Tv doesn't come with all the channels...you have to pay for cable. Cable doesn't come with all the channels, you have to pay extra for HBO.
He already covered that:
When you pay for HBO, HBO doesn't leave out certain shows that you have to pay extra for or only show you 3/4 of an episode and you have to pay extra for the rest of the episode.
...he wasn't talking about ALL cable channels, obviously.
When you buy a car, you don't get all the options. You have to pay extra for leather seats, heated steering wheel, dual ac, etc.
All of which actually cost more money than the base options. Leather costs more than cloth. Heated seats cost more than unheated seats. That's not the case with software.
Is that how you teach your kids to respond when they lose arguments?
Just because they're being monitored, you;re assuming there's not an exchange of trust?
Not if they aren't monitoring you at the same time. Obviously.
You also CLEARLY have paid no attention to my comments about insisting that the monitoring device ALERTS the child when their being monitored!
Uh huh. So if you're making an important phone call, and one of your kids picks up the other phone in your house to listen in, you're not going to be upset, because you know it's happening?
This IS the 2 way trust foundation!!!
On what planet is one-sided snooping "2 way"?
The tool is to create open communication between parent and child. "where are you going soon becomes "I'm headed to..." and the child continually keeps you in the loop, and boundries can be communicated, and over time lessened, and trust is gained.
A little device was invented over a hundred years ago that does that without lowjacking your kid: the telephone.
You expect to what, give your 16 year old who has never been out of the house unsupervised keys to a car and license to do whatever they want?
And the fact that they are a new driver wouldn't have anything to do with that, now would it?
Have some common sense asshole.
What a role model you are. I hope you don't homeschool. Look, it's quite simple:
1. Will you wear the same device so your kids can check on you: yes or no. 2. Do you dress your kids in flame retardant suits and crash helmets when you drive them anywhere: yes or no.
If you say no to the first question: practice what you preach. You'll no more build up trust by one-way snooping than you can encourage your children to learn manners at the dinner table while ordering them to pass you the potatoes while demanding that they say "please" and "thank you".
If you say no to the second question: your sense of proportion is seriously broken.
Oh yes, there are those who hold that e.g. Linux would suffer the same level of penetration had it had the same level of penetration on the desktop but the fact that about 60% of all Internet traffic is handled by Linux machines (which are far less often compromised) pleads against that. It's not exposure that does it but architecture (and the quality of administration, but that's another issue).
The best example is Microsoft's IIS, back in the day. It had far more exploits than Apache, even though Apache had far larger market share.
Let's put this straight: This is about people running software that they're not entitled to run. Simple as that.
Hardly - it's about the Windows ecosystem. Legitimately purchased (but vulnerable) Windows PC's can get viruses from pirated copies of Windows just fine. If pirated copies can be patched, it will mean fewer hassles for Microsoft's paying customers.
It's sort of like if Republicans wanted to deny flu vaccines to illegal immigrants - it's cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.
Shorter version: thousands of people watch college sports on campus, thousands more on TV, schools and coaches make millions - and the players that people turn out to see are the lowest paid people in the building. Pretty sad that someone working concessions at Podunk U makes more money than a starting player for a Big 10 university.
So is blaming the Obama Economy on Republicans the new meme?
Wow, I suppose you are also one of those "special" people who blame Clinton for Ruby Ridge. You know, that select group of individuals who's intellect makes the Darwin Award winners look like Nobel Laureates. Because the economy crashed before Obama was elected much less took office.
Or is it now officially the Republican's fault that a large Dem majority in congress can't seem to pass any of the Dem's favorite policy initiatives?
No, it's not the Republicans fault at all that so many Democrats are acting like asshat Republicans. But thanks for another pathetic straw man.
Bah, politics: people just vote for the popular team to win the big game with no concern for the consequences.
I don't think that statement is accurate. I think it is true that generally Republicans/Conservatives frown on federally funded science, because they don't believe that it is a legitimate function of government, but I don't think it is fair to say they don't like science.
They don't like science because it deals with reality, and reality has a well known liberal bias. See: evolution. See: climate change. See: pollution.
And for the record, I'm a Libertarian, now that Republicans are unpopular.
I have stopped caring about describing myself as a Republican because Republicans have royally fucked the country over and I want to deny any responsibility for my support of Republican politicians and policies
My favorite was the story of how "iCon" was banned from Apple stores. The haters were doing their usual "now if this were Microsoft, you'd all be up in arms" even as many of the +5 posts called Jobs a consummate asshole.
Again, stated several times, device is not for their general saftey.
So it's not about safety, it's about grilling your kids until they make some statement that you can bust them for. Did you work for Ken Starr?
and, for the last time, its a TEMPORARY measure, until TRUST is not only earned, but confirmed.
Trust is a two-way street. If you want to teach your kids about trust, no doubt you'll purchase the deluxe option so they can check up on your location 50 times a day. Maybe you can order it with the next size crash helmet and flame retardant suit, and then find some way to de-program them so they don't turn into chronic snoops.
A businessman (lets call him Warren) who earns a huge amount of money, but invests it back (creating more jobs)
If a business will profit from expansion - it will go ahead and expand. Personal income tax rates on the owners are completely and utterly irrelevant to this equation, as anyone who's taken 6th grade economics should know.
