People would probably complain at first but they'd get used to it just like I'm sure people complained about stamps but accept it now.
Remember when we all used to complain about stamps? I remember pulling up Slashdot on that dreadful morning and seeing the headline:
"FreePostLover writes:
"The USPS has pulled back on its pledge to deliver all mail for free forever, and is scheduled to begin charging for delivery next month. Sources say the delivery will require you to affix 'stamps,' or small pieces of patterned paper with an adhesive backing, to anything you send. The catch? Those small pieces of paper will cost you upward of 25 cents each (though no exact price has been announced"
Looks like my free Amazon shipping is about to fall apart.
GP did qualify his citation with the phrase "The wikipedia article gives a good definition of creationism," not "The wikipedia article backs me up, therefore I'm right." No implication was made that the source was otherwise reliable. (Heck, you could quote Conservapedia if it gave a good definition... though it doesn't.)
Who are Jones Day anyway? How could Jones Day be concerned with trademark dilution if nobody outside of their own damn office building knows who they are?
Congratulations, user 1125189, you've won a free trip to glorious Cleveland, Ohio, courtesy of Jones Day - One Firm Worlwide. Please proceed to your front door, where our siren-topped courtesy vehicle will pick you up in twenty minutes.
Re:DVR + Netflix Online + USB + DRM = why bother
on
Bad Signs For Blu-ray
·
· Score: 1
Don't forget the Internet (and by that I mean both downloads and simple web surfing, including Facebooking and other social networking). And gaming.
Entertainment juggling has been hard on the venerable video disc. There are so many entertainment-related balls in the air that inserting a disc in a video player is something I do about once a month at best. At this point watching a full movie is something I do so rarely that I just go to the cinema if it's up to me, and rent pay-per-view if it's up to the spouse. DVD is already pretty much dead for me, and it hasn't been replaced by a newer physical format.
Maybe they should consider putting free trial Blu-Ray players in magazines. I'd consider giving them a spin of they did that.
That would certainly help solve the problem of selling Blu-Ray discs. With free players distributed in magazines people would be much more apt to buy movies in that format. I don't know why magazine companies aren't already doing it.
In question is the "vexatious" claims that the RIAAs legal tactics is a "sham"
The best way to show that criticism of your valiant, righteous lawsuits is a sham is to sue the critic for being so irritatingly vexatious. Now I (and I imagine this goes for everyone else here on Slashdot) take the RIAA completely seriously. I suspect a million geeks just stopped filesharing a few minutes ago, and that the torrents of the tubes have all gone dead: Seeders 0, Leechers 0. The RIAA has won.
Except... all sarcasm aside, this is really desperate.
There is another key. Arthur comes from Earth, and Earth is apparently in one of the plural sectors. We still don't entirely understand what this means, but the effect seems to be that he can return to alternate versions of Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha and find parallel Earths.
The Vogons destroyed all of these alternate versions at the end of Mostly Harmless, but the underlying concept behind the plural sectors was never thoroughly explained. Whatever it all means, it's the reason Fenchurch disappeared between So Long and Mostly Harmless. In explaining why she disappeared this author could conceivably bring both her and Arthur back, but the likelihood is that the resuting book would still not be worth reading.
I disagree. I rather liked Mostly Harmless, and particularly the sci-fi concepts he developed in it, particularly the new guide (the bird). But it did end with the destruction of every Earth in every possible universe, which is a bit of a downer.
If the sixth book - which I agree should not be done - is done, it should probably deal with the concept of the plural sectors and what happened to Fenchurch. That would be the best way to end on a positive note.
Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!
This whole explanation is just designed to buy you favor with the Illuminati, the transatlatnic conservative union that secretly controls Slashdot and most other sites on this supposedly "unregulated" Internet. Anonymous Coward indeed! They know who you are...
Step 28 of the Apple Product Cycle. Step 28 for the iPhone was the chipset, so maybe that's the problem with these scratches... er, blue screens... er, faulty plastic backs... er, WPA network errors as well.
I wonder, if Rowling had not had a similar product in the works, if the decision to sue would have been different.
No. The judgement actually specifies this:
Notwithstanding Rowling's public statements of her intention to publish her own encyclopedia, the market for reference guides to the Harry Potter works is not exclusively hers to exploit or license, no matter the commercial success attributable to the popularity of the original works.
Emphasis mine. So the Judge recognizes that the money involved is irrelevant, and that anyone is free to compile and publish a reference work for Harry Potter. But according to the judgement, this particular work went too far and therefore does not qualify for fair use protections. Ergo, infringement.
No one here on Slashdot should give you their opinion of whether this was a fair judgement without first reading the unpublished Lexicon book (probably hard to do under the circumstances) and comparing it to the content of the Harry Potter books. While the tendency around here is to yell "Copyright - Bad!" it's entirely possible that no injustice was done in this case.
