HP's new model, part of its Pavilion series, features a central processing unit (CPU) from Advanced Micro Devices Inc. and a FreeDOS operating system, both cheaper alternatives to more popular CPUs from Intel and the Windows operating system from Microsoft.
I think the reporter has never used FreeDOS, nor knows what it is (surprise surprise).
FreeDOS is very useful, but for the vast majority of users, it's not an "alternative" to Windows. It's an alternative to MS-DOS!
Firefox 1.0 quietly submitted to the hijacking of its browser window.
Internet Explorer (under XP sp2) also submitted, but as soon as I opened the citibank page, it started making a lot of loud popup killing sounds.
Apparently, the exploit works by continually trying to place its html into the new popup window.
Man that's scary. You don't even have to fall for a phishing email to get caught by this one... and Firefox (at least in my case) seemed more vulnerable than IE, simply because it was so quiet.
This, you say to a Norwegian. You then cite four examples from American history to prove your point.
We are a young nation. If the only history you examine is American history, you are doomed to a nearsighted perspective.
Yes, all of the violations of liberty which you cite are worse than a temporary national biometric ID card would be.
But that misses the point. When the government takes a lot of liberty away from people, it tempts revolution. But when it takes a little, it doesn't seem like much. Over time, people accept it. And the government ends up taking more, not less.
The federal income tax is but one example of this. Notice also the reinterpretation of the Commerce Clause during FDR. Our system of government is completely different from what it was in the 1800s.
And it shows no sign of going back.
The Founding Fathers knew that centralized power is the most dangerous form. We are letting all power slowly gravitate to a few people in Washington. It's been happening longer than you have been alive. And it isn't stopping until the empire crashes down... just as Rome did.
On another note I fail to see how the german laws you cite are any more stifling to free speech than laws prohibiting libel. Neonazism is tightly coupled to malicious defamation of jews - according to the laws of most countries that constitutes libel. Mentioning neonazism explicitly in the law just serves to simplify libel lawsuits.
Or do you beleive that libel laws in america are morally equivalent to limiting the civil liberties of an ethnic minority?
American defamation law does not protect large groups of people. To succesfully sue someone for libel (or slander), you have to defame them personally. Members of very small groups of people can sometimes sue for defamation, but "Jews", "Blacks", and "Honkies" do not have a valid claim when someone says something bad about their respective group.
This underlines an important distinction between American understandings of free speech and European understandings of it. The American understanding is that you can never limit political expression because of what is expressed. (Not meaning to imply that we have a perfect record or anything.)
Expressions of racism or hatred are just that, expressions. If you let government decide what expressions are allowable and what are not, then you have something more than a government... you have a Thought Police.
You didn't mention what kind of speed you require. If you're just doing the occasional checking of email and browsing only when necessary, T-Mobile is your best bet.
You can get unlimited email and port 80 access with T-Mobile for $5/month through their "Unlimited T-Zones" service... although they only advertize it as "WAP Access". Some people report that T-Mobile is cracking down and preventing non-WAP use of port 80, but it still works for me. Check the T-Mobile board at HowardForums for more up to date info.
Worst case scenario is that you might have to subscribe to their "Unlimited Internet" service for $20/month.
If you need DSL-like speeds, go with someone else. T-Mobile's GPRS access is usually slower than dial-up.
How you hook up the phone depends on the phone. All the Nokia symbian phones can hook up to a linux computer wirelessly using bluetooth. Others use cables. Here's one guide I just found using Google... there are many other's out there.
I don't see the point of getting a dedicated pcmcia card for the connection. Even if you don't intend to use the phone, it will probably be cheaper than a PC card.
This is just someone out to try to make cash from MS
Riiiiiiiiiight.
Let's see, $150 XBOX.
Best possible reward: $150 -Attorney fees -Court costs = -thousands of dollars
The lawyers will make plenty of money... but the guy whose XBOX broke will be lucky if he gets a coupon for some games that still won't work in his defective XBOX.
