I may be wrong, but didn't I read somewhere that canada was bankrupt because of all of their social services? I think that the rural customers (like me) should pay extra, not the people in the city. It's not the governments job there. For me though, it's not a matter of cost, I simply can't get broadband period, and I would pay extra, and satelite doesn't count, it's only good for browsing the web, and streaming shitty media.( beleive me I tried it, on top of all the latency issues, it only works for windows)
I wouldn't mind paying that. I can't get friggin broadband, and satelite SUCKS. (I even tried that, and was sadly disappointed when the upload was only 2kbps) Hell, I tried every kind of broadband service out there, and none of them work in my area. I even begged the cable company. They won't run me a cable, even if I do pay extra. If the government would add service for poor 'just out of reach' consumers like me, then we (the just out of reach) should have to pay a little extra. I don't think the general public should have to foot the bill though.
Couldn't this contain a possible fusion reaction? I mean, sure you'd have to set off a fission bomb to ignite the thing, but if it's contained, no big deal right? This could make cold fusion a moot point.
yup, the preview pane is a 'no-no' in our company. Although, Microsoft claims to have fixed the preview pane issue in OE 6 and outlook 2002, but I haven't tested it.
I'm not sure if this was the intent, but the 'analyst' in question mentioned that there are similarities in the 'comments.' Being a programmer, I know that the comments only usually detail the input params, output params, and what changes are made between them.
This can be faily obvious and may have nothing at all to do with the algorithm the function itself actually uses to get the results.
for example:
/*adds integers a and b and returns the result*/
int Add(int a, int b)
{
return (a + b);
}
/*adds integers a and b and returns the result */
int Add (int a, int b)
{
return (a && b);
}
clearly the two functions could have been written by different programmers, and clearly the comments are obvious to anyone, and not a signal that it's 'copied'
Ok. So technically you got me, but the people in general in the Mideast don't seem to like us (with the exception of the saudi's) Not any one country is producing the terrorists, but there are a bunch of angy people over there, and they are indeed angry at us. For what? I don't know, but they didn't have all the money or oil that everyone is fighting over until the US came in, industrialized, and left. Osama bin Laden himself doesn't like us because the Saudis are so nice to us. He thinks the gov't over there is kissing our ass.
no I'm saying it all started with the americans coming to industrialize, then the other nations, who are actully producing terrorists (like Iraq) get into it and resent our original involvement, esp after we leave.
This reminds me of the story of Saudi Arabia and mideastern oil. Way back around the turn of the century, there was no great oil industry in the Arabian Peninsula. They were trying to find something to do with this deset wasteland. Then, the US comes in, offers to pay the countries (then Saudi Arabia was the focus) 1 penny per barrel exported, all drilled by the US, worked mostly by US oil workers. Now, we see what has come of this situation... Should we be as worried about tennis shoes and cheap nylon jumpsuits?
Well, God's intentions aside, I think I had the story straight, except, I said 'tower to god' meaning 'tower to reach god.' I was unlcear. I also said Nebekennezur instead of Nimrod the Hunter. In some movie (overdramatized I'm sure) I saw Nimrod even shot an arrow at the clouds. These is, I might add still enourmous historical controversy over whether or not the story happened at all, but if your a Bible fan (as I am even though I don't beleive any of it comes from any kind of god) you beleive what you want.
The Douglas Adams story is undoubtedly poking fun at the bible story.
A couple of side notes: And how can you not know what babel is?
Babel: Tower of babel: a story from the bible where King Nebekenezur (there is no correct spelling for that in english, just commonly accepted ones) wanted to build a tower to god, so god being jealous, put a spell on everyone, and they all ended up speaking a different language. It's how the christians believe that there came to be multiple languages.
Now the website babelfish gets its name from 'The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy' by Douglas Adams, where the characters 'stick a babelfish in their ear' to act as a universal translator.
I didn't read down far enough to realize that someone else basically said everything that I did. Sorry kids. I'm not really a rip-off artist. I didn't mean to clone someone else's thoughts.
Miss Vermont and Barbara are both public figures which, by all previous counts, invalidates any suits of libel or slander, and/or rights to privacy as described here. (granted they still have certain rights to privacy, but just not the right to protection against 'name calling' and 'this is where she lives') Public figures are supposed to accept the good, the bad, and the ugly, and that's it. If you make money on your names, people can use it. I cannot see any reason whatsoever that these people can say that either of these cases is an invasion of their privacy, simply because it tells more than they would like to, even if it is beyond what they would like the public to associate with their image. They both need to grow up.