The iphone doesn't run flash and it costs twice as much. No one will ever buy one!
When you buy a computer smaller than your hand you pretty much accept you won't get a full browsing experience out of it. Not so with a netbook, which despite its size is still basically a cheap laptop, and comes with laptop expectations.
To me the interesting thing about the rise of the netbooks is that they mark the death of the upgrade cycle that Microsoft and Intel have fed off for many years. Basically you're getting a laptop with the power of a four year old model, but lightweight, cheap, and with a new warranty. These MIPS-based models satisfy all of those benefits, but the compatibility issue will make this a non-seller for most people.
If it doesn't run the Flash plugin, it's out of the Interweb game for most people. I'm sure someone will port GNU Gnash to it, but that's hardly a substitute. If the buyer only cares about some specific function like word processing, this might not matter. But the usual idea of netbooks is that they are more or less fully web-enabled.
He has no reason to be worried. Chrome is gunning for the anti-standards browser - the one that was designed to prevent the web from becoming a development platform independent of the user agent's host operating system. Most people who develop for the web use "IE" as a curse word, but businesses like Google are reliant upon that browser to deliver their services, making IE a weak point in their business model. Microsoft has good reasons to break standards as long as they control most of the market for user agents. The more Microsoft's browser sinks in market share, the more they have to adopt standards.
Mozilla isn't like that: Firefox is pretty much in step with Chrome on where the future of the web lies. Both browsers are trying to push a network development platform like the one many foresaw in the mid-90s before IE brought stagnation. Now the whole ecosystem is larger and more diverse, particularly since yesterday's Chrome launch, making IE-only development just slightly more difficult to justify and pushing Microsoft further into the standards hell that terrified Bill Gates and company when they finally grokked it in 1995.
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 1
If you didn't get it, #008080 is the default background for Windows 95/98
I know. I threw the hex into the GIMP's palette tool and pressed Enter... and suffered a horrific flashback to the mid 90s. Sort of like the one I have whenever I see the heading bars on Slashdot.
Slashdot Mirror
People would probably complain at first but they'd get used to it just like I'm sure people complained about stamps but accept it now.
Remember when we all used to complain about stamps? I remember pulling up Slashdot on that dreadful morning and seeing the headline:
A sad day indeed.
I know www.thespoom is probably taken, but is ed.thespoom still available?
"I will take the key to Redmond ... but I do not know the way."
I'm qualified to take part in this discussion, since I wisely chose KDE over Gnome.
To use the usual Republican criminality logic, Clinton did the same thing so it's OK:
Clinton Declares Self President for Life
Well, it's not like their picking candidates for a beauty contest, now, is it?
Well, that would make the choice a lot easier.
No kidding. That Joe Biden sure is a looker.
You just quoted Wikipedia to make your point.
GP did qualify his citation with the phrase "The wikipedia article gives a good definition of creationism," not "The wikipedia article backs me up, therefore I'm right." No implication was made that the source was otherwise reliable. (Heck, you could quote Conservapedia if it gave a good definition ... though it doesn't.)
Shhhhhh! Someone put Ubuntu on his machine and didn't tell him what it was. Quick - retract your comment before he finds out.
Who are Jones Day anyway? How could Jones Day be concerned with trademark dilution if nobody outside of their own damn office building knows who they are?
Congratulations, user 1125189, you've won a free trip to glorious Cleveland, Ohio, courtesy of Jones Day - One Firm Worlwide. Please proceed to your front door, where our siren-topped courtesy vehicle will pick you up in twenty minutes.
Don't forget the Internet (and by that I mean both downloads and simple web surfing, including Facebooking and other social networking). And gaming.
Entertainment juggling has been hard on the venerable video disc. There are so many entertainment-related balls in the air that inserting a disc in a video player is something I do about once a month at best. At this point watching a full movie is something I do so rarely that I just go to the cinema if it's up to me, and rent pay-per-view if it's up to the spouse. DVD is already pretty much dead for me, and it hasn't been replaced by a newer physical format.
Maybe they should consider putting free trial Blu-Ray players in magazines. I'd consider giving them a spin of they did that.
That would certainly help solve the problem of selling Blu-Ray discs. With free players distributed in magazines people would be much more apt to buy movies in that format. I don't know why magazine companies aren't already doing it.
Most moral/ethical issues seem clearcut to me. This one really doesn't.
It just goes to show a cat is no trade for integrity.*
* Disclaimer: I have no idea what this means.
I have no idea what A cat is no trade for integrity means but I think it's my new sig.