It definitely has different colors than the original Rubik's Cube. It uses more flourescent type colors... but it's possible that the Rubik's Cube company put out a variation that looked like this one.
If the shape and colors of the item are exactly the same, it's probably a trademark violation. You can make a baseball hat that functions the same as a Red Sox hat. But if it looks the same, then you are violating their trademark. Same thing with a Rubik's Cube.
But I agree they should have to prove it in court first.
Are they any law students out there who can do a Lexis search for Toysmith and see if they've been sued for trademark infringement by the Rubik's Cube company?
Um, no. Soldiers serve their country. They do not consider the ethical, political or social implications of following their orders. Look at Vietnam. Hell, look at Iraq. Many of the soldiers knew/know that their mission is not essential to the interests of their country, sometimes, not even right at all.
I misstated what I meant. I agree with everything you said...
But there is something in a soldier's mind that prevents him from shooting his brother.
As an example, look at Tiananmen Square. The first soldiers they had would not shoot the protesters... instead, the government called in the soldiers from the inner provinces and fed them a bunch of propaganda so that they could be trusted to massacre their own countrymen.
That would have not have been necessary were the soldiers just robots... nor would it have been necessary if the soldiers were people with no conscious whatsoever...
Yes, soldiers have to do what they're told and they aren't "supposed to think" as a soldier friend of mine once told me. But they are still human beings.
But they know that playboy can afford good lawyers...
Apparently they (Nintendo) think that the folks running the SG site will be scared enough of litigation (and the associated costs) to just remove the link and be done with it.
I know you're afraid of the ole Hal 9000 syndrome.
But I'm afraid of the opposite... robots without inhibitions.
what happens when the guy we elect as "root" goes nuts and uses the robots to subjugate us all into his own personal slaves?
At least human soldiers have to believe in what they are doing... which makes gradual enslavement SLIGHTLY more difficult to do within a 4-8 year period.
You can read the order for an en banc rehearing here.
One of the questions they ask the parties to argue for the rehearing is "Whether the conduct at issue in this case could have been additionally, or alternatively, prosecuted under the Stored Communications Act?".
Hmmm, I wonder what the Stored Communications Act is? It seems the court might be worried that the SCA (whatever it is) already applies to email-snooping, so that the Wiretap Act should not apply.
FYI, the Supremes did not "back the do-not-call list". They denied cert in the case, which means that they simply refused to hear the appeal.
The Supreme Court has held in the past that a denial of cert is not in any way an endorsement of the appeals court's ruling. Only a small fraction of applications for cert are actually granted by the Court.
It is still possible that another lower court (outside of the 10th Circuit) could hold the Do-Not-Call List unconstitutional. Hopefully, any other court would find the 10th Circuit's opinion persuasive... but unless such a court is actually in the 10th Circuit, they are not required to follow the ruling.
Seriously... is there ANYONE in ANY part of this country anymore that just takes a little bit of responsibility for their own goddamn actions?
Explaining and determining how you came to act in a particular way IS taking responsibility for your actions.
I think the only disease involved in all this "you're not an irresponsible jackass, you just need medical help!" attitude is an acute affliction of stupid.
You think it stupid that people examine and analyze situations instead of just belting out bold and unsupported statements like "that's ludicruous!"
Alright Monty Python, why don't you explain what is ludicruous about the fact that caffeine withdrawal turns people into crabs?
I'm going to get some coffee and come back... but don't worry, I'll be just as crabby after I get my fix.
I wasn't aware that PCs were made by Microsoft. I realize that B. Crew wants every PC to be sold with Windows and makes in very difficult for vendors to do anything but sell them that way, but I am pretty certain it isn't a requirement for Windows to be on every single PC out there.
Indeed. every PC I've ever bought (laptops excluded) came with no operating system.
The last desktop computer I had that came with an operating system was a Commodore 64.
Guess which one supports (unconstitutional) legislation limiting sales of violent videogames? I'll give you a hint : it's not the right-leaning one.
You prove nothing with such anecdotal accounts.
Which side is it that introduces amendments to ban flag-burning? Which side most frequently introduces bills to deal with online pornography? Which side was Ed Meese on?
