Marthisdil. Unaware of the clever reference to Taco's comments on the iPod. Lame.
Says who? I've always been one of the mind "if you can't make fun of yourself, you don't deserve to make fun of someone else." Too bad more people don't think the same:)
Why should Microsoft have the right to lock up my documents and not tell me how to get my document complete with formatting from their program?
Because they can?
What gives them the right to treat my work in that way after I have already paid them?
They aren't doing anything with your work.
I believe that companies should be allowed to take whatever measures they deem neccessary to prevent piracy and reverse-engineering of their software as long as it doesn't hurt customers.
How is this hurting you? If you were that concerned about it, you'd not have bought their software. You'd be writing PostScript code in VI...or text in EDLIN...or something.
I'm happy to pay for, and use proprietary software, but that does not mean that I want some company to tell me with what software I can open my own data.
Then write your data in text form. Or save as RTF. Or write in PostScript...or whatever. If you create something in AutoCad, you expect to be able to open it in AutoCad - anything else that opens is is just a nicety. If you don't like it, too bad.
You're happy to pay for proprietary software that will do the things you want it to do. If Office doesn't do that for you, then get something else. You're not being forced to use it. If you have to use it at work as part of your job, well, that's your company's issue - you get to deal.
What amendment says that the states have to provide free and open access? Oh, must be the same one that you think lets you browse kiddie porn.
Whatever - the state is being responsible, and providing a service at no cost to the user. In the end, they should have every right to say what people can and can't do with it - after all, they aren't MAKING you use their connection. There's other options if you wanna browse your own stuff.
Assuming the OP truly was not looking for a 'yes man' style of article, it is reasonable to believe a review detailing true failings of Firefox without resorting to questionable statistics would have met the requirements for 'enlightenment'.
Except that all statistics are "questionable" - thus, it becomes nearly moot.
Based on reading the OPs blurb, it seemed that he was biased from the get-go, and ended his blurb with an "attack of his own against Symantec. Yadda, yadda, rinse, repeat, nothing to see here...Was typical.
Ah - but you see, there's the difference. Comcast "owns" the IPs in question. If you were to go up to them and say "hey, what location was this IP address active at, on X date at Y time" - if they wanted to, they could tell you - since it's their line, their equipment, their IP. Now, granted, they likely wouldn't tell you.
However, it's all their equipment, and unless your terms of service explicitly says otherwise, I don't see where there's a problem of what the company can tell whom, about their equipment.
If she wins against Comcast, cool - that will give her the money that will let her pay RIAA when they take her to court and win. And then all providers will change their TOS to allow them to divulge information, and it's all moot
Again - it's not like they couldn't have told the RIAA (or anyone else for that matter), who's connection was using the IP address the RIAA inquired about, and where the cable equipment is located at.
Since it's Comcast's hardware, they can tell them the address, etc, IMO, and withold her name. Show up at her door, say "hello, who are you? Oh, here's a subpeona to show up here for these allegations. Have a nice day"
And be done with it.
I mean, seems like she likely got caught with her hand in the cookie jar, and she's pissed at the people who helped her get caught.
Technically, they could have done the same thing without using her name. It's their cable line. They can trace the IP to which box on which house it's at, which is their equipment,and say "the equipment the person you asked about, connected to this box at this address, at these times" and given that info, just opened up a John Doe subpeona for the resident living there to show up in court, and the name would be revealed there.
They wouldn't be selling it - odds are people can see it when looking up info online (try using encarta from the MSN website) or when getting updates from MS for Encarta on your local computer....
or will the OS creators have to start making their software secure?"
Or will people like the OP finally come to realize that when it comes to code, there's usually something broken in it - no matter how big or small, and someone who takes the time to figure it out, will almost always figure a way in?
But your comment sucked, and you wasted 10 seconds of your worthless life to post it....so what does that make you? Oh, right, one of those other virginal/. posters
Yeah - only because Linux and Macs aren't pervasive enough to warrant the virus/trojan writers to focus their time on them. If Linux and Macs ever gain a dominant foothold, that will change - and you all know it.
Of course it'll also be most effective at creating a mindset that isn't geared towards using MS products.
Yeah - show them a system that they can't play games on, thus, making them want Windows even more so they CAN play games. Sure, you can make SOME games play on Linux (some even have native clients). But well, buying Cedega and trying to make the game work...well, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Not too many kids care much about working with the commandline and hack-proofing things. Some do...but most just wanna have a computer that will do what they wanna do - and for most kids, it's play games.
"How do you think about governments' funding OSS developments(by tax)?"
Would be sorta cool - they we could all start hating the OSS software creators like we all hate MS, right? I mean, we'd be paying them money with our tax dollars, so we can bitch when they don't get security holes plugged weeks before someone announces them, and all that good stuff, right?
There wont be key-loggers, virus infested OS's Active X, IE, blah, blah, blah. At least this is a step in the right direction.
Yeah...there will be hardware incompatabilities, irate customers due to that, just as many bugs, being forced to use a new cd when they fix said bugs, oops, I used the wrong cd, where did i put that updated version...Yeah....it'll go nice and smooth....
Sure I do - I bought the song and I can do as I please with it, provided I don't redistribute copies.
Unless, of course, you've agreed in some way to limit what you can do with it, right? So, if you agree to not do something, and you do, you're in violation.
The Internal Revenue Services uses a list of 20 criteria to help determine a worker's status, but Kaupins said those criteria come down to three main points: Does the employer have control over where you work, what time you work and what you work with?
If memory serves, that's to determine if you are an employee, or self-employed. If you are a contractor, wither through yourself, or some other company, you are either self-employed, or are employed by the contracting company.
I hope HP wins this case, and in the meantime, tells the outsourcing company to find them new people who will then sign agreements. Greedy people suck!
Slashdot Mirror
Marthisdil. Unaware of the clever reference to Taco's comments on the iPod. Lame.
:)
Says who? I've always been one of the mind "if you can't make fun of yourself, you don't deserve to make fun of someone else." Too bad more people don't think the same
No stopwatch. Less features than Mozilla. Lame.
Anonymous poster. Someone who is blind to anything not open source. Lame.
Why should Microsoft have the right to lock up my documents and not tell me how to get my document complete with formatting from their program?
Because they can?
What gives them the right to treat my work in that way after I have already paid them?
They aren't doing anything with your work.
I believe that companies should be allowed to take whatever measures they deem neccessary to prevent piracy and reverse-engineering of their software as long as it doesn't hurt customers.
How is this hurting you? If you were that concerned about it, you'd not have bought their software. You'd be writing PostScript code in VI...or text in EDLIN...or something.
I'm happy to pay for, and use proprietary software, but that does not mean that I want some company to tell me with what software I can open my own data.
Then write your data in text form. Or save as RTF. Or write in PostScript...or whatever. If you create something in AutoCad, you expect to be able to open it in AutoCad - anything else that opens is is just a nicety. If you don't like it, too bad.
You're happy to pay for proprietary software that will do the things you want it to do. If Office doesn't do that for you, then get something else. You're not being forced to use it. If you have to use it at work as part of your job, well, that's your company's issue - you get to deal.
Sounds both wasteful and unconstitutional."
What amendment says that the states have to provide free and open access? Oh, must be the same one that you think lets you browse kiddie porn.
Whatever - the state is being responsible, and providing a service at no cost to the user. In the end, they should have every right to say what people can and can't do with it - after all, they aren't MAKING you use their connection. There's other options if you wanna browse your own stuff.
Assuming the OP truly was not looking for a 'yes man' style of article, it is reasonable to believe a review detailing true failings of Firefox without resorting to questionable statistics would have met the requirements for 'enlightenment'.
Except that all statistics are "questionable" - thus, it becomes nearly moot.
Based on reading the OPs blurb, it seemed that he was biased from the get-go, and ended his blurb with an "attack of his own against Symantec. Yadda, yadda, rinse, repeat, nothing to see here...Was typical.
Ah - but you see, there's the difference. Comcast "owns" the IPs in question. If you were to go up to them and say "hey, what location was this IP address active at, on X date at Y time" - if they wanted to, they could tell you - since it's their line, their equipment, their IP. Now, granted, they likely wouldn't tell you. However, it's all their equipment, and unless your terms of service explicitly says otherwise, I don't see where there's a problem of what the company can tell whom, about their equipment. If she wins against Comcast, cool - that will give her the money that will let her pay RIAA when they take her to court and win. And then all providers will change their TOS to allow them to divulge information, and it's all moot
Address where their EQUIPMENT IS LOCATED WHICH THEY OWN isn't personal information. Or do you not understand that point?