In question is the "vexatious" claims that the RIAAs legal tactics is a "sham"
The best way to show that criticism of your valiant, righteous lawsuits is a sham is to sue the critic for being so irritatingly vexatious. Now I (and I imagine this goes for everyone else here on Slashdot) take the RIAA completely seriously. I suspect a million geeks just stopped filesharing a few minutes ago, and that the torrents of the tubes have all gone dead: Seeders 0, Leechers 0. The RIAA has won.
Except ... all sarcasm aside, this is really desperate.
There is another key. Arthur comes from Earth, and Earth is apparently in one of the plural sectors. We still don't entirely understand what this means, but the effect seems to be that he can return to alternate versions of Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha and find parallel Earths.
The Vogons destroyed all of these alternate versions at the end of Mostly Harmless, but the underlying concept behind the plural sectors was never thoroughly explained. Whatever it all means, it's the reason Fenchurch disappeared between So Long and Mostly Harmless. In explaining why she disappeared this author could conceivably bring both her and Arthur back, but the likelihood is that the resuting book would still not be worth reading.
I disagree. I rather liked Mostly Harmless, and particularly the sci-fi concepts he developed in it, particularly the new guide (the bird). But it did end with the destruction of every Earth in every possible universe, which is a bit of a downer. If the sixth book - which I agree should not be done - is done, it should probably deal with the concept of the plural sectors and what happened to Fenchurch. That would be the best way to end on a positive note.
Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!
This whole explanation is just designed to buy you favor with the Illuminati, the transatlatnic conservative union that secretly controls Slashdot and most other sites on this supposedly "unregulated" Internet. Anonymous Coward indeed! They know who you are ...
I'm caught in his tractor beam, you insensitive clod!
Step 28 of the Apple Product Cycle. Step 28 for the iPhone was the chipset, so maybe that's the problem with these scratches ... er, blue screens ... er, faulty plastic backs ... er, WPA network errors as well.
I wonder, if Rowling had not had a similar product in the works, if the decision to sue would have been different.
No. The judgement actually specifies this:
Notwithstanding Rowling's public statements of her intention to publish her own encyclopedia, the market for reference guides to the Harry Potter works is not exclusively hers to exploit or license, no matter the commercial success attributable to the popularity of the original works.
Emphasis mine. So the Judge recognizes that the money involved is irrelevant, and that anyone is free to compile and publish a reference work for Harry Potter. But according to the judgement, this particular work went too far and therefore does not qualify for fair use protections. Ergo, infringement.
No one here on Slashdot should give you their opinion of whether this was a fair judgement without first reading the unpublished Lexicon book (probably hard to do under the circumstances) and comparing it to the content of the Harry Potter books. While the tendency around here is to yell "Copyright - Bad!" it's entirely possible that no injustice was done in this case.
The iphone doesn't run flash and it costs twice as much. No one will ever buy one!
When you buy a computer smaller than your hand you pretty much accept you won't get a full browsing experience out of it. Not so with a netbook, which despite its size is still basically a cheap laptop, and comes with laptop expectations.
To me the interesting thing about the rise of the netbooks is that they mark the death of the upgrade cycle that Microsoft and Intel have fed off for many years. Basically you're getting a laptop with the power of a four year old model, but lightweight, cheap, and with a new warranty. These MIPS-based models satisfy all of those benefits, but the compatibility issue will make this a non-seller for most people.
If it doesn't run the Flash plugin, it's out of the Interweb game for most people. I'm sure someone will port GNU Gnash to it, but that's hardly a substitute. If the buyer only cares about some specific function like word processing, this might not matter. But the usual idea of netbooks is that they are more or less fully web-enabled.
He has no reason to be worried. Chrome is gunning for the anti-standards browser - the one that was designed to prevent the web from becoming a development platform independent of the user agent's host operating system. Most people who develop for the web use "IE" as a curse word, but businesses like Google are reliant upon that browser to deliver their services, making IE a weak point in their business model. Microsoft has good reasons to break standards as long as they control most of the market for user agents. The more Microsoft's browser sinks in market share, the more they have to adopt standards.
Mozilla isn't like that: Firefox is pretty much in step with Chrome on where the future of the web lies. Both browsers are trying to push a network development platform like the one many foresaw in the mid-90s before IE brought stagnation. Now the whole ecosystem is larger and more diverse, particularly since yesterday's Chrome launch, making IE-only development just slightly more difficult to justify and pushing Microsoft further into the standards hell that terrified Bill Gates and company when they finally grokked it in 1995.
In Soviet Russia, dot slashes you?
No. In Soviet Russia, you dot slashes.
If you didn't get it, #008080 is the default background for Windows 95/98
I know. I threw the hex into the GIMP's palette tool and pressed Enter ... and suffered a horrific flashback to the mid 90s. Sort of like the one I have whenever I see the heading bars on Slashdot.