanned US drone fired on him and killed him. They killed his son in a similar fashion, the kid was only 16 years old. He wasn't a threat that I know of, but he was a "loose end" for the forces orchestrating the unrest in the Middle East.
So according to you, the US government is now at war with... its citizens. I can't argue that it's not the case, but I can tell you that it should not be this way. It's not okay for the government (one man, even) to be able to declare any person at any time an "enemy belligerent" (they used to use "enemy combatant", but that was problematic in that it implied a person that actually committed a violent act), and send drones to kill them on a whim. I don't know what authorization says that you can not only kill whoever you declare is an enemy, but also his entire family, but apparently it's all okay dokey with you. Claiming all this is "legal" because you can call it "war" and every person in American is a "potential enemy" whether they know it or not is just a legal fiction, designed to get you to go along with allowing the president the power of life and death over every citizen.
Just hope nobody sees you talking to the wrong person and decides to put you on "the list".
Control politicians' environment and you control them. That means pretty much ignoring parties and rhetoric and paying attention to bills and votes. Believe it or not, grassroots beats money every time - as long as there are enough active grassroots participants to make an impact. It worked with SOPA/PIPA (so far). The issue is that the high-paid corporate lobbyists know how to wait until things get quiet and then just try again. You need to KEEP people engaged, and make sure someone is watching.
Yea, it's a lot of work, but that's how participatory governments work. As someone once said, "The cost of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Oh it's just the NeoCons doing this? Well, nothing to worry about, then. The Dems will oppose all these Big Media initiatives and Obama will veto any attempt to censor technology. Just vote Democrat and everything will be fine!
Slashdot Mirror
Well I can't speak for the OP - and I haven't heard the $30 figure before. If it's true, it's about double the per-device cost of WP7, which is about $15 (for HTC anyway). Others pay more - estimates are between $20 and $30, and ZTE (in the UK) has revealed their WP7 license is between $23 and $30.
What should strike any justice-minded person as repugnant is the entire idea that Microsoft, through legal coercion, market dominance and government sanction, can make so much money on something that they did no real productive work to earn, but obtain purely through rent-seeking. AND they actually make MORE money from that than they do their own crappy software that nobody wants.
They do make more money licensing Android patents than they do from WP7 licenses. It's right there in their corporate reports.
Jeff? Is that you?
This is slick PR, but completely inaccurate. B&N's tablet, their service, their brick-and-morter presence are all major advantages of "I own the one-click ordering" Amazon. Apple is a technology company, so they are not B&N competitors. The Nook tablet is awesome, BTW, but they should really back off on the lock-down if they want to sell more.
B&N also is NOT a publishing company - they are a book retailer. There is no need or reason for them to "provide tools for publishing books" - other people do that, and the B&N Nook supports those formats. And some of those tools allow you to actually control your work, unlike Apple's tool that takes ownership of your entire publishing and marketing chain just for using their tool.
Yes, good point. It's pretty clear that things have been good for the people of the US for quite some time, which led to a mostly apathetic populace and far too much trust of those in the government. It is ending.
But the other side of this is that, when some effort is made, the US system works for the people very well. It's simply designed to allow that to happen, and in a peaceful manner, which is much different from just about every other government on earth, where power is rarely overturned without violent and bloody conflict. Even ousting the Egyptian president wasn't accomplished without bloodshed, although it was probably one of the least deadly transitions of government by historical standards.
The US system was designed to avoid any person or small group being able to consolidate too much controlling authority. The Constitution is supposed to be a check on the Federal government, sovereign states were supposed to enforce that compact, the houses of congress and the President, it was viewed, would often have conflicting interests and ideas (and often do). And of course all bodies are subject to common law and courts, which were accessible to all the people.
The Founding fathers were universally, Rich, Owned land and property, and slaves ...
Not accurate. Some owned slaves, others were devout abolitionists. Benjamin Franklin founded the first antislavery society in 1774. While I think they probably all owned land, not all were "rich", but they were leaders of their communities, and well to do. But then I've never heard of any country being founded, led, or taken over by any poor or indigent people, so that's entirely irrelevant.
I don't think so. He's spot-on and current.
It was called the "Great Society", and it was the most destructive set of policies since FDR. Where FDR created Social Security, LBJ decided to raid the SS trust fund and spend it social engineering programs that basically ended most of the progress of black communities since the turn of the century. I have to wonder if his reversal on Civil Rights legislation (which he blocked during his entire tenure in the Senate) was because he had come up with a more effective way of suppressing them - making them depending on Federal government and hand-outs, while subtly intimating that they would never be "good enough" to make it on their own.
At most, the 'A' tag was created at CERN. The rest of HTML is nothing more than SGML, which had been in use for decades before HTML was 'created'. SGML, incidentally, was create by IBM - in the good old USA.
That's what they tell you - when in fact it was stolen from the poor.
Not currently.. there used to be, but religious nuts being what they are have polluted the party.
Technically, they are not nuts. They are a type of fruit.
Exactly right. The same thing came up last election cycle with McCain getting sued for use of a song, but that was used in an ad. Same thing with David Byrne's suit against Charlie Crist. Both of those were settled. But, frankly, I think since ASCAP laws mean that composers don't have standing to sue for performances.