Your example also suffers in that it ignores the traditional difference in focus of right wing and left wing limitations on speech. Right wingers traditionally like to limit speech on the topic of sex (and political viewpoint). Left wingers are typically more into limiting violence.
So you use an example of violent material to prove your point that the left is more restrictive than the right. That's dishonest...
The truth is that neither the left nor the right have a good track record, because it is the political process that encourages elected officials to ignore Constitutional commands and placate their constituency.
Hmm, you sound like a troll. All news sources are more or less biased in one direction or another, even if simply by ommitting information. "Opinion" pieces are simply news articles that pass some arbitrary threshold of bias.
That is the popular notion.
A news article provides facts and at least attempts to be unbiased. Opinions pieces are NOT news articles, because they contain boldly stated opinions, and they make no attempt to appear unbiased.
As you point out, any news provided by humans is somewhat biased (for what it chooses to include if nothing else), but that doesn't mean we should just throw in the towel and declare that all news is opinion.
If you're going to say that, why don't we just say that all facts are opinion. You might as well point out the potential for bias in the optic nerve. You never know what kinds of interference might occur between the eye and brain... so why believe anything?
A healthy dose of skepticism is a good thing. But to assume that all journalists have an alterior motive, is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
"Willingly" means that it was your desire to cause the result (the distribution of copyrighted materials).
"Knowingly" simply means that you caused it and knew you were causing it, regardless of whether you desired the result or just knew it was an inevitable byproduct of your actions.
It's pretty rare that someone gets off for a crime because they "knew" but didn't "will" the result. But it's an open argument with file-trading, because a lot of programs share files by default. So if this bill were the law, and you were installing the program for a legal purpose, but you knew that it was going to share copyrighted music from your harddrive, you could no longer argue that you didn't "intend" to share copyrighted files, because you "knew" you were sharing the files.
Whether a person "knew" or "intended" something are questions left for juries to determine.
even most of the 'usual suspect' pacifists of today were involved because of the 'United Front' with the state that followed their favored system of political economy.
Surely you're not suggesting that most pacifists are communists!
Because, well, that would be incorrect... as would the reverse.
In fact, the more I think about it, the more that sentence seems to make no sense at all... carry on now.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the reporter has never used FreeDOS, nor knows what it is (surprise surprise).
FreeDOS is very useful, but for the vast majority of users, it's not an "alternative" to Windows. It's an alternative to MS-DOS!
I tried it using IE and Firefox.
Firefox 1.0 quietly submitted to the hijacking of its browser window.
Internet Explorer (under XP sp2) also submitted, but as soon as I opened the citibank page, it started making a lot of loud popup killing sounds.
Apparently, the exploit works by continually trying to place its html into the new popup window.
Man that's scary. You don't even have to fall for a phishing email to get caught by this one... and Firefox (at least in my case) seemed more vulnerable than IE, simply because it was so quiet.
This, you say to a Norwegian. You then cite four examples from American history to prove your point.
We are a young nation. If the only history you examine is American history, you are doomed to a nearsighted perspective.
Yes, all of the violations of liberty which you cite are worse than a temporary national biometric ID card would be.
But that misses the point. When the government takes a lot of liberty away from people, it tempts revolution. But when it takes a little, it doesn't seem like much. Over time, people accept it. And the government ends up taking more, not less.
The federal income tax is but one example of this. Notice also the reinterpretation of the Commerce Clause during FDR. Our system of government is completely different from what it was in the 1800s.
And it shows no sign of going back.
The Founding Fathers knew that centralized power is the most dangerous form. We are letting all power slowly gravitate to a few people in Washington. It's been happening longer than you have been alive. And it isn't stopping until the empire crashes down... just as Rome did.
Or do you beleive that libel laws in america are morally equivalent to limiting the civil liberties of an ethnic minority?
American defamation law does not protect large groups of people. To succesfully sue someone for libel (or slander), you have to defame them personally. Members of very small groups of people can sometimes sue for defamation, but "Jews", "Blacks", and "Honkies" do not have a valid claim when someone says something bad about their respective group.
