John McLaughlin: Question - Best and worst games of 2006! Pat Buchanan! Pat Buchanan: Well, there's only one best game this year, and that's America's Army, but they're stuck on the worst console of the 21st century, the Iraqstation Thr-- John McLaughlin: Wrong! Tony Blankley! Tony Blankley: This year's best game is Muslim Scrolls IV: Obliv-- John McLaughlin: Wrong! Eleanor! Eleanor Clift: Obviously, the year's worst game is Sim Bush Admini-- John McLaughlin: Also wrong! Mor-ton! Morton Kondracke: Hey, I don't even do this show anym-- John McLaughlin: Wrong! The correct answer is, Duke Nukem Forever! Next year, 2007, will this year's best and worst game finally be released? Bye bye!
Hamas doesn't share a border, with Iran and are antagonists to Israel - which is a barrier to Iran's regional aspirations.
You just proved my point, which is that, below the surface, Iran doesn't really care whether a group/nation is Sunni or Shi'ite - they'll work with or against whomever they need to, in order to achieve the political goal of becoming the dominant force in the region.
Rather, the analog broadcasts are a (downsampled) duplication of the digital broadcasts. That's going to be true whether they have DRM or not, simply because there are so many people out there with analog TV sets right now. When the forced conversion to digital broadcast is complete, the comparison will be irrelevant, as everyone will at least have a converter box.
The point is, the content cabal threatened to produce no HD content, the government (despite its best efforts) ended up calling their bluff, and today we have a bunch of programming in HD.
We can't force them to make the right choice NOW, because they won't make it. They'll provide zero content.
Not true. The content cabal claimed that without a broadcast flag, their government-mandated efforts to switch to digital broadcast HDTV would be tantamount to suicide, and they threatened to obstruct the production of content in HD until such a flag was passed. Here we are, three years after the FCC first tried to implement the broadcast flag by providential decree, and we have a bevy of digital broadcast high-definition programming with no broadcast flag.
The reason the content cabal will never provide "zero content" is because there's too much money to be made even without DRM. The only reason they want DRM is because it provides them with additional control over the content that they sell to us that goes beyond copyright and piracy prevention. It's the same reason they have things like User Operation Prohibited and Region Codes in the DVD spec. Neither of those forms of DRM have anything to do with preventing piracy. UOP is used to force-feed advertising (and the ubiquitously-ignored FBI warning) to the paying customer, and region codes are used to exploit worldwide market arbitrage.
They are fighting tooth and nail today to get DRM everywhere they can, because they know that once the technological dust settles and the standards that we'll be using for the next 20 years mature, if it doesn't have DRM in it, it never will in any meaningful sense.
Okay, first you pin this sort of behavior on "ambitious, young-republican types". Then you cite a bunch of names - "Rove, Gannon, DeLay, A[]bramoff" - who don't actually fit that mold, all of them being well-established, somewhat aged participants in the political arena. And finally, you ignore the fact that blind ambition easily crosses partisan boundaries, and scandal has been no stranger to Democrats as well as Republicans.
Mentioning this guy's Republican-ness in the OP's title was nothing more than a thinly-veiled, irrelevant dig on the Republican Party, when the story is really about some moron in a low-ranking political job who tried to cheat on his resume.
This is what I did as well, and I'm very happy with the results. I've been sanitizing most HTML tags (including IMG) out of my e-mails for years now, but a nonzero number of spams that contained IMG tags were still making it through to my inbox (they'd be blank or have nonsense text unrelated to the spam, but I'd still have to deal with them).
Unfortunately, it won't work for people who need to accept e-mail from unknown non-tech-savvy parties, since when people use those fancy-schmancy editors that put in things like stationery backgrounds or letterhead images, they may be sending a legit e-mail with (unnecessary) attachments.
Your Christmas light shop doesn't benefit from owning rights-of-way (or benefitting from another company's right-of-way) on both public and private property. It doesn't hold monopoly power over Christmas lights.
In exchange for having their monopoly and rights-of-way protected by the government, it's only fair that utility companies would be required to give something back to the community, especially since there's such a huge public benefit at stake. If a utility company is considering moving into a hence-unserviced market, they can take into account servicing that market's outlying areas when they make that decision.
I agree with everything you said, and none of it is in conflict with what I said above, if you read what I said carefully.
Okay, except the part where you said that Bush is a "Christian extremist". Yes, he's a Christian, and yes, you probably disagree with a lot of his policies, but he doesn't hate Muslims any more than Dick Cheney is an avatar of Hitler*. You should have given an exemplar that everyone would agree upon, like Pat Robertson.
(* Thanks to Joy Behar for fifteen seconds of belly-laughing entertainment. And not the part where she said Cheney was like Hitler - I mean the part where even her ultra-liberal cronies gasped in astonishment.)
Suppose I let a friend borrow a few of my CDs. That's legal, right? But now, what this judge is saying, is that (at least in Australia) what's illegal isn't letting them borrow the CDs - it's telling them that it's okay with me if they make copies.
Given that Microsoft's record for backward- and forward-compatibility is among the best in the industry, it's not entirely clear what you're basing your allegations on.
Until another operating system gives me everything I want and more from Microsoft - and I'm talking usability, utility, compatability with entertainment,... I'm sticking with Microsoft.
Does 2000 provide you with usability, utility, and compatibility with entertainment? What about XP? The only one of those things that Vista will provide that (eventually) 2000 and XP won't is compatibility, and that's solely because Microsoft strives to force the obsolescence of their prior pretty good OSes so they can sell more product.
Discussing this as a Linux versus Microsoft issue, as RMS has done, merely obfuscates the real issue, which is that Vista is just another upgrade most of us don't need.
Then when you buy the machine OS-less, they should warn you that unless you know what you're doing, your new machine won't do the stuff that you want. But they should also provide the option to sell you the same machine without an OS and without all that crappy bundled software and discount the cost of that software from the purchase price of the machine, in case you would rather put Linux on it, for instance.
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe they were excited to get a turkey that came pre-stuffed ;)
Gestures do have their place, but not as the primary user interface for office systems.
Neo: How about I give you the finger.... and you give me my phone call?
It is at this point that Agent Smith blocks Neo's VoIP ports, and... well, you know the rest.
John McLaughlin: Question - Best and worst games of 2006! Pat Buchanan!
Pat Buchanan: Well, there's only one best game this year, and that's America's Army, but they're stuck on the worst console of the 21st century, the Iraqstation Thr--
John McLaughlin: Wrong! Tony Blankley!
Tony Blankley: This year's best game is Muslim Scrolls IV: Obliv--
John McLaughlin: Wrong! Eleanor!
Eleanor Clift: Obviously, the year's worst game is Sim Bush Admini--
John McLaughlin: Also wrong! Mor-ton!
Morton Kondracke: Hey, I don't even do this show anym--
John McLaughlin: Wrong! The correct answer is, Duke Nukem Forever! Next year, 2007, will this year's best and worst game finally be released? Bye bye!
why not offer support for [b]internal[/b] mail
Given the topic of the OP, there's definitely some sort of irony here.
Hamas doesn't share a border, with Iran and are antagonists to Israel - which is a barrier to Iran's regional aspirations.
You just proved my point, which is that, below the surface, Iran doesn't really care whether a group/nation is Sunni or Shi'ite - they'll work with or against whomever they need to, in order to achieve the political goal of becoming the dominant force in the region.
Remember, the Iranians are Shiite, the Taliban are Wahhabi Sunni. Basically the Iranians don't like them, either.
That hasn't stopped them from supporting Hamas, which is also a Sunni organization.
Why is this under "Your Rights Online"? It has nothing to do with my rights, nor does it have anything to do with anything online.
CmdrTaco should make a new category called "Somebody's Rights Somewhere", just for this sort of article.
Rather, the analog broadcasts are a (downsampled) duplication of the digital broadcasts. That's going to be true whether they have DRM or not, simply because there are so many people out there with analog TV sets right now. When the forced conversion to digital broadcast is complete, the comparison will be irrelevant, as everyone will at least have a converter box.
The point is, the content cabal threatened to produce no HD content, the government (despite its best efforts) ended up calling their bluff, and today we have a bunch of programming in HD.
We can't force them to make the right choice NOW, because they won't make it. They'll provide zero content.
Not true. The content cabal claimed that without a broadcast flag, their government-mandated efforts to switch to digital broadcast HDTV would be tantamount to suicide, and they threatened to obstruct the production of content in HD until such a flag was passed. Here we are, three years after the FCC first tried to implement the broadcast flag by providential decree, and we have a bevy of digital broadcast high-definition programming with no broadcast flag.
The reason the content cabal will never provide "zero content" is because there's too much money to be made even without DRM. The only reason they want DRM is because it provides them with additional control over the content that they sell to us that goes beyond copyright and piracy prevention. It's the same reason they have things like User Operation Prohibited and Region Codes in the DVD spec. Neither of those forms of DRM have anything to do with preventing piracy. UOP is used to force-feed advertising (and the ubiquitously-ignored FBI warning) to the paying customer, and region codes are used to exploit worldwide market arbitrage.
