Should near universal access to a communication tool be profitable? thats the question.
The Aussie mail service is still cheap, fast and reliable, it makes a profit and is competitively priced against private couriers such as FedEx. It's main business is letters and parcels, as with any other courier company it's insanely expensive to deliver spam via Australia Post. Go back a couple of decades and the US postal service used to be just as efficient and profitable. A $17B loss in a single year indicates to me that the US congress has not been doing it's job properly, unless of course its job is to dismantle the postal service and eliminate what used to be a major competitor to FedEx? Why do I blame congress? - Because (as I understand it) they set the prices on EVERYTHING the USPS sells. Metaphorically USPS management has been tied up with red tape and throw in the pool, congress and the big boys of the courier industry have been laughing their arses off watching them try to swim for at least a decade.
The "slippery slope" argument is a logical fallacy. The UK has always had laws that punish people for certain forms of offensive speech. Doing the same thing with greater frequency (or enthusiasm) is NOT a "slippery slope".
It's important that the "cool" factor be removed from cars...the very concept of "a pleasure drive" needs to disappear.
Agree, I'm writing to my polycritter while we speak! We must stop this pleasurable activity immediately before people start enjoying themselves! What's next on our anti-vainity hit list? - Hair gel? - I hate smarmy barstards with shinny hair, who the fuck do they thing they are!
Yep, read it in SciAm maybe 20yrs ago along with the "crazy" prediction that tar sand woould become economically viable when oil hit the $!00 mark (which IIRC they said would be ~2010). They were also taking about fuel cells rather than conventional batteries, Honda and BMW seem to be looking at that piece of the future pie but the whole industry is rather incestous at the wholesale level.
In business, principles are expensive. So what you do is notify Apple in writing that you will comply because they leave you no option, bluntly state you believe you are being treated unfairly and are seeking legal advise about the matter. Tell all your customers about the new name and why it has to change, keep it factual, if you want to use the opportunity to bitch, do it in a humorous manner (re: "The Oatmeal"). But be careful, that style of writing takes real talent and can easily backfire in the hands of an arm-chair lawyer.
Having said that, few people appreciate being bullied by someone waving a trademark that should not have been issued in the first place. Apple have already made up their mind to comply with the demand, it's the "path of least resistance" to them, and as the owner of the app store they are standing on solid legal ground. You'll need more than the fleeting attention of the media to convince a behemoth like Apple to change their mind. Your best bet for a principled stand against the demand is to band together with other victims, hire some lawyers and contest the trademark in court as a group AFTER the fact, ie: after it has demonstrably damaged your wallet as well as your pride and sense of fair play. (re: fact of life #1 - Life is not fair)
The cost is probably not worth the fight from a business POV, probably a wise move would be to cool off for a week or two before purchasing a pack of silk hounds. That's life, you win some, you lose some, as the "underdog" your very likely to be a popular loser and may even profit from it. At the end of the day it makes as much sense for adults to settle every stupid dispute in court as it does for school kids to settle all their differences in the headmasters office. At some point the headmaster has to say, stop bothering me with trivia.
And anyway, haven't I read about various authorities around the world wanting a switch to turn off the phone networks in the event of a terrorist attack?
You're right, I saw it on Die Hard. However you don't need any jamming equipment, all you need to do is put on a suit and yell at the nearest linesman.
Welfare has fuck all to do with intelligence - Every Roman citizen received ~30kg of grain a month from the emperor (via their local bakery), why do you think so many "conquered people" wanted to join their former enemy, were all Roman citizens stupid?
It's a common saying here in Oz, more so before half flush toilets became the norm. Here in Oz, if you don't take water rationing laws seriously in times of drought your neighbors will make sure your behavior is corrected.
"The public" have a great deal of power over government, individual voters don't, and yes, it was deliberately engineered to be that way. As for Ancient Greece, I don't know what your definition of "real democracy" is, but mine has the minimum requirement that it includes rather than excludes the majority of residents.
According to the wiki page, USDA research says that pesticides may be implicated in CCD. There's a long list of suspected causes on that page but the one thing everyone seems to agree on is that the real cause is currently unkown.
The only right answer is not to fuck it up in the first place.
Problem is, people who are always right never learn anything.
Even resigning, plenty of people will believe that Alistair did it and that shadowy right-wing operatives coerced him into resigning.
The editor had the strength of character to take personal responsibility for his actions and the "victims" reputation has been fully restored, why should he suffer because other people have psychological problems accepting reality?
Maybe it's simpler as a car analogy; the editor didn't see the red light, it was the MP who was hurt by the accident, everyone else is just a fucking spectator.
The BBC did nothing "wrong" neither did the editor, however It is certainly an embarrassing cock up. Resigning is the RightThingToDo(TM), it's the ultimate apology, it unambiguously clears the MP's name and deflects partisan attacks away from the BBC.
Slashdot Mirror
Smart people do dumb things, news at 11. Seriously it's like my dog or the 911 hijacker's, smart beings are often motivated by dumb goals.
You have to love a show where the main character's weapon, is his mind.
You're gonna love the first episode in the new series of Red Dwarf.
Should near universal access to a communication tool be profitable? thats the question.
The Aussie mail service is still cheap, fast and reliable, it makes a profit and is competitively priced against private couriers such as FedEx. It's main business is letters and parcels, as with any other courier company it's insanely expensive to deliver spam via Australia Post. Go back a couple of decades and the US postal service used to be just as efficient and profitable. A $17B loss in a single year indicates to me that the US congress has not been doing it's job properly, unless of course its job is to dismantle the postal service and eliminate what used to be a major competitor to FedEx? Why do I blame congress? - Because (as I understand it) they set the prices on EVERYTHING the USPS sells. Metaphorically USPS management has been tied up with red tape and throw in the pool, congress and the big boys of the courier industry have been laughing their arses off watching them try to swim for at least a decade.