I had a long 3 month ordeal back and forth with verizon. The salespeole, and the cancellation department kept assuring me that I would be able to get service, and the service never came on. They cancelled the order 6 times and re-submitted it, sending me 2 modems and connections kits, after all of that they said that for some unknown reason I couldn't get service, and assured me that a manager would get back to me. No calls. no service. They suck. If I were this guy, I'd have been counting my digital blessings. I wouldn't have tried to fight over who was providing the service, after all, wouldn't dealing with them directly probably be cheaper than going through a re-seller anyhow?
The fact that one or two companies, even though not in the US, will switch to this kind of technology, is good, because it will be that much harder for our government to legislate against a system that's already in place elsewhere. It's not a gurantee, sure, but it's one for the good guys (consumers) at the very least. I look forward to seeing more companies stick their electronic tongues out at big telcos everywhere.
A man after my own heart. Block those bastards. I also tell people that filesharing programs void my warranty. (I was recently a desktop technician, and the people asking me to 'fix their virii', especially when I wasn't at work, were more than annoying) Taking advantage of innocent surfers!
The businesses will not get past the hurdles that it takes to open the new customer base for themselves because in the forseeable future, they don't see it as profitable. They won't know what vast markets they are missing because right now, all rural customers are being hung up on before they get to the solution part. Besides, I don't think we should let Union Pacific take a vote to decide whether or not I get a road built to my house. That's the governments job just as much as is deciding which batallion gets which HUMVs. When it comes to infrastructure, thats where it should go, government. I wouldn't have electricity right now if this weren't the case, and you'd be paying a lot more money for that creamed corn you ate last thanksgiving.
Listen, to all of you compaining about big government:
The government doesn't have to be an ISP. I think they should be willing to help put in place infrastructure, like fiber lines, or whatever other kind of lines you want to use.
These lines can be used by any schmoe company to sell service. I used an example, in my previous posting, of roads. The roads are the infrastructure, whereas the actual service comes from Ford, Chevy, Toyota, or wherever.
The point of the whole story seemed to me to be that the telco companies aren't going to put up new infrastructure because at this point, (and forever at this rate) it's not profitable to do so.
If we have the government grant money to municiplaities to put the infrastructure in place, then they can sell to their heart's content all of the service they wish. In the end they would end up with a bigger customer base. How's that not good for business?
I don't think that the government has to provide the service, let's just have them set up the infrastructure -- Roads aren't the service, the cars are. I can purchase my 'service' from Ford, Toyota, or even LeCar if I want. Not big government.
IF everyone has the service, and competition is more pure (ie quality of service versus service at all) then the prices will go down, not up. Gas is not a pure competition industry. They have OPEC killing it.
Nope, you're absolutely right. This whole thing would be the equivelant of me buying out all kind of stock in Apple computer and then suing Microsoft for stealing my intellectual property
Slashdot Mirror
I may be wrong, but didn't I read somewhere that canada was bankrupt because of all of their social services? I think that the rural customers (like me) should pay extra, not the people in the city. It's not the governments job there. For me though, it's not a matter of cost, I simply can't get broadband period, and I would pay extra, and satelite doesn't count, it's only good for browsing the web, and streaming shitty media.( beleive me I tried it, on top of all the latency issues, it only works for windows)
I wouldn't mind paying that. I can't get friggin broadband, and satelite SUCKS. (I even tried that, and was sadly disappointed when the upload was only 2kbps) Hell, I tried every kind of broadband service out there, and none of them work in my area. I even begged the cable company. They won't run me a cable, even if I do pay extra. If the government would add service for poor 'just out of reach' consumers like me, then we (the just out of reach) should have to pay a little extra. I don't think the general public should have to foot the bill though.
Couldn't this contain a possible fusion reaction? I mean, sure you'd have to set off a fission bomb to ignite the thing, but if it's contained, no big deal right? This could make cold fusion a moot point.
I traded mine in at Electronics Botique and got $45 toward the SP. Yay! I'm happy.
yup, the preview pane is a 'no-no' in our company. Although, Microsoft claims to have fixed the preview pane issue in OE 6 and outlook 2002, but I haven't tested it.
I meant || not &&, sorry, and yes it only works for powers of 2, that's not the point, it's an illustration
This can be faily obvious and may have nothing at all to do with the algorithm the function itself actually uses to get the results.
for example:
int Add(int a, int b)
{
return (a + b);
}
int Add (int a, int b)
{
return (a && b);
}
clearly the two functions could have been written by different programmers, and clearly the comments are obvious to anyone, and not a signal that it's 'copied'
Ok. So technically you got me, but the people in general in the Mideast don't seem to like us (with the exception of the saudi's) Not any one country is producing the terrorists, but there are a bunch of angy people over there, and they are indeed angry at us. For what? I don't know, but they didn't have all the money or oil that everyone is fighting over until the US came in, industrialized, and left. Osama bin Laden himself doesn't like us because the Saudis are so nice to us. He thinks the gov't over there is kissing our ass.
no I'm saying it all started with the americans coming to industrialize, then the other nations, who are actully producing terrorists (like Iraq) get into it and resent our original involvement, esp after we leave.