This underlines an important distinction between American understandings of free speech and European understandings of it. The American understanding is that you can never limit political expression because of what is expressed. (Not meaning to imply that we have a perfect record or anything.)
Expressions of racism or hatred are just that, expressions. If you let government decide what expressions are allowable and what are not, then you have something more than a government... you have a Thought Police.
You can get unlimited email and port 80 access with T-Mobile for $5/month through their "Unlimited T-Zones" service... although they only advertize it as "WAP Access". Some people report that T-Mobile is cracking down and preventing non-WAP use of port 80, but it still works for me. Check the T-Mobile board at HowardForums for more up to date info.
Worst case scenario is that you might have to subscribe to their "Unlimited Internet" service for $20/month.
If you need DSL-like speeds, go with someone else. T-Mobile's GPRS access is usually slower than dial-up.
How you hook up the phone depends on the phone. All the Nokia symbian phones can hook up to a linux computer wirelessly using bluetooth. Others use cables. Here's one guide I just found using Google... there are many other's out there.
I don't see the point of getting a dedicated pcmcia card for the connection. Even if you don't intend to use the phone, it will probably be cheaper than a PC card.
Have any studies been done that show a correlation between use of automatic toothbrushes and this kind of infection?
Perhaps wrist exercises are helpful for more than one activity.
This is just someone out to try to make cash from MS
Riiiiiiiiiight.
Let's see, $150 XBOX.
Best possible reward:
$150
-Attorney fees
-Court costs
= -thousands of dollars
The lawyers will make plenty of money... but the guy whose XBOX broke will be lucky if he gets a coupon for some games that still won't work in his defective XBOX.
It definitely has different colors than the original Rubik's Cube. It uses more flourescent type colors... but it's possible that the Rubik's Cube company put out a variation that looked like this one.
If the shape and colors of the item are exactly the same, it's probably a trademark violation. You can make a baseball hat that functions the same as a Red Sox hat. But if it looks the same, then you are violating their trademark. Same thing with a Rubik's Cube.
But I agree they should have to prove it in court first.
Are they any law students out there who can do a Lexis search for Toysmith and see if they've been sued for trademark infringement by the Rubik's Cube company?
Don't trust them Suicide Girls!
It's just a ruse so that they can get RuneLateralus's home address and sue him directly...
DON'T DO IT!
(I'm joking, but if it were the RIAA or SCO instead of Nintendo, I wouldn't be.)
Um, no. Soldiers serve their country. They do not consider the ethical, political or social implications of following their orders. Look at Vietnam. Hell, look at Iraq. Many of the soldiers knew/know that their mission is not essential to the interests of their country, sometimes, not even right at all.
I misstated what I meant. I agree with everything you said...
But there is something in a soldier's mind that prevents him from shooting his brother.
As an example, look at Tiananmen Square. The first soldiers they had would not shoot the protesters... instead, the government called in the soldiers from the inner provinces and fed them a bunch of propaganda so that they could be trusted to massacre their own countrymen.
That would have not have been necessary were the soldiers just robots... nor would it have been necessary if the soldiers were people with no conscious whatsoever...
Yes, soldiers have to do what they're told and they aren't "supposed to think" as a soldier friend of mine once told me. But they are still human beings.
Nor would they have one against playboy.
But they know that playboy can afford good lawyers...
Apparently they (Nintendo) think that the folks running the SG site will be scared enough of litigation (and the associated costs) to just remove the link and be done with it.
the better.
I know you're afraid of the ole Hal 9000 syndrome.
But I'm afraid of the opposite... robots without inhibitions.
what happens when the guy we elect as "root" goes nuts and uses the robots to subjugate us all into his own personal slaves?
At least human soldiers have to believe in what they are doing... which makes gradual enslavement SLIGHTLY more difficult to do within a 4-8 year period.
You can read the order for an en banc rehearing here.