I'm dubious about the concept that Washington state deserves a slice of a cool billion dollars or so from the-rest-of-the-world just because they have developers in the state.
And if you're a Microsoft exec or a major shareholder. If you're not, why do you want to pay more taxes so a corporation with more money than God can dodge their taxes?
Microsoft has already started moving/building data centers out of Washington state, which is both perfectly legal and bound to hurt the shortsighted WA state govt that thought it could just start changing tax laws on companies without any repercussions.
Hardly. Building new datacenters is kind of irrelevant to software licensing.
a company that is probably one of the biggest sources of economic growth in the Seattle metropolitan area
Not if they aren't paying their taxes. I suppose you also support taxpayer funded stadiums for billionaire owners of sports teams in leagues with anti-trust exemption?
If you live in Washington, you have to pay more taxes because Microsoft is avoiding theirs. Your attitude only makes sense if you're a Microsoft exec or major shareholder. If you're not, you're cutting of your nose to spite your face.
Products and services are already priced to maximize revenue. If Microsoft (or any other company on the planet) can charge customers more money without consequences to their bottom line - they'll go ahead and charge their customers more.
Slashdot Mirror
Say what? Your "counter-example" actually backs up his point perfectly.
1.6MB is rather large for a simple unlock key, so its more likely a patch which has been compressed.
And if this were 1996, that might be plausible. But a patch today can be larger than an entire installation from just a few years ago.
Your post is hilarious.
So is yours.
Tv doesn't come with all the channels...you have to pay for cable. Cable doesn't come with all the channels, you have to pay extra for HBO.
He already covered that:
...he wasn't talking about ALL cable channels, obviously.
When you buy a car, you don't get all the options. You have to pay extra for leather seats, heated steering wheel, dual ac, etc.
All of which actually cost more money than the base options. Leather costs more than cloth. Heated seats cost more than unheated seats. That's not the case with software.
They could just cut spending. No one needs to pay more because someone pays less. Just cut spending.
Because that's like asking an anorexic gymnast to lose another five pounds.
And I have less money because you aren't giving me yours.
Yawn.
You shouldn't let your greed cloud your judgement:
There's that projection again.
licensing taxes *are* stupid
Why.
if Microsoft found a way to get off them, good for them.
Which goes back to the fact that you pay more taxes because other people are cheating on theirs.
But I just don't see the logic which says they owe it to Washington State to pay as much of their income in tax as they can.
Except this isn't about paying extra taxes, it's about not dodging the taxes they should already be paying.
Boy, you're really a dumb fuck aren't you!
Is that how you teach your kids to respond when they lose arguments?
Just because they're being monitored, you;re assuming there's not an exchange of trust?
Not if they aren't monitoring you at the same time. Obviously.
You also CLEARLY have paid no attention to my comments about insisting that the monitoring device ALERTS the child when their being monitored!
Uh huh. So if you're making an important phone call, and one of your kids picks up the other phone in your house to listen in, you're not going to be upset, because you know it's happening?
This IS the 2 way trust foundation!!!
On what planet is one-sided snooping "2 way"?
The tool is to create open communication between parent and child. "where are you going soon becomes "I'm headed to..." and the child continually keeps you in the loop, and boundries can be communicated, and over time lessened, and trust is gained.
A little device was invented over a hundred years ago that does that without lowjacking your kid: the telephone.
You expect to what, give your 16 year old who has never been out of the house unsupervised keys to a car and license to do whatever they want?
And the fact that they are a new driver wouldn't have anything to do with that, now would it?
Have some common sense asshole.
What a role model you are. I hope you don't homeschool. Look, it's quite simple:
1. Will you wear the same device so your kids can check on you: yes or no.
2. Do you dress your kids in flame retardant suits and crash helmets when you drive them anywhere: yes or no.
If you say no to the first question: practice what you preach. You'll no more build up trust by one-way snooping than you can encourage your children to learn manners at the dinner table while ordering them to pass you the potatoes while demanding that they say "please" and "thank you".
If you say no to the second question: your sense of proportion is seriously broken.
I suppose you could see it that way, if your head was planted deep in your ass.
Oh yes, there are those who hold that e.g. Linux would suffer the same level of penetration had it had the same level of penetration on the desktop but the fact that about 60% of all Internet traffic is handled by Linux machines (which are far less often compromised) pleads against that. It's not exposure that does it but architecture (and the quality of administration, but that's another issue).
The best example is Microsoft's IIS, back in the day. It had far more exploits than Apache, even though Apache had far larger market share.
Let's put this straight: This is about people running software that they're not entitled to run. Simple as that.
Hardly - it's about the Windows ecosystem. Legitimately purchased (but vulnerable) Windows PC's can get viruses from pirated copies of Windows just fine. If pirated copies can be patched, it will mean fewer hassles for Microsoft's paying customers.
It's sort of like if Republicans wanted to deny flu vaccines to illegal immigrants - it's cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.
We did that over 70 years ago. Where have you been?
Shorter version: thousands of people watch college sports on campus, thousands more on TV, schools and coaches make millions - and the players that people turn out to see are the lowest paid people in the building. Pretty sad that someone working concessions at Podunk U makes more money than a starting player for a Big 10 university.
So is blaming the Obama Economy on Republicans the new meme?
Wow, I suppose you are also one of those "special" people who blame Clinton for Ruