Every single game that you remember fondly from your youth was just "one title in a sea of... trash". You simply don't remember the trash, for obvious reasons.
Thank you for saying this; people always remember the good parts and forget the vast morass of trash that surrounded it. Whatever it is.
Yeah, there probably were more original game ideas from the mid-70s to the mid-80s, but how many tenth-rate, derivative shoot-'em-ups were there as well?
This also applies to the 1960s (I've seen representative compilations from that era, and chart listings, and there's a *lot* of MOR and pop dross that rose-tinted-glasses baby boomers and nostalgia-obsessed teenagers seem oblivious to.)
I wondered why I hadn't taped more of Live Aid; when I saw the 10th anniversary repeats, I realised that it was mostly AOR stuff I wasn't into. I hate 3/4 of the music in the charts today, but I can remember listening to the charts in the late 1980s, finger poised on the cassette deck's record button, and realising that it was mostly crap then, too.
Isn't it *just* a coincidence that my most fondly-remembered games on my 8-bit Atari 800XL were those I got within the first few months, and those I'm now planning to sell on EBay are those I got years later?
The one thing you can't sell to kids nowadays is *novelty*. In a sense, I was lucky to get this; video games were established by the time I was old enough to be aware of anything, and computers were already coming in, but I was a deprived kid (cough), and didn't get all that stuff. So I still got the novelty value. There's no way you can replicate that now, but I'll bet today's 8, 9 and 10 year olds will get nostalgic about some PS2 game that us adults will consider derivative and bloated; and frankly, who's to say that they're wrong?
You could accompany that with an official TubGirl (TM) milkshake. Comes in a TubGirl-shaped container, squeeze it and try to get it in your mouth as it comes out.
Don't even *think* what flavor that's meant to be...
Nice try at setting up a straw-man argument. I don't know if this was deliberate, or you just made lots of assumptions about my position.
Let's get one thing straight. You want to paint me as some whiny "don't punish people, bleeding heart", etc., etc. type. Wrong.
I'm against rape as a form of below-boards punishment because it's so blatantly open to abuse and the people who get raped are more likely to be those who can't defend themselves, not necessarily those that 'deserve' it by any measure.
Guy on parole for something the government doesn't like, but likely to be freed anyway? Nod and a wink, and he's thrown in a cell with some drooling sex-offender while on parole. You 'know' how the system 'works'?
Meanwhile, the same abuse of power lets people like the Enron guys off lightly, despite the fact they're more deserving of punishment. Why? Part of the system, friends with the people who count.
Funny, you don't seem as much of a pro-Bush fanatic as you first appeared, but you're willing to let them and their friends make below-boards decisions about who gets punished and how. Because, let's be blunt, they're the ones who ultimately pull the strings in situations like that.
Guess what? The Enron guys won't be the ones getting HIV'ed from their cellmates if that's what you want.
You got one thing right. I'm fucking sick of high-up white collar criminals getting away with shit like that; if nothing else, this sort of bullshit is one of the biggest threats to capitalism and western economies (screw Al-Qaida and friends, they'll only win if you let them dictate what you do).
The croneyism that lets people get thrown in with rapists is the same reason that the Enron executives won't get what they deserve.
By the way, I don't care if 99% of people supported Bubba-rape as punishment. I don't.
Pretty fucking pathetic when people covertly support something that's worse than the most badly thought out law, that lets enemies of those in power receive under-the-counter punishment (I won't call it justice, because it isn't) and lets the people that most deserve punishment off scott-free because they're best pals with whoever's in power.
So, as I said, if you believe in something, at least have the guts to have it written down as law. Or is law and justice only for 'whining' types?
One thing for sure; if you want the same type of 'justice' that gave us the lynch-mob, it won't be the Enron executives getting what they deserve.
the ones that try to look "cool" with wierd colors and designs on them.
Yeah, they're ******* horrible.... I remember seeing some cases with obviously plastic pieces of "metal" attached to them. Very nasty...
Or those PC cases that came out around the time of the original iMac, and mixed transparent coloured plastic with beige, and looked bloody awful (ignoring the fact that the original iMac always looked much better in photos than real life).
Nothing less cool than someone doing a cheap knock-off of someone elses cool, and still failing miserably.
You're not any better than I am, you're willing to use violence against them, you're just willing to break their arms
I said I might understand if you'd wanted to break their arms. Not the same thing.
Although if I had supported it, it's not in the same league as being violently raped and infected with HIV.
(or have someone else do it for you since you're obviously a cowardly, genetically defective piece of shit)
I called you cowardly because you support the informal use of rape, which lets people wash their hands of the consequences (guess what? The people most "deserving" are unlikely to be the people that suffer, and that fact that someone's in on parole- yep, our 17-year old shoplifter hasn't even been found guilty yet- isn't likely to stop this happening). If you really believe in rape as much as you're willing to mouth off about, let's see you debate it in public, rather than shoving it under the carpet.
Scum loving bleeding heart shitbags such as yourself are one of the reasons why many of our largest cities are barely habitable.
If you think you're so much in the fucking right, if you think rape is such a great punishment, why the fuck don't you stand up for what you believe in?
You want to have your fucking sick rape punishment fantasies, but you'd rather sweep it under the carpet, because you know when it was out in the open as a proposed law you'd be exposed for the all-bluster bullshitter you really are.
If expecting someone to be punished appropriately, to be given the opportunity to defend themselves before they get raped, and not to be exposed to a system, which, let's face it DOESN'T FUCKING WORK because the weakest are going to get punished, not those who deserve it most- if all that makes me a "cowardly, genetically defective piece of shit... scum loving bleeding heart shitbag", better that than a bullshitter who doesn't have the guts to see the consequences of his half-baked, badly thought out rape fantasies exposed to daylight.
Ever figure out that 'punishment' that didn't really depend on how guilty someone was might not be very effective? No... keep on blaming "liberals", or whoever else you figure out is to blame. Not you for supporting action outside the law. Never you to blame.
Yeah. Keep it under the carpet, so you don't have to justify yourself- "a particularly noisome shit", that's you alright.
It looks like a cheap stereo-set! All those flashing lights!
Flashing lights masquerading as functionality are the superficiality preferred by aesthetically-challenged geeks who like to criticise Apple owners for being superficial.
You're spot on. If flashing lights are so great, how come there are more of them on the cheap hifis? I was going to say "micro systems", but some of those monstrosities are as big as my old all-in-one "Midi" hifi (record deck, twin cassettes, radio); and they include lots of pointless, contrived and obviously *cheap* moulded detailing.
Nope. Flashy lights -|-> Functional in general...
On the other hand, minimalism can go too far as well, and I'm not going to stand up and defend the boring fugliness of the typical beige PC case (fine for the back office and server room, but they're just so damn *boring*; even light grey would be more interesting than *beige*.)
This isn't competing with Apple. Granted, it looks like someone has put a lot of consideration into the appearance, but in this case, it looks designed to appeal to (a) the "black is cool, lots of nicely-coloured bright lights" boys toys market, and (b) The "ThinkGeek" market, who are more like the latter than they'd care to admit. Actually, I'm not sure it's flashy and superficial enough for (a), but at either rate, its visual "appeal" isn't the same as Apple's.
Personally, I think it's tacky; I wish they'd hurry up and release the Nanode, and preferably in lots of different colours like the Cubit P4 (why on earth did they reduce the colour range for the Cubit? I *want* the choice of Metallic Red or Copper...)
>> For some reason, I've heard of many vocal
>> lobbies in the US, but never one willing to push
>> for gang rape of 17-year-old shoplifters.
> And who the fuck said anything about that? I
> certainly didn't, don't put words in my mouth
> fucktard.
That may not be what you said, but given your implied endorsement of informal rape (and its consequences), that's one obvious consequence. You're a fucking coward who wants something, but isn't willing to stand up for the consequences. This is why I'd like to see all those friends of rapists try to get their support of this informal 'policy' enshrined in law- it'd show it up for the unbalanced, ineffective (what punishment do the rapists get?) and downright fucking sick measure it is.
I notice you didn't address anything I said in my message properly, preferring to call me a "fucktard".
You come out in support of the use of rape; well, if it's such a good idea, get it into the US law books. As you said... death by gang rape for Enron executives, phone scammers, corporate polluters and....
....people who vandalize public toilets?! Seriously?
Why rape? Is gassing or electrocution too good for "people who vandalize public toilets"? Man, you complained that you hadn't said anything about the 17-year old shoplifter case, but you support its use for "people who vandalise public toilets"?!
Fuck. I might have understood if you'd said they deserved to have their arms broken, but I'm trying to think what sort of drooling, right-wing, fucked up piece of scum supports the rape and HIV infection of "people who vandalize public toilets". Does this include the guy who wrote grafitti on the walls?
Oh, hang on, maybe you didn't explicitly *say* you supported them getting AIDS. So it's not your fault. And it's not my fault if I start shooting bullets in your direction and you die, because I didn't intend to hit any vital organs or whatever.
As I said, you, and anyone else who supports rape as a form of informal punishment, are a fucking coward who doesn't have the guts to stand up for what they believe in.
Of course he should first spend some time in a nice secure federal pound-me-in-the-ass penitentiary. Having his anus blown out and being several billion dollars in debt would be just punishment and a fine deterrent. (My emphasis)
I agree totally. Let's throw him in with some HIV-infected sex offender and have him die a slow and painful death caught from being repeatedly raped by this sick fuck.
Maybe this guy will escape his punishment. That's why I hope you'll be publicly declaring your support for manadatory repeated rape of spammers until they get infected with HIV, or hang themselves.
I'm not sure which punishment you propose for the sex offenders who'll be carrying out the rape. Should professionals be hired to do this?
Either way, I expect those who share this view to be airing their views more vocally, in order to avoid being labelled hypocritical scum who support rape being carried out informally, but don't have the guts to have it written in law.
For some reason, I've heard of many vocal lobbies in the US, but never one willing to push for gang rape of 17-year-old shoplifters.
In addition, would it be appropriate for this punishment to include men raping women, or would that be too fucking sick for you?
Does owning copyright imply that someone has to hand over copyrighted material to you? Or just that you have the right to copy the stuff yourself and prevent others copying it (which is *not* the same thing)?
In the latter case, Yahoo could say "fine, we're not stopping you from copying it", and they may still be within their rights to retain and transfer the data as this may have been implied by acceptance of the original user agreement (IANAL).
In the event of my death, these are my passwords in plaintext. I trust the Slashdot community to maintain confidentiality until I depart this life and my soul goes straight to hell^w^w^w^w ascends to heaven. Here they come:-
we have these in the UK. They taste about as good as warmed up cold coffee. Which is basically what it is....
I've never seen that, though I've seen the cans of coffee that get kept in a warming device.
Point is, almost my first thought (*) was "Isn't this going to taste quite poor, since it's basically brewed ages in advance?" I don't see that the people who think Starbucks is so great (whether it is or not; I'm proud to say I've *never* even been in Starbucks; nor Gap for that matter) would be that much slower on the uptake.
I agree with the writers of the article. It's going to be a novelty; frankly, once it's been hanging around that long, I doubt that even the best coffee around could match up to bog-standard instant, let alone Starbucks.
If it was going to be that much of a success, why don't I see more people going around with the pre-heated cans of coffee, despite the fact they're widely available?
(*) My first thought was "the coffee heats *itself*?... hang on, I don't think so"
Walmart is having a negative effect on the market. Manufactors are forced to never raise prices for products despite inflation
I read that this was one explanation for the proliferation of countless pointless variants on the same product; the 'variant' is a 'new' product, and puts the manufacturer in a stronger position when it comes to negotiating.
I don't live in the US, so I don't know how often companies change products there, though.
Rainbird dprinklers ('sprinklers'?) got tired of Walmart playing games with them and dropped them as a distributor.
Good for them; but how did they get out of the corner they'd presumably got themselves into; i.e. (as described in a sibling message) they scale up production to sell to Wal-Mart, but *have* to sell to Wal-Mart to pay off the investment in that production. Maybe they were very clever, I'd like to hear.
At last! Someone else who shares my views on that horribly overrated keyboard!
Let's get married and have kids.... erm, no, on second thoughts that wouldn't work since I'm a guy.
Let's just form an anti-Model M organisation instead and seek to eradicate this nostalgia propoganda! We could start by hoarding a great pile of them, and setting fire to it, releasing tons of carcinogenic toxins into the atmosphere.
Seriously, I never understood the point of that noisy keyboard with a pressure-point halfway down the travel like that. I actually prefer the cheapish membrane keyboards (well, within reason).
I didn't say the Firefox logo was sexually explicit. I said the *reworking* that was linked to in the grandparent message was sexually explicit. If you'd paid attention to what I said, your misunderstanding wouldn't make any sense, anyway.
Ironically, the fox is at least wearing some clothes in the reworking...
The Firefox logo was a beautifully designed piece of artwork; if nothing else, that sexually explicit reworking is pretty amateurish in comparison. More on the level of that seriously fucked-up cartoon strip Boston and Shaun.
I would advise against its use for publicity purposes. Thank God they didn't use it in the NYT ad;-)
Anyhow, I want a pornographic version of the Internet Explorer 'e' logo. That should be a challenge.:)
Yeah; well, I pretty much believe Gates here too, although I'd trust him as far as I could throw him.
However, I was (and still am) open to anyone who can provide a reasonably plausible citation for the quote. I've *never* seen one; so although I'd normally suspect Gates was telling fibs, in this case I believe his denial.
You need to pay into the US Social Security system for 10 years before you can get a dime back in retirement benefits. An H1 visa is for 6 years. Anyone who stays on an H1 visa will therefore pay lots of money into the social security system, and see nothing back. How does this not meet your criteria?
Where the HELL did I say it didn't?
I was drawing a general case (about as general as I could make it) about people moving from one society to another.
I certainly didn't claim this justified (or otherwise) the US H1 system.
Did you pay for the existing infrastructure you were born into? Bite me.
Here's some stuff to chew over;
*No-one* chose to be born into a particular culture; no-one *chose* to be born full-stop. The responsibility for that lies with the parents, and it is their contribution (and that of the extended family and their associates) to the infrastructure that should be considered.
Of course, when someone moves to another country, they (or those responsible for them, or associated with them) have not made a sustained investment in that country. It is unreasonable to expect that because a person paid taxes in a particular country for 6 months that they should be entitled to all the benefits. Similarly, it is unreasonable to criticise someone for not "paying for" the infrastructure of the society they were born into.
Of course, there comes a point where treating someone as a second-class citizen- even when they have more than paid their dues for many years- could rightly be considered discriminatory; but it's *not* unreasonable to expect a newcomer to invest in the pot for some time before they can take from it.
Hell, the stunts RIAA pull are all perfectly legal, but that doesn't make them right!
All of them?
Just because something hasn't been tried in court and isn't likely to be tried in court doesn't make it "perfectly legal".
If you view companies as amoral profit-maximising entities (which is what most large companies are), it makes sense for them to do whatever they can *get away with* , and if that includes things that would be breaking the law but are unlikely to get to court for any number of reasons, then so be it. I would guess a number of the RIAA's tactics may be found illegal in such a situation.
Of course, they will also break the law if the (total) punishment is far smaller than the potential benefits.
This doesn't account for pissing off the public. In a non-monopoly situation, the public have an opportunity not to buy that company's products.
In a monopoly situation, the companies risks the public (through politicians) taking action against the monopoly. Ha ha..... yeah, I found that last bit pretty implausible too.
Slashdot Mirror
Every single game that you remember fondly from your youth was just "one title in a sea of... trash". You simply don't remember the trash, for obvious reasons.
Thank you for saying this; people always remember the good parts and forget the vast morass of trash that surrounded it. Whatever it is.
Yeah, there probably were more original game ideas from the mid-70s to the mid-80s, but how many tenth-rate, derivative shoot-'em-ups were there as well?
This also applies to the 1960s (I've seen representative compilations from that era, and chart listings, and there's a *lot* of MOR and pop dross that rose-tinted-glasses baby boomers and nostalgia-obsessed teenagers seem oblivious to.)
I wondered why I hadn't taped more of Live Aid; when I saw the 10th anniversary repeats, I realised that it was mostly AOR stuff I wasn't into. I hate 3/4 of the music in the charts today, but I can remember listening to the charts in the late 1980s, finger poised on the cassette deck's record button, and realising that it was mostly crap then, too.
Isn't it *just* a coincidence that my most fondly-remembered games on my 8-bit Atari 800XL were those I got within the first few months, and those I'm now planning to sell on EBay are those I got years later?
The one thing you can't sell to kids nowadays is *novelty*. In a sense, I was lucky to get this; video games were established by the time I was old enough to be aware of anything, and computers were already coming in, but I was a deprived kid (cough), and didn't get all that stuff. So I still got the novelty value. There's no way you can replicate that now, but I'll bet today's 8, 9 and 10 year olds will get nostalgic about some PS2 game that us adults will consider derivative and bloated; and frankly, who's to say that they're wrong?
You could accompany that with an official TubGirl (TM) milkshake. Comes in a TubGirl-shaped container, squeeze it and try to get it in your mouth as it comes out.
Don't even *think* what flavor that's meant to be...
Merry Christmas!
Nice try at setting up a straw-man argument. I don't know if this was deliberate, or you just made lots of assumptions about my position.
Let's get one thing straight. You want to paint me as some whiny "don't punish people, bleeding heart", etc., etc. type. Wrong.
I'm against rape as a form of below-boards punishment because it's so blatantly open to abuse and the people who get raped are more likely to be those who can't defend themselves, not necessarily those that 'deserve' it by any measure.
Guy on parole for something the government doesn't like, but likely to be freed anyway? Nod and a wink, and he's thrown in a cell with some drooling sex-offender while on parole. You 'know' how the system 'works'?
Meanwhile, the same abuse of power lets people like the Enron guys off lightly, despite the fact they're more deserving of punishment. Why? Part of the system, friends with the people who count.
Funny, you don't seem as much of a pro-Bush fanatic as you first appeared, but you're willing to let them and their friends make below-boards decisions about who gets punished and how. Because, let's be blunt, they're the ones who ultimately pull the strings in situations like that.
Guess what? The Enron guys won't be the ones getting HIV'ed from their cellmates if that's what you want.
You got one thing right. I'm fucking sick of high-up white collar criminals getting away with shit like that; if nothing else, this sort of bullshit is one of the biggest threats to capitalism and western economies (screw Al-Qaida and friends, they'll only win if you let them dictate what you do).
The croneyism that lets people get thrown in with rapists is the same reason that the Enron executives won't get what they deserve.
By the way, I don't care if 99% of people supported Bubba-rape as punishment. I don't.
Pretty fucking pathetic when people covertly support something that's worse than the most badly thought out law, that lets enemies of those in power receive under-the-counter punishment (I won't call it justice, because it isn't) and lets the people that most deserve punishment off scott-free because they're best pals with whoever's in power.
So, as I said, if you believe in something, at least have the guts to have it written down as law. Or is law and justice only for 'whining' types?
One thing for sure; if you want the same type of 'justice' that gave us the lynch-mob, it won't be the Enron executives getting what they deserve.
I'd love to get a nanode but it will be rediculasly expensive.
Want. Nanode. Must have. Nanode.
WANT NANODE. NANODE! NANODE NANODE NANODE!!!!!
the ones that try to look "cool" with wierd colors and designs on them.
Yeah, they're ******* horrible.... I remember seeing some cases with obviously plastic pieces of "metal" attached to them. Very nasty...
Or those PC cases that came out around the time of the original iMac, and mixed transparent coloured plastic with beige, and looked bloody awful (ignoring the fact that the original iMac always looked much better in photos than real life).
Nothing less cool than someone doing a cheap knock-off of someone elses cool, and still failing miserably.
You're not any better than I am, you're willing to use violence against them, you're just willing to break their arms
I said I might understand if you'd wanted to break their arms. Not the same thing.
Although if I had supported it, it's not in the same league as being violently raped and infected with HIV.
(or have someone else do it for you since you're obviously a cowardly, genetically defective piece of shit)
I called you cowardly because you support the informal use of rape, which lets people wash their hands of the consequences (guess what? The people most "deserving" are unlikely to be the people that suffer, and that fact that someone's in on parole- yep, our 17-year old shoplifter hasn't even been found guilty yet- isn't likely to stop this happening). If you really believe in rape as much as you're willing to mouth off about, let's see you debate it in public, rather than shoving it under the carpet.
Scum loving bleeding heart shitbags such as yourself are one of the reasons why many of our largest cities are barely habitable.
If you think you're so much in the fucking right, if you think rape is such a great punishment, why the fuck don't you stand up for what you believe in?
You want to have your fucking sick rape punishment fantasies, but you'd rather sweep it under the carpet, because you know when it was out in the open as a proposed law you'd be exposed for the all-bluster bullshitter you really are.
If expecting someone to be punished appropriately, to be given the opportunity to defend themselves before they get raped, and not to be exposed to a system, which, let's face it DOESN'T FUCKING WORK because the weakest are going to get punished, not those who deserve it most- if all that makes me a "cowardly, genetically defective piece of shit... scum loving bleeding heart shitbag", better that than a bullshitter who doesn't have the guts to see the consequences of his half-baked, badly thought out rape fantasies exposed to daylight.
Ever figure out that 'punishment' that didn't really depend on how guilty someone was might not be very effective? No... keep on blaming "liberals", or whoever else you figure out is to blame. Not you for supporting action outside the law. Never you to blame.
Yeah. Keep it under the carpet, so you don't have to justify yourself- "a particularly noisome shit", that's you alright.
Coward.
It looks like a cheap stereo-set! All those flashing lights!
Flashing lights masquerading as functionality are the superficiality preferred by aesthetically-challenged geeks who like to criticise Apple owners for being superficial.
You're spot on. If flashing lights are so great, how come there are more of them on the cheap hifis? I was going to say "micro systems", but some of those monstrosities are as big as my old all-in-one "Midi" hifi (record deck, twin cassettes, radio); and they include lots of pointless, contrived and obviously *cheap* moulded detailing.
Nope. Flashy lights -|-> Functional in general...
On the other hand, minimalism can go too far as well, and I'm not going to stand up and defend the boring fugliness of the typical beige PC case (fine for the back office and server room, but they're just so damn *boring*; even light grey would be more interesting than *beige*.)
This isn't competing with Apple. Granted, it looks like someone has put a lot of consideration into the appearance, but in this case, it looks designed to appeal to (a) the "black is cool, lots of nicely-coloured bright lights" boys toys market, and (b) The "ThinkGeek" market, who are more like the latter than they'd care to admit. Actually, I'm not sure it's flashy and superficial enough for (a), but at either rate, its visual "appeal" isn't the same as Apple's.
Personally, I think it's tacky; I wish they'd hurry up and release the Nanode, and preferably in lots of different colours like the Cubit P4 (why on earth did they reduce the colour range for the Cubit? I *want* the choice of Metallic Red or Copper...)
and with that, we cue up those that are offended by a prison rape comment. who's going to be first?
Hey, if you think it's such a great idea, why are you posting as an Anonymous Coward?
>> For some reason, I've heard of many vocal
....people who vandalize public toilets?! Seriously?
>> lobbies in the US, but never one willing to push
>> for gang rape of 17-year-old shoplifters.
> And who the fuck said anything about that? I
> certainly didn't, don't put words in my mouth
> fucktard.
That may not be what you said, but given your implied endorsement of informal rape (and its consequences), that's one obvious consequence. You're a fucking coward who wants something, but isn't willing to stand up for the consequences. This is why I'd like to see all those friends of rapists try to get their support of this informal 'policy' enshrined in law- it'd show it up for the unbalanced, ineffective (what punishment do the rapists get?) and downright fucking sick measure it is.
I notice you didn't address anything I said in my message properly, preferring to call me a "fucktard".
