oh, but wait! Lets quote Editor-in-chief from the press release:
- "This is an important book about predatory pedophiles on the Internet (...) We changed the title to keep focus on this issue (...) We have always taken this situation very
seriously. And we hope that by making this title change, it will demonstrate just how
dedicated Plume is to clarifying this matter."
so it only took them 4 years to clarify it... dedicated indeed.
And a little more corporate bullshit for you:
- "After the book was released into the market, it was brought to Dutton's attention that a website of the same name existed on the Internet."
Riiiiight... They decided to use a domain name as a title and nobody bothered to check if it was taken.
Good ass kicking/.
P.S. And everybody seems to disassociatie themselves from the Parry FATab. Where's her press release?
Anyway, remember her name, the bitch will be back!
I had the book in my hands and spent a good amount of time browsing it. What a waste of time! Poorly written the story could be resumed in a few words: Don't be a stupid f**** moron and meet strangers in hotel rooms. Period! Internet or no Internet! She has more luck than brains for she's obviously too stupid to live.
Now the c*nt is just milking the I-net paranoia cow and making other ppl lives miserable in the process.
I encourage you to email what you think to Tarbox katie@katiet.com
and her Penguin Putnam mafia customer.service@penguin.co.uk (too bad I couldn't find any customer service email in u$a)
Why don't you also post a review that this self-promoting piece of crap deserves at Amazon.com book review
points:
2 - Having access to code is not only about "fixing problems" but also allows other programmers to pick up an abandoned project and keep developing it. In the closed source world such products simply die. At the same time knowing that your peers can and will audit your code at any time forces most programmers to be more careful.
3 - The question is not as much that *all* software should be free but rather that ideas should not be copyrighted. Anybody should be able to pick up on your idea and try to improve it. And art is a good example!
4 - Since Closed software can only be audited by "the company" we have to rely on their good will to test it thoroughly. In many cases, pushed by corporate constrains, they will only do a halfassed job expecting users to report bugs, and maybe even charge for a future version fixing them. (Microsoft comes to mind).
5 - Programmers do not only have "programming needs" and they do not only program tools for other programmers, period. The fact that user-side OpenSource progs didn't have enough of an impact yet has nothing to do with this argument and should be an entirely different subject.
6 - Restricting choice is NEVER a good idea. Offering an option of a basic, barebones installation is.
of course they're not american... u.s. had never anything to do with saddam or any other dictatorship for that matter. promotion of democracy and justice is their only motivation! pfffff
"The american way...": always find someone else to blame!
Slashdot Mirror
Up in northern Canada we have mosquitos so big you have to call them 'Sir'.
And this year one bloodsucker got elected as Prime Minister...
FYI,
there's also a Google Labs aptitude test / recruiting ad in this month's Linux Journal
it's a good point that the copies already on the market will always generate traffic on katie.com. Will she ever be able to use it again?
K. Jones should also be compensated for 4 years of inconvenience of not being able to use what was rightfully hers!
oh, but wait! Lets quote Editor-in-chief from the press release:
/.
- "This is an important book about predatory pedophiles on the Internet (...) We changed the title to keep focus on this issue (...) We have always taken this situation very seriously. And we hope that by making this title change, it will demonstrate just how dedicated Plume is to clarifying this matter."
so it only took them 4 years to clarify it... dedicated indeed.
And a little more corporate bullshit for you:
- "After the book was released into the market, it was brought to Dutton's attention that a website of the same name existed on the Internet."
Riiiiight... They decided to use a domain name as a title and nobody bothered to check if it was taken.
Good ass kicking
P.S. And everybody seems to disassociatie themselves from the Parry FATab. Where's her press release? Anyway, remember her name, the bitch will be back!
I had the book in my hands and spent a good amount of time browsing it. What a waste of time! Poorly written the story could be resumed in a few words: Don't be a stupid f**** moron and meet strangers in hotel rooms. Period! Internet or no Internet! She has more luck than brains for she's obviously too stupid to live.
Now the c*nt is just milking the I-net paranoia cow and making other ppl lives miserable in the process.
Up Yours Tarbox!!!
I encourage you to email what you think to Tarbox
katie@katiet.com
and her Penguin Putnam mafia
customer.service@penguin.co.uk
(too bad I couldn't find any customer service email in u$a)
Why don't you also post a review that this self-promoting piece of crap deserves at Amazon.com book review
points: 2 - Having access to code is not only about "fixing problems" but also allows other programmers to pick up an abandoned project and keep developing it. In the closed source world such products simply die. At the same time knowing that your peers can and will audit your code at any time forces most programmers to be more careful. 3 - The question is not as much that *all* software should be free but rather that ideas should not be copyrighted. Anybody should be able to pick up on your idea and try to improve it. And art is a good example! 4 - Since Closed software can only be audited by "the company" we have to rely on their good will to test it thoroughly. In many cases, pushed by corporate constrains, they will only do a halfassed job expecting users to report bugs, and maybe even charge for a future version fixing them. (Microsoft comes to mind). 5 - Programmers do not only have "programming needs" and they do not only program tools for other programmers, period. The fact that user-side OpenSource progs didn't have enough of an impact yet has nothing to do with this argument and should be an entirely different subject. 6 - Restricting choice is NEVER a good idea. Offering an option of a basic, barebones installation is.
Rumsfeld & Saddam
of course they're not american... u.s. had never anything to do with saddam or any other dictatorship for that matter.
promotion of democracy and justice is their only motivation! pfffff
"The american way...": always find someone else to blame!