This reminds me of the story of Saudi Arabia and mideastern oil. Way back around the turn of the century, there was no great oil industry in the Arabian Peninsula. They were trying to find something to do with this deset wasteland. Then, the US comes in, offers to pay the countries (then Saudi Arabia was the focus) 1 penny per barrel exported, all drilled by the US, worked mostly by US oil workers. Now, we see what has come of this situation... Should we be as worried about tennis shoes and cheap nylon jumpsuits?
The Douglas Adams story is undoubtedly poking fun at the bible story.
Nimrod the Hunter. My bad.
Shows what I know.
A couple of side notes: And how can you not know what babel is? Babel: Tower of babel: a story from the bible where King Nebekenezur (there is no correct spelling for that in english, just commonly accepted ones) wanted to build a tower to god, so god being jealous, put a spell on everyone, and they all ended up speaking a different language. It's how the christians believe that there came to be multiple languages.
Now the website babelfish gets its name from 'The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy' by Douglas Adams, where the characters 'stick a babelfish in their ear' to act as a universal translator.
I didn't read down far enough to realize that someone else basically said everything that I did. Sorry kids. I'm not really a rip-off artist. I didn't mean to clone someone else's thoughts.
Miss Vermont and Barbara are both public figures which, by all previous counts, invalidates any suits of libel or slander, and/or rights to privacy as described here. (granted they still have certain rights to privacy, but just not the right to protection against 'name calling' and 'this is where she lives') Public figures are supposed to accept the good, the bad, and the ugly, and that's it. If you make money on your names, people can use it. I cannot see any reason whatsoever that these people can say that either of these cases is an invasion of their privacy, simply because it tells more than they would like to, even if it is beyond what they would like the public to associate with their image. They both need to grow up.
I stand corrected. Still wishing I had service at home :(
I had a long 3 month ordeal back and forth with verizon. The salespeole, and the cancellation department kept assuring me that I would be able to get service, and the service never came on. They cancelled the order 6 times and re-submitted it, sending me 2 modems and connections kits, after all of that they said that for some unknown reason I couldn't get service, and assured me that a manager would get back to me. No calls. no service. They suck. If I were this guy, I'd have been counting my digital blessings. I wouldn't have tried to fight over who was providing the service, after all, wouldn't dealing with them directly probably be cheaper than going through a re-seller anyhow?
Where do I sign up?
*btw, you're right, religion is child abuse.*
The businesses will not get past the hurdles that it takes to open the new customer base for themselves because in the forseeable future, they don't see it as profitable. They won't know what vast markets they are missing because right now, all rural customers are being hung up on before they get to the solution part. Besides, I don't think we should let Union Pacific take a vote to decide whether or not I get a road built to my house. That's the governments job just as much as is deciding which batallion gets which HUMVs. When it comes to infrastructure, thats where it should go, government. I wouldn't have electricity right now if this weren't the case, and you'd be paying a lot more money for that creamed corn you ate last thanksgiving.
The government doesn't have to be an ISP. I think they should be willing to help put in place infrastructure, like fiber lines, or whatever other kind of lines you want to use.
These lines can be used by any schmoe company to sell service. I used an example, in my previous posting, of roads. The roads are the infrastructure, whereas the actual service comes from Ford, Chevy, Toyota, or wherever.
The point of the whole story seemed to me to be that the telco companies aren't going to put up new infrastructure because at this point, (and forever at this rate) it's not profitable to do so.
If we have the government grant money to municiplaities to put the infrastructure in place, then they can sell to their heart's content all of the service they wish. In the end they would end up with a bigger customer base. How's that not good for business?
I don't think that the government has to provide the service, let's just have them set up the infrastructure -- Roads aren't the service, the cars are. I can purchase my 'service' from Ford, Toyota, or even LeCar if I want. Not big government.
IF everyone has the service, and competition is more pure (ie quality of service versus service at all) then the prices will go down, not up. Gas is not a pure competition industry. They have OPEC killing it.
Nope, you're absolutely right. This whole thing would be the equivelant of me buying out all kind of stock in Apple computer and then suing Microsoft for stealing my intellectual property
They won't lose their IP, they just lose the ability to collect damages for it. Silly.