One of the questions they ask the parties to argue for the rehearing is "Whether the conduct at issue in this case could have been additionally, or alternatively, prosecuted under the Stored Communications Act?".
Hmmm, I wonder what the Stored Communications Act is? It seems the court might be worried that the SCA (whatever it is) already applies to email-snooping, so that the Wiretap Act should not apply.
The Supreme Court has held in the past that a denial of cert is not in any way an endorsement of the appeals court's ruling. Only a small fraction of applications for cert are actually granted by the Court.
It is still possible that another lower court (outside of the 10th Circuit) could hold the Do-Not-Call List unconstitutional. Hopefully, any other court would find the 10th Circuit's opinion persuasive... but unless such a court is actually in the 10th Circuit, they are not required to follow the ruling.
Explaining and determining how you came to act in a particular way IS taking responsibility for your actions.
I think the only disease involved in all this "you're not an irresponsible jackass, you just need medical help!" attitude is an acute affliction of stupid.
You think it stupid that people examine and analyze situations instead of just belting out bold and unsupported statements like "that's ludicruous!"
Alright Monty Python, why don't you explain what is ludicruous about the fact that caffeine withdrawal turns people into crabs?
I'm going to get some coffee and come back... but don't worry, I'll be just as crabby after I get my fix.
...talk about FUD!
He's not my enemy. I use linux, but if it never beats out Gates' empire, that won't keep me from going to sleep at night.
Gates does not rule the world. He has a lot of influence in computer software... but only in proprietary computer software.
What he says is not necessarily what he thinks. And what he thinks is not necessarily important anyway.
Or at least, that's what he would say if he were honest.
Indeed. every PC I've ever bought (laptops excluded) came with no operating system.
The last desktop computer I had that came with an operating system was a Commodore 64.
You prove nothing with such anecdotal accounts.
Which side is it that introduces amendments to ban flag-burning? Which side most frequently introduces bills to deal with online pornography? Which side was Ed Meese on?
Your example also suffers in that it ignores the traditional difference in focus of right wing and left wing limitations on speech. Right wingers traditionally like to limit speech on the topic of sex (and political viewpoint). Left wingers are typically more into limiting violence.
So you use an example of violent material to prove your point that the left is more restrictive than the right. That's dishonest...
The truth is that neither the left nor the right have a good track record, because it is the political process that encourages elected officials to ignore Constitutional commands and placate their constituency.
That is the popular notion.
A news article provides facts and at least attempts to be unbiased. Opinions pieces are NOT news articles, because they contain boldly stated opinions, and they make no attempt to appear unbiased.
As you point out, any news provided by humans is somewhat biased (for what it chooses to include if nothing else), but that doesn't mean we should just throw in the towel and declare that all news is opinion.
If you're going to say that, why don't we just say that all facts are opinion. You might as well point out the potential for bias in the optic nerve. You never know what kinds of interference might occur between the eye and brain... so why believe anything?
A healthy dose of skepticism is a good thing. But to assume that all journalists have an alterior motive, is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
"Willingly" means that it was your desire to cause the result (the distribution of copyrighted materials).
"Knowingly" simply means that you caused it and knew you were causing it, regardless of whether you desired the result or just knew it was an inevitable byproduct of your actions.
It's pretty rare that someone gets off for a crime because they "knew" but didn't "will" the result. But it's an open argument with file-trading, because a lot of programs share files by default. So if this bill were the law, and you were installing the program for a legal purpose, but you knew that it was going to share copyrighted music from your harddrive, you could no longer argue that you didn't "intend" to share copyrighted files, because you "knew" you were sharing the files.
Whether a person "knew" or "intended" something are questions left for juries to determine.
And I own one... It's called a CD/MP3 player and you can get one at any Target, Wal-Mart, etc.
They go for less than $50 and they hold as much space as blank CD-Rs you are willing to buy.
If he can't do that, you are doomed anyway.
Surely you're not suggesting that most pacifists are communists!
Because, well, that would be incorrect... as would the reverse.
In fact, the more I think about it, the more that sentence seems to make no sense at all... carry on now.