Kind of makes me wonder why slashdot almost never links the REAL articles and instead just links some fancy news sites with second hand information.
We have a contender for "Woosh of the month"!
No, no, he needs a block box for $49.95, and if he mentions this post he gets a 10% discount!
The "slippery slope" argument is a logical fallacy. The UK has always had laws that punish people for certain forms of offensive speech. Doing the same thing with greater frequency (or enthusiasm) is NOT a "slippery slope".
It's important that the "cool" factor be removed from cars...the very concept of "a pleasure drive" needs to disappear.
Agree, I'm writing to my polycritter while we speak! We must stop this pleasurable activity immediately before people start enjoying themselves! What's next on our anti-vainity hit list? - Hair gel? - I hate smarmy barstards with shinny hair, who the fuck do they thing they are!
make something like it with a single seat
A Duccati motorcycle?
Yep, read it in SciAm maybe 20yrs ago along with the "crazy" prediction that tar sand woould become economically viable when oil hit the $!00 mark (which IIRC they said would be ~2010). They were also taking about fuel cells rather than conventional batteries, Honda and BMW seem to be looking at that piece of the future pie but the whole industry is rather incestous at the wholesale level.
In business, principles are expensive. So what you do is notify Apple in writing that you will comply because they leave you no option, bluntly state you believe you are being treated unfairly and are seeking legal advise about the matter. Tell all your customers about the new name and why it has to change, keep it factual, if you want to use the opportunity to bitch, do it in a humorous manner (re: "The Oatmeal"). But be careful, that style of writing takes real talent and can easily backfire in the hands of an arm-chair lawyer.
Having said that, few people appreciate being bullied by someone waving a trademark that should not have been issued in the first place. Apple have already made up their mind to comply with the demand, it's the "path of least resistance" to them, and as the owner of the app store they are standing on solid legal ground. You'll need more than the fleeting attention of the media to convince a behemoth like Apple to change their mind. Your best bet for a principled stand against the demand is to band together with other victims, hire some lawyers and contest the trademark in court as a group AFTER the fact, ie: after it has demonstrably damaged your wallet as well as your pride and sense of fair play. (re: fact of life #1 - Life is not fair)
The cost is probably not worth the fight from a business POV, probably a wise move would be to cool off for a week or two before purchasing a pack of silk hounds. That's life, you win some, you lose some, as the "underdog" your very likely to be a popular loser and may even profit from it. At the end of the day it makes as much sense for adults to settle every stupid dispute in court as it does for school kids to settle all their differences in the headmasters office. At some point the headmaster has to say, stop bothering me with trivia.
And anyway, haven't I read about various authorities around the world wanting a switch to turn off the phone networks in the event of a terrorist attack?
You're right, I saw it on Die Hard. However you don't need any jamming equipment, all you need to do is put on a suit and yell at the nearest linesman.
So what's the difference between a law and a regulation - aside from the juridiction of the court that hears the complaint?
He's paying for your post, why would you want him to "die in a fire"
Agree, attaching fox testicles to one's head in the hope of curing a headache....well lets just say it's not my idea of "genius".
Welfare has fuck all to do with intelligence - Every Roman citizen received ~30kg of grain a month from the emperor (via their local bakery), why do you think so many "conquered people" wanted to join their former enemy, were all Roman citizens stupid?
It's just math, and conversion is not particularly hard anyway...unless youre a disabled black kid in Virginia of course.
Or NASA flying a spaceship to Mars. It's much more difficult to make an expensive conversion error if there is no conversion.
Maybe it would be worded a little less snarky, but that's how I'd do it.
If it was my job to reply I'd just post a link to the constitution.
It's a common saying here in Oz, more so before half flush toilets became the norm. Here in Oz, if you don't take water rationing laws seriously in times of drought your neighbors will make sure your behavior is corrected.
"The public" have a great deal of power over government, individual voters don't, and yes, it was deliberately engineered to be that way. As for Ancient Greece, I don't know what your definition of "real democracy" is, but mine has the minimum requirement that it includes rather than excludes the majority of residents.
So you're saying hot grits are not cool?
whatever passes for porn in that part of the world
Shampoo advertisments?
According to the wiki page, USDA research says that pesticides may be implicated in CCD. There's a long list of suspected causes on that page but the one thing everyone seems to agree on is that the real cause is currently unkown.
And they only found a total of 395 tweets which will lead to appalling precision in any of their findings.
Yet from a totally anecdotal perspective, their results look remarkably accurate.
The only right answer is not to fuck it up in the first place.
Problem is, people who are always right never learn anything.
Even resigning, plenty of people will believe that Alistair did it and that shadowy right-wing operatives coerced him into resigning.
The editor had the strength of character to take personal responsibility for his actions and the "victims" reputation has been fully restored, why should he suffer because other people have psychological problems accepting reality?
Maybe it's simpler as a car analogy; the editor didn't see the red light, it was the MP who was hurt by the accident, everyone else is just a fucking spectator.
The BBC did nothing "wrong" neither did the editor, however It is certainly an embarrassing cock up. Resigning is the RightThingToDo(TM), it's the ultimate apology, it unambiguously clears the MP's name and deflects partisan attacks away from the BBC.