Do you really think that the government can coordinate an international seizure operation involving authorities in New Zealand and Virginia in the space of 12 hours?
What do you mean 12 hours? The investigation, and the planning / writing / introduction of SOPA has been going on for years. That's why it couldn't be stopped like the vote on SOPA was - it was already laid out. SOPA didn't pass, but they couldn't stop the bust.
I'd like to say there is some hope for educating people like this person you know, but I'm afraid the PR machine is massive, and the rabbit hole goes much deeper than anyone suspects. Think for a minute about the SOPA/PIPA timing and the seizure of MegaUpload. Think it's coincidence? I don't. The only thing I think didn't work out right was the unexpected response to black-out day, which got the SOPA vote delayed. It would have been better marketing if the bill had passed and the arrests used to justify it.
If you read the indictment, you'll notice a lot of emails (unencrypted) with damning evidence, including a lot of "users" from places like Northern Virginia, Norfolk Virginia, Alexandria Virginia, etc. And Kim Dotcom was the obvious "ne'er do well" criminal kingpin type, with her castle-like mansion and staff of 12 to run the place. A very movie-like villain in the Scarface drug lord tradition. Except the Great Evil that the heroes at the Justice department were combating is IP Infringement - the great Internet-enabled scourge of our time that is OMG! costing jobs!
I don't believe for a minute that this is anything but a well-orchestrated PR stunt. The actors playing the MegaUpload executive are not going to prison - more likely they'll be given new identities and left in nice little homes in Paraguay to serve out their "sentence". The public is being completely duped with this thing. Sorry, but, please, I'm not buying it.
I think you're a little brainwashed by the MSM and the POTUS rhetoric. Yes, there is far too much collaboration among the CEO / Washington Administrator club (same guys, moving back and forth), but don't forget that only the government has the monopoly on force. And, yep, there are armed bureaucrats all over the place.
I'm not really worried about corporate power until they have government backing.
While I can relate with your sentiment, it should be clear by now that private interests have acquired the scope of influence of governments should have,
Not to me, it isn't. I get what I want from Verizon - they don't hesitate as long as I'm willing to pay the rates. They certainly don't suggest that there are protocols or destinations that they may block from access. They DO comply with government requests for information (what they have), and regulations and crap that the Washington tyrants impose. I can't blame them for that - they're not going guard my local loop against armed bureaucrats.
I've been experimenting with a few commodity routers (that can support open-wrt or dd-wrt) for just such a purpose. Do you have any good references? I'm envisioning some roof-top and tree-mounted self-contained set of router/repeaters than can run off a small battery and solar charger...
The basic infrastructure of your internet needs to be controlled by the government.
Oh hell no.
They must be catching plenty of terrorists, and just not telling anyone. After all, they catch three terrorist per day at some Canadian border crossings!
Thank you, Mr. Chertoff
should have demanded
Some people can't tell the difference between war and tyranny. Not that Lincoln wasn't a tyrant, but at least he declared war, and the Confederates declared war, they raised an army, they wore uniforms.
Al-Awlaki may have done what you claim, but I haven't seen the evidence of it. There wasn't a battle at Fort Sumter (or anywhere else). We never declared war on Yemen, either. But it was in Yemen where Al-Awlaki was driving his pick-up truck down the road when the unmanned US drone fired on him and killed him. They killed his son in a similar fashion, the kid was only 16 years old. He wasn't a threat that I know of, but he was a "loose end" for the forces orchestrating the unrest in the Middle East.
So according to you, the US government is now at war with ... its citizens. I can't argue that it's not the case, but I can tell you that it should not be this way. It's not okay for the government (one man, even) to be able to declare any person at any time an "enemy belligerent" (they used to use "enemy combatant", but that was problematic in that it implied a person that actually committed a violent act), and send drones to kill them on a whim. I don't know what authorization says that you can not only kill whoever you declare is an enemy, but also his entire family, but apparently it's all okay dokey with you. Claiming all this is "legal" because you can call it "war" and every person in American is a "potential enemy" whether they know it or not is just a legal fiction, designed to get you to go along with allowing the president the power of life and death over every citizen.
Just hope nobody sees you talking to the wrong person and decides to put you on "the list".
Control politicians' environment and you control them. That means pretty much ignoring parties and rhetoric and paying attention to bills and votes. Believe it or not, grassroots beats money every time - as long as there are enough active grassroots participants to make an impact. It worked with SOPA/PIPA (so far). The issue is that the high-paid corporate lobbyists know how to wait until things get quiet and then just try again. You need to KEEP people engaged, and make sure someone is watching.
Yea, it's a lot of work, but that's how participatory governments work. As someone once said, "The cost of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Getting the level of detail from a brain you'd need to simulate it might be less a matter of implants than destructive readout. Slice-and-scan.
Well, right. That also eliminates the potential issues from having duplicate persons in virtual space and meat space.
Oh it's just the NeoCons doing this? Well, nothing to worry about, then. The Dems will oppose all these Big Media initiatives and Obama will veto any attempt to censor technology. Just vote Democrat and everything will be fine!
How else will keep track of you, Citizen? We need the drones to be able to find you when you step out of line.
So they're researching how to create computronium? Will we then turn the whole solar system into a Matrioshka brain and all live in a virtual world?