To be associated with AOL, possibly they regret the merger. Notice how nowhere do you see "AOL-Time Warner" branding. They've spotted that AOL are going down the pan and are doing their best to step away from it.
if the packaging (or the cube itself) said "rubiks" on it anywhere you might have a point.
Maybe you do0 have a point - either way I consider the action to have been unreasonable. The point of IP laws is to have things invented and made and eventually enter the public domain whilst allowing for reward of the inventor. In this case the inventor made many millions or dollars over at least 20 years - they've had their state mandated monopoly.
I agree that it's silly to scream about the Homeland security agents though, clearly it is their jurisdiction and paranoia about that is just silly.
That's an opinion based upon the facts of the case as highlighted by slashdot in a previous story! Not a ffriggin' troll. I was genuinely trying to set the guy straight.
The biggest name people knew. Sometimes the only one.
And this was for only a little more than an ISP with no content and no handholding.
Net access has now become so easy with the newer versions of windows and better support/easy setup cd's that the handholding is now less special. Net access is now available from many many providers all over the place. The content is not special compared to the rest of the net any more, a lot of it is bought in from other sites or print publications. People now know that AOL is only one company.
The problem for them now is that there is a google and people can get broadband cheaper than AOL can offer it. It seems clear that you can either be an ISP or a content provider on the scale AOL wants to be. I don't think there's gonna be much market for a content-only provider though - they'll slide into obscurity.
Does sound bad. We'll see I guess, i just sent a speculative email in to their tech department in the UK in the hope of getting some web design/coding work of some sort.
I think you'll find that no-one puts themselves on the line for this. Remember the EULA that comes with pretty much any software you can get these day? Well that basically absolves the company of any responsibility for this.
Now if they have a support contract then someone's on the line to get things done, but support contracts are where the likes of redhat make money, so support contracts for open source can be there too.
Now if you wish to argue that companies have the perception that someone's arse is on the line, then that probably is true, but I hav yet to hear of any company being held to account for security breaches.
Did I say he never had WMD?
No I did not, mostly because it was the damn yanks that sold the stuff to him in the first place.
What I'm saying is that there was little to no evidence that he still had WMDs by the time Bush Jnr. thought about invading. The weapons inspectors had nothing, the intelligence agencies had some rather tenuous links that turned out to be very dubious.
Bush and others in the administration made a hell of a lot of noise about WMD's, mobile WMD plants and all sorts of other stuff that turned out to be dubious at best, and at worst just totally wrong.
How come only half the US believe this and most of the rest of the world don't?
It's more clear as time goes on that the premise for the war was shaky at best, due to either incompetent leadership or incompetent intelligence agencies. Saddam HAD weapons of mass destruction but that was a long time ago. As we drew up to war it seemed that he might have some still, but there was certainly no definite evidence. Now it appears there really were non, as we can't find any.
Sorry no link from me here either, but I remember it being in the news too, The analogy they used was that her heart needed a rest and the pump took over for a while allowing her strained heart to recuperate.
unless they had problems. Large secure systems like this are signoed off on once (and there most definately would be a code audit involved in that process). After the signoff the code will not be updated unless serious problems are discovered, because the risk of introducing bugs to the system, let alone exploits, is too great.
The military are not running apt-get every night, they don't change anything they don't have to, and when they do it'll be thoroughly reviewed and tested.
yes, windows did say "This is unsigned, on your head be it", but I still don't expect the whole OS to crash and die when a driver is dodgy. Sure, stop the device working, but the OS ought to be robust enough that the rest keeps going.
Why do people think that BSOD jokes are just soooooo last century? I'm sick of people making assertions that they've gone away. I had a BSOD last week with WinXP.
And I can reproduce it reliably. I just try not to use that particular cheap digicam now, because after I've used it I get the BSOD on shutdown.
And ignored the legitimate news item I pointed out to you.
Goodbye troll, well done for catching me in your net, it won't happen again. You're not that good though, perhaps you should take a few lessons from turmeric over on k5
Slashdot Mirror
To be associated with AOL, possibly they regret the merger. Notice how nowhere do you see "AOL-Time Warner" branding. They've spotted that AOL are going down the pan and are doing their best to step away from it.
if the packaging (or the cube itself) said "rubiks" on it anywhere you might have a point.
Maybe you do0 have a point - either way I consider the action to have been unreasonable. The point of IP laws is to have things invented and made and eventually enter the public domain whilst allowing for reward of the inventor. In this case the inventor made many millions or dollars over at least 20 years - they've had their state mandated monopoly.
I agree that it's silly to scream about the Homeland security agents though, clearly it is their jurisdiction and paranoia about that is just silly.
That's an opinion based upon the facts of the case as highlighted by slashdot in a previous story! Not a ffriggin' troll. I was genuinely trying to set the guy straight.
Crissakes, some people....
- Unparalled ease of use
- Available everywhere
- Original proprietary content
- The biggest name people knew. Sometimes the only one.
And this was for only a little more than an ISP with no content and no handholding.Net access has now become so easy with the newer versions of windows and better support/easy setup cd's that the handholding is now less special. Net access is now available from many many providers all over the place. The content is not special compared to the rest of the net any more, a lot of it is bought in from other sites or print publications. People now know that AOL is only one company.
The problem for them now is that there is a google and people can get broadband cheaper than AOL can offer it. It seems clear that you can either be an ISP or a content provider on the scale AOL wants to be. I don't think there's gonna be much market for a content-only provider though - they'll slide into obscurity.
It's something gone crazy!
Patents on the cube have expired, meaning that these are perfectly legal.
Seriously, bring back five!
Perhaps for people that read ebooks 6 is a good thing, for a casual user of PDF's six is horribly slow to start compared to previous versions.
Also the plugin is nasty to my computer.
It's not all of europe, some countries seem to like to switch the more common (in the US and UK) uses of ',' and '.'
Most notably the french.....
Come on, if you knew anything about Linux you'd know it's a valid desktop replacement for windows now.
No it doesn't run all the same programs, and there is a learning curve (because people are used to windows), but it can be done easily enough.
I just picked up an LG L1710B in the UK for 233 pounds - 417 dollars according to xe.com.
Unfortunately it seems to be over 500 dollars from US stores.
Does sound bad. We'll see I guess, i just sent a speculative email in to their tech department in the UK in the hope of getting some web design/coding work of some sort.
Probably won't get back to me anyway.
Is it that bad?
I'm applying right now....
I think you'll find that no-one puts themselves on the line for this. Remember the EULA that comes with pretty much any software you can get these day?
Well that basically absolves the company of any responsibility for this.
Now if they have a support contract then someone's on the line to get things done, but support contracts are where the likes of redhat make money, so support contracts for open source can be there too.
Now if you wish to argue that companies have the perception that someone's arse is on the line, then that probably is true, but I hav yet to hear of any company being held to account for security breaches.
They allow pot-smoking there?
I might just have to visit australia after all!
Did I say he never had WMD?
No I did not, mostly because it was the damn yanks that sold the stuff to him in the first place.
What I'm saying is that there was little to no evidence that he still had WMDs by the time Bush Jnr. thought about invading. The weapons inspectors had nothing, the intelligence agencies had some rather tenuous links that turned out to be very dubious.
Bush and others in the administration made a hell of a lot of noise about WMD's, mobile WMD plants and all sorts of other stuff that turned out to be dubious at best, and at worst just totally wrong.
it seems the situation has been fixed.
Huzzah.
How does this get a 4?
It's mind-numbingly clear that Iraq had WMD
To who?
Where are they?
How come only half the US believe this and most of the rest of the world don't?
It's more clear as time goes on that the premise for the war was shaky at best, due to either incompetent leadership or incompetent intelligence agencies. Saddam HAD weapons of mass destruction but that was a long time ago. As we drew up to war it seemed that he might have some still, but there was certainly no definite evidence. Now it appears there really were non, as we can't find any.
Sorry no link from me here either, but I remember it being in the news too, The analogy they used was that her heart needed a rest and the pump took over for a while allowing her strained heart to recuperate.
unless they had problems. Large secure systems like this are signoed off on once (and there most definately would be a code audit involved in that process).
After the signoff the code will not be updated unless serious problems are discovered, because the risk of introducing bugs to the system, let alone exploits, is too great.
The military are not running apt-get every night, they don't change anything they don't have to, and when they do it'll be thoroughly reviewed and tested.
yes, windows did say "This is unsigned, on your head be it", but I still don't expect the whole OS to crash and die when a driver is dodgy. Sure, stop the device working, but the OS ought to be robust enough that the rest keeps going.
I know the digicam is a piece of crap with badly written driver software, but Windows should not fall over because of a badly written driver
End of story. There's no reason that one device should be allowed to make the whole system fall over.
Why do people think that BSOD jokes are just soooooo last century? I'm sick of people making assertions that they've gone away. I had a BSOD last week with WinXP.
And I can reproduce it reliably. I just try not to use that particular cheap digicam now, because after I've used it I get the BSOD on shutdown.
Why bother if they have no value?
Surely if they have brought you no value then they were not worth the effort, and you could have let someone else have them and get use from them?
What a waste.
And ignored the legitimate news item I pointed out to you.
Goodbye troll, well done for catching me in your net, it won't happen again.
You're not that good though, perhaps you should take a few lessons from turmeric over on k5
tortured to death
You wanted a news report, well there you have it.