They are fighting tooth and nail today to get DRM everywhere they can, because they know that once the technological dust settles and the standards that we'll be using for the next 20 years mature, if it doesn't have DRM in it, it never will in any meaningful sense.
Farnsworth: Sweet Zombie Jesus! It's huge!
Amy: It's coming up!
Hermes: Oh, that's big!
Farnsworth: A colossal-mouth bass!
Okay, first you pin this sort of behavior on "ambitious, young-republican types". Then you cite a bunch of names - "Rove, Gannon, DeLay, A[]bramoff" - who don't actually fit that mold, all of them being well-established, somewhat aged participants in the political arena. And finally, you ignore the fact that blind ambition easily crosses partisan boundaries, and scandal has been no stranger to Democrats as well as Republicans.
Mentioning this guy's Republican-ness in the OP's title was nothing more than a thinly-veiled, irrelevant dig on the Republican Party, when the story is really about some moron in a low-ranking political job who tried to cheat on his resume.
Nah, ol' George was stuck on "Episode VII: Attack of the Snape".
I think the phrase you're looking for is "takes one to know one".
This is what I did as well, and I'm very happy with the results. I've been sanitizing most HTML tags (including IMG) out of my e-mails for years now, but a nonzero number of spams that contained IMG tags were still making it through to my inbox (they'd be blank or have nonsense text unrelated to the spam, but I'd still have to deal with them).
Unfortunately, it won't work for people who need to accept e-mail from unknown non-tech-savvy parties, since when people use those fancy-schmancy editors that put in things like stationery backgrounds or letterhead images, they may be sending a legit e-mail with (unnecessary) attachments.
Your Christmas light shop doesn't benefit from owning rights-of-way (or benefitting from another company's right-of-way) on both public and private property. It doesn't hold monopoly power over Christmas lights.
In exchange for having their monopoly and rights-of-way protected by the government, it's only fair that utility companies would be required to give something back to the community, especially since there's such a huge public benefit at stake. If a utility company is considering moving into a hence-unserviced market, they can take into account servicing that market's outlying areas when they make that decision.
I agree with everything you said, and none of it is in conflict with what I said above, if you read what I said carefully.
Okay, except the part where you said that Bush is a "Christian extremist". Yes, he's a Christian, and yes, you probably disagree with a lot of his policies, but he doesn't hate Muslims any more than Dick Cheney is an avatar of Hitler*. You should have given an exemplar that everyone would agree upon, like Pat Robertson.
(* Thanks to Joy Behar for fifteen seconds of belly-laughing entertainment. And not the part where she said Cheney was like Hitler - I mean the part where even her ultra-liberal cronies gasped in astonishment.)
Sorry, but even if we didn't hate Muslim extremists, they'd still hate us.
Sony owns MGM now, so why can't they just do something like www.sony.com/wargames2, like they do with all their other movies?
Suppose I let a friend borrow a few of my CDs. That's legal, right? But now, what this judge is saying, is that (at least in Australia) what's illegal isn't letting them borrow the CDs - it's telling them that it's okay with me if they make copies.
Funk dat.
Given that Microsoft's record for backward- and forward-compatibility is among the best in the industry, it's not entirely clear what you're basing your allegations on.
Uh.... DirectX 10?
Until another operating system gives me everything I want and more from Microsoft - and I'm talking usability, utility, compatability with entertainment, ... I'm sticking with Microsoft.
Does 2000 provide you with usability, utility, and compatibility with entertainment? What about XP? The only one of those things that Vista will provide that (eventually) 2000 and XP won't is compatibility, and that's solely because Microsoft strives to force the obsolescence of their prior pretty good OSes so they can sell more product.
Discussing this as a Linux versus Microsoft issue, as RMS has done, merely obfuscates the real issue, which is that Vista is just another upgrade most of us don't need.
Apparently fear, uncertainty, and doubt were already taken.
Put a SCSI controller in there, and it's twice the fun!
Then when you buy the machine OS-less, they should warn you that unless you know what you're doing, your new machine won't do the stuff that you want. But they should also provide the option to sell you the same machine without an OS and without all that crappy bundled software and discount the cost of that software from the purchase price of the machine, in case you would rather put Linux on it, for instance.
The reports at issue here concern the uptime of the cell phone providers' networks, not the rate of dropped calls or coverage problems.