Again - it's not like they couldn't have told the RIAA (or anyone else for that matter), who's connection was using the IP address the RIAA inquired about, and where the cable equipment is located at. Since it's Comcast's hardware, they can tell them the address, etc, IMO, and withold her name. Show up at her door, say "hello, who are you? Oh, here's a subpeona to show up here for these allegations. Have a nice day" And be done with it.
Of downloading music....
I mean, seems like she likely got caught with her hand in the cookie jar, and she's pissed at the people who helped her get caught.
Technically, they could have done the same thing without using her name. It's their cable line. They can trace the IP to which box on which house it's at, which is their equipment,and say "the equipment the person you asked about, connected to this box at this address, at these times" and given that info, just opened up a John Doe subpeona for the resident living there to show up in court, and the name would be revealed there.
Yet when you send in a report about a security flaw in OpenOffice that affects possibly everyone who uses it, the story gets rejected - woo! :)
Love em.
too bad your opinion means nothing in the grand scheme of things.
Personally, I hope he exhausts all his appeals, gets fined a ton of money AND put in jail. Fuck all the spammers.
They wouldn't be selling it - odds are people can see it when looking up info online (try using encarta from the MSN website) or when getting updates from MS for Encarta on your local computer....
or will the OS creators have to start making their software secure?"
Or will people like the OP finally come to realize that when it comes to code, there's usually something broken in it - no matter how big or small, and someone who takes the time to figure it out, will almost always figure a way in?
I bet the OP thinks Linux is secure too.
But your comment sucked, and you wasted 10 seconds of your worthless life to post it....so what does that make you? Oh, right, one of those other virginal /. posters
yeah, the global war on terror is used as an excuse for the current regimes totalitarian tendencies. You americans better read 1984.
Let us know when you stop being a Socialistic Frenchy then maybe we'll care.
It all comes down to how you have to do the depreciation.
With leasing, you just treat it as an expense, just like say, buying copier paper.
With purchasing and depreciating, it's like any other asset. The IRS has rules as to how fast you can depreciate it, etc, etc.
...were worth reading. The rest was the expected stuff.
No battery for a laptop that is actually USED for anything lasts more than a couple hours. Sure, you can buy extras and start swapping...but why?
Yeah - only because Linux and Macs aren't pervasive enough to warrant the virus/trojan writers to focus their time on them. If Linux and Macs ever gain a dominant foothold, that will change - and you all know it.
Of course it'll also be most effective at creating a mindset that isn't geared towards using MS products.
Yeah - show them a system that they can't play games on, thus, making them want Windows even more so they CAN play games. Sure, you can make SOME games play on Linux (some even have native clients). But well, buying Cedega and trying to make the game work...well, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Not too many kids care much about working with the commandline and hack-proofing things. Some do...but most just wanna have a computer that will do what they wanna do - and for most kids, it's play games.
"How do you think about governments' funding OSS developments(by tax)?"
Would be sorta cool - they we could all start hating the OSS software creators like we all hate MS, right? I mean, we'd be paying them money with our tax dollars, so we can bitch when they don't get security holes plugged weeks before someone announces them, and all that good stuff, right?
Right.
There wont be key-loggers, virus infested OS's Active X, IE, blah, blah, blah. At least this is a step in the right direction.
Yeah...there will be hardware incompatabilities, irate customers due to that, just as many bugs, being forced to use a new cd when they fix said bugs, oops, I used the wrong cd, where did i put that updated version...Yeah....it'll go nice and smooth....
For such a damn long post making me have to f'in scroll the main page.
Sure I do - I bought the song and I can do as I please with it, provided I don't redistribute copies.
Unless, of course, you've agreed in some way to limit what you can do with it, right? So, if you agree to not do something, and you do, you're in violation.
Funny how simple logic works.
The Internal Revenue Services uses a list of 20 criteria to help determine a worker's status, but Kaupins said those criteria come down to three main points: Does the employer have control over where you work, what time you work and what you work with?
If memory serves, that's to determine if you are an employee, or self-employed. If you are a contractor, wither through yourself, or some other company, you are either self-employed, or are employed by the contracting company.
I hope HP wins this case, and in the meantime, tells the outsourcing company to find them new people who will then sign agreements. Greedy people suck!