You come out in support of the use of rape; well, if it's such a good idea, get it into the US law books. As you said... death by gang rape for Enron executives, phone scammers, corporate polluters and....
Why rape? Is gassing or electrocution too good for "people who vandalize public toilets"? Man, you complained that you hadn't said anything about the 17-year old shoplifter case, but you support its use for "people who vandalise public toilets"?!
Fuck. I might have understood if you'd said they deserved to have their arms broken, but I'm trying to think what sort of drooling, right-wing, fucked up piece of scum supports the rape and HIV infection of "people who vandalize public toilets". Does this include the guy who wrote grafitti on the walls?
Oh, hang on, maybe you didn't explicitly *say* you supported them getting AIDS. So it's not your fault. And it's not my fault if I start shooting bullets in your direction and you die, because I didn't intend to hit any vital organs or whatever.
As I said, you, and anyone else who supports rape as a form of informal punishment, are a fucking coward who doesn't have the guts to stand up for what they believe in.
Of course he should first spend some time in a nice secure federal pound-me-in-the-ass penitentiary. Having his anus blown out and being several billion dollars in debt would be just punishment and a fine deterrent. (My emphasis)
I agree totally. Let's throw him in with some HIV-infected sex offender and have him die a slow and painful death caught from being repeatedly raped by this sick fuck.
Maybe this guy will escape his punishment. That's why I hope you'll be publicly declaring your support for manadatory repeated rape of spammers until they get infected with HIV, or hang themselves.
I'm not sure which punishment you propose for the sex offenders who'll be carrying out the rape. Should professionals be hired to do this?
Either way, I expect those who share this view to be airing their views more vocally, in order to avoid being labelled hypocritical scum who support rape being carried out informally, but don't have the guts to have it written in law.
For some reason, I've heard of many vocal lobbies in the US, but never one willing to push for gang rape of 17-year-old shoplifters.
In addition, would it be appropriate for this punishment to include men raping women, or would that be too fucking sick for you?
Does owning copyright imply that someone has to hand over copyrighted material to you? Or just that you have the right to copy the stuff yourself and prevent others copying it (which is *not* the same thing)?
In the latter case, Yahoo could say "fine, we're not stopping you from copying it", and they may still be within their rights to retain and transfer the data as this may have been implied by acceptance of the original user agreement (IANAL).
In the event of my death, these are my passwords in plaintext. I trust the Slashdot community to maintain confidentiality until I depart this life and my soul goes straight to hell^w^w^w^w ascends to heaven. Here they come:-
Hotmail:- wn4tpr0n4u
Yahoo:- x10CAM4me
Geocities:- 4n0TH4pOpuP
PayPal:- pp47isTEHsuX0r5
Of course, if anyone asks for the account names to go with them, I'll know you're up to something.
we have these in the UK. They taste about as good as warmed up cold coffee. Which is basically what it is....
I've never seen that, though I've seen the cans of coffee that get kept in a warming device.
Point is, almost my first thought (*) was "Isn't this going to taste quite poor, since it's basically brewed ages in advance?" I don't see that the people who think Starbucks is so great (whether it is or not; I'm proud to say I've *never* even been in Starbucks; nor Gap for that matter) would be that much slower on the uptake.
I agree with the writers of the article. It's going to be a novelty; frankly, once it's been hanging around that long, I doubt that even the best coffee around could match up to bog-standard instant, let alone Starbucks.
If it was going to be that much of a success, why don't I see more people going around with the pre-heated cans of coffee, despite the fact they're widely available?
(*) My first thought was "the coffee heats *itself*?... hang on, I don't think so"
Walmart is having a negative effect on the market. Manufactors are forced to never raise prices for products despite inflation
I read that this was one explanation for the proliferation of countless pointless variants on the same product; the 'variant' is a 'new' product, and puts the manufacturer in a stronger position when it comes to negotiating.
I don't live in the US, so I don't know how often companies change products there, though.
Rainbird dprinklers ('sprinklers'?) got tired of Walmart playing games with them and dropped them as a distributor.
Good for them; but how did they get out of the corner they'd presumably got themselves into; i.e. (as described in a sibling message) they scale up production to sell to Wal-Mart, but *have* to sell to Wal-Mart to pay off the investment in that production. Maybe they were very clever, I'd like to hear.
The 25th of December is when the days begin to grow longer again.
Actually, that happens on the 21st or thereabouts.
THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!!!!!
At last! Someone else who shares my views on that horribly overrated keyboard!
Let's get married and have kids.... erm, no, on second thoughts that wouldn't work since I'm a guy.
Let's just form an anti-Model M organisation instead and seek to eradicate this nostalgia propoganda! We could start by hoarding a great pile of them, and setting fire to it, releasing tons of carcinogenic toxins into the atmosphere.
Seriously, I never understood the point of that noisy keyboard with a pressure-point halfway down the travel like that. I actually prefer the cheapish membrane keyboards (well, within reason).
I didn't say the Firefox logo was sexually explicit. I said the *reworking* that was linked to in the grandparent message was sexually explicit. If you'd paid attention to what I said, your misunderstanding wouldn't make any sense, anyway.
Ironically, the fox is at least wearing some clothes in the reworking...
Bleh, it contains nudity
To be fair, the fox in the original FireFox logo was also naked.
Actually, most foxes are naked for that matter...
Aaargh.
;-)
:)
The Firefox logo was a beautifully designed piece of artwork; if nothing else, that sexually explicit reworking is pretty amateurish in comparison. More on the level of that seriously fucked-up cartoon strip Boston and Shaun.
I would advise against its use for publicity purposes. Thank God they didn't use it in the NYT ad
Anyhow, I want a pornographic version of the Internet Explorer 'e' logo. That should be a challenge.
Yeah; well, I pretty much believe Gates here too, although I'd trust him as far as I could throw him.
However, I was (and still am) open to anyone who can provide a reasonably plausible citation for the quote. I've *never* seen one; so although I'd normally suspect Gates was telling fibs, in this case I believe his denial.
Apocryphal quote at best. Can you provide the original source if you care to disagree?
You need to pay into the US Social Security system for 10 years before you can get a dime back in retirement benefits. An H1 visa is for 6 years. Anyone who stays on an H1 visa will therefore pay lots of money into the social security system, and see nothing back. How does this not meet your criteria?
Where the HELL did I say it didn't?
I was drawing a general case (about as general as I could make it) about people moving from one society to another.
I certainly didn't claim this justified (or otherwise) the US H1 system.
Did you pay for the existing infrastructure you were born into? Bite me.
Here's some stuff to chew over;
*No-one* chose to be born into a particular culture; no-one *chose* to be born full-stop. The responsibility for that lies with the parents, and it is their contribution (and that of the extended family and their associates) to the infrastructure that should be considered.
Of course, when someone moves to another country, they (or those responsible for them, or associated with them) have not made a sustained investment in that country. It is unreasonable to expect that because a person paid taxes in a particular country for 6 months that they should be entitled to all the benefits. Similarly, it is unreasonable to criticise someone for not "paying for" the infrastructure of the society they were born into.
Of course, there comes a point where treating someone as a second-class citizen- even when they have more than paid their dues for many years- could rightly be considered discriminatory; but it's *not* unreasonable to expect a newcomer to invest in the pot for some time before they can take from it.
Hell, the stunts RIAA pull are all perfectly legal, but that doesn't make them right!
All of them?
Just because something hasn't been tried in court and isn't likely to be tried in court doesn't make it "perfectly legal".
If you view companies as amoral profit-maximising entities (which is what most large companies are), it makes sense for them to do whatever they can *get away with* , and if that includes things that would be breaking the law but are unlikely to get to court for any number of reasons, then so be it. I would guess a number of the RIAA's tactics may be found illegal in such a situation.
Of course, they will also break the law if the (total) punishment is far smaller than the potential benefits.
This doesn't account for pissing off the public. In a non-monopoly situation, the public have an opportunity not to buy that company's products.
In a monopoly situation, the companies risks the public (through politicians) taking action against the monopoly. Ha ha..... yeah, I found that last bit pretty implausible too.