While I like Fox News, and as another poster has already pointed out so well, they are centrist, and not right-biased (except when measured against much of the rest of the mainstream media), the Microsoft affiliation of the opinion columnist should have been pointed out at the top of the article -- not the bottom.
That's just 133tism talking. They're not real journalists because they don't write for the registration required NYT. They're not real journalists because they don't get paychecks from ink-on-newsprint operations. They're not real journalists even though they beat the regular news organizations to so much of the news.
They're not real journalists, and we should take every opportunity to remind them of this. Especially since I -- Mr. Lugar to you -- want to remain on the friendly side of the real press, without whom I have a snowball's chance in h311 of getting re-elected next time around.
That $10 a month for the HD PVR is practically untouchable.
Until the cable company starts making all their -- and I do mean their -- hardware obey the Broadcast Flag. Like TiVo, first they have to get it in your house. Then they can start taking away what made it so attractive in the first place.
One issue not addressed is who wants a DVD with the transition to HiDef DVD (take your pick HD-DVD or BluRay) just months away? Comcast is basically selling old technology according to this announcement.
IBM announced the addition of genetic makeup (Genetic Registration Required) to its non-discrimination policy.
Like they could? I mean, we can't determine a whole lot yet from genetic codes provided provided someone would give theirs in the first place, so this comes across more as PR-BS, to wit:
1: We can't yet really determine much of anything useful about a potential employee from their DNA.
2: By the time this even becomes reasonably possible it will likely be made illegal anyway.
3: Hey, this is a great PR opportunity that isn't going to cost us a thing, and will probably even get us discussed on Slashdot to boot.
4: PROFIT!
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.
Considering how neither of my kids (boys in their 20's) feel no compunction at all about paying back any of their debts no matter how extravagant their promises at the time of borrowing, I worry less about this debt every day.
Packing both UMTS (3G) and WiFi in addition to a 2 megapixel digital camera and a host of other goodies, the P990 looks like it will be a shot in the arm for the Symbian camp.
Looks like:
1: New avenues to hack into my phone.
2: More software that probably hasn't been adequately tested in the competative enviroment before release.
You know, free music on the radio is just not that essential to my life. It's not like air, water, food, shelter. If the price for music becomes too high (e.g. 10% news, 40% music, 50% commericals to pay for the music) I'll stop listening. And when I stop listening, I stop buying as well. Like many people, I've got enough good music on my shelf already to last me for the rest of my life.
And that's what I feel the RIAA simply does not understand. Music is nice, fun, interesting -- but not essential. If it was, I'd start singing it myself.
And what company in their right mind is going to allow this? It's a cute technical solution that inserts even more noise into the workspace. Like many cute technical solutions, were these people even thinking of what the real world impact would be? Or do they just have the tunnel vision of, Hey, it works and solves the immediate problem. What more is required?
The courts ultimately ruled against Lexmark in this matter, and I expect (and hope) that they will rull against the cellphone companies as well.
The courts will only rule against the cellphone companies if someone fights them long and hard in the courts. Many unconstitutional laws become defacto law simply because they're never taken to court in the first place, and hence never overturned. Be sure before you start, however, that you have Deep Pockets for this fight, because your opponents sure do.
Time to buy more google stock I suspect. Consider the following:
1: Google digitizes a significant percentage of the books in print and actually makes them searchable. This is a significant undertaking that very few other companies can even consider doing, although Microsoft will certainly try in order to keep up with Google.
2: People actually use this index, finding out about books in their areas of interest they never knew existed before. (And that was always the true magic of P2P music sharing. Finding performances of your favorite song by artists you never knew recorded it, or songs by your favorite artist you never knew existed in the first place. There was no way to ever find stuff like this before.)
3: Google becomes even more popular than before. PROFIT from AdWords and other synergies.
4: Google acquires Project Gutenberg and expands on their free, public domain, efforts. PROFIT - at least if you're associated with PG.
5: Public Domain is strengthened for all of us because works in PD are now more accessable to everyone. PROFIT - more traffic to Google to get these works, and society overall is richer!
6: For books still under copyright and in print, Google becomes the biggest referrer to purchasers to Amazon and Barnes & Nobel, which are now only one click away. PROFIT!
7: With everything already digitized, the moment the Author's Guild gets away from giving themselves a self-induced colonoscopy, Google starts selling full e-books of everything they already have digitized. PROFIT to Google, AND THE AUTHORS!
It's just a guess on my part, but my guess is that the Author's Guild is not very technologically literate. Their opposition seems somewhat Luddite inspired.
So I assume you are in favor of persecuting gun manufacturers for every murder committed with a gun as well?
No, I never said that. Can't you read and understand simple English?
Let me try to explain it in small words and simple terms. A gun manufacturer does not build and sell a product with the intent that all their purchasers will murder innocent victims. And when that does happen in a very small percent of overall guns in circulation, the murderer is the one to be punished.
OTOH, a Rootkit author intends from the beginning for his product to cause harm. There are no benign uses for Rootkits.
I put Rootkit writers in the same catagory as I do the actual bombmakers who provide the suicide bombers with their bomb vests. There are no benign uses for suicide bomb vests -- or a Rootkits.
Slashdot Mirror
While I like Fox News, and as another poster has already pointed out so well, they are centrist, and not right-biased (except when measured against much of the rest of the mainstream media), the Microsoft affiliation of the opinion columnist should have been pointed out at the top of the article -- not the bottom.
Can you fit all that into a single Evil Bit?
Doesn't that answer your own question?
That's just 133tism talking. They're not real journalists because they don't write for the registration required NYT. They're not real journalists because they don't get paychecks from ink-on-newsprint operations. They're not real journalists even though they beat the regular news organizations to so much of the news.
They're not real journalists, and we should take every opportunity to remind them of this. Especially since I -- Mr. Lugar to you -- want to remain on the friendly side of the real press, without whom I have a snowball's chance in h311 of getting re-elected next time around.
OMG! Now Microsoft will be able to use it and write good products.
[[SLAP]]
Oh, never mind. Everyone knows MS would never be caught dead touching anything OSS.
Time to sell my Adobe stock?
Sounds like the ultimate in Chinese take-out.
Until the cable company starts making all their -- and I do mean their -- hardware obey the Broadcast Flag. Like TiVo, first they have to get it in your house. Then they can start taking away what made it so attractive in the first place.
And that driver is...?
All things considered, TiVo needs some real competition so that they'll stop bending over to the MPAA and remember who their real customers are.
One issue not addressed is who wants a DVD with the transition to HiDef DVD (take your pick HD-DVD or BluRay) just months away? Comcast is basically selling old technology according to this announcement.
Just as I was getting ready to use it to mailbomb Congress in opposition to the Broadcast Flag.
Like they could? I mean, we can't determine a whole lot yet from genetic codes provided provided someone would give theirs in the first place, so this comes across more as PR-BS, to wit:
1: We can't yet really determine much of anything useful about a potential employee from their DNA.
2: By the time this even becomes reasonably possible it will likely be made illegal anyway.
3: Hey, this is a great PR opportunity that isn't going to cost us a thing, and will probably even get us discussed on Slashdot to boot.
4: PROFIT!
Considering how neither of my kids (boys in their 20's) feel no compunction at all about paying back any of their debts no matter how extravagant their promises at the time of borrowing, I worry less about this debt every day.
Looks like:
1: New avenues to hack into my phone.
2: More software that probably hasn't been adequately tested in the competative enviroment before release.
All Samsung needs to do is create a new Bulk Purchase category. When you buy all our chips, you get this price!
And that's what I feel the RIAA simply does not understand. Music is nice, fun, interesting -- but not essential. If it was, I'd start singing it myself.
And what makes you think it will be commercial free? This is the industry doing this best to kill commerical skipping.
And what company in their right mind is going to allow this? It's a cute technical solution that inserts even more noise into the workspace. Like many cute technical solutions, were these people even thinking of what the real world impact would be? Or do they just have the tunnel vision of, Hey, it works and solves the immediate problem. What more is required?
The courts will only rule against the cellphone companies if someone fights them long and hard in the courts. Many unconstitutional laws become defacto law simply because they're never taken to court in the first place, and hence never overturned. Be sure before you start, however, that you have Deep Pockets for this fight, because your opponents sure do.
1: Google digitizes a significant percentage of the books in print and actually makes them searchable. This is a significant undertaking that very few other companies can even consider doing, although Microsoft will certainly try in order to keep up with Google.
2: People actually use this index, finding out about books in their areas of interest they never knew existed before. (And that was always the true magic of P2P music sharing. Finding performances of your favorite song by artists you never knew recorded it, or songs by your favorite artist you never knew existed in the first place. There was no way to ever find stuff like this before.)
3: Google becomes even more popular than before. PROFIT from AdWords and other synergies.
4: Google acquires Project Gutenberg and expands on their free, public domain, efforts. PROFIT - at least if you're associated with PG.
5: Public Domain is strengthened for all of us because works in PD are now more accessable to everyone. PROFIT - more traffic to Google to get these works, and society overall is richer!
6: For books still under copyright and in print, Google becomes the biggest referrer to purchasers to Amazon and Barnes & Nobel, which are now only one click away. PROFIT!
7: With everything already digitized, the moment the Author's Guild gets away from giving themselves a self-induced colonoscopy, Google starts selling full e-books of everything they already have digitized. PROFIT to Google, AND THE AUTHORS!
Yup, pull in that truck and load up my stock!
It's just a guess on my part, but my guess is that the Author's Guild is not very technologically literate. Their opposition seems somewhat Luddite inspired.
No, I never said that. Can't you read and understand simple English?
Let me try to explain it in small words and simple terms. A gun manufacturer does not build and sell a product with the intent that all their purchasers will murder innocent victims. And when that does happen in a very small percent of overall guns in circulation, the murderer is the one to be punished.
OTOH, a Rootkit author intends from the beginning for his product to cause harm. There are no benign uses for Rootkits.
I put Rootkit writers in the same catagory as I do the actual bombmakers who provide the suicide bombers with their bomb vests. There are no benign uses for suicide bomb vests -- or a Rootkits.
Have you got it now?
The deleted scenes I want are those featuring Koo Stark in the original SW. That's one attractive woman!
1: Scenes leaked.
2: Lawsuits follow.
3: Profit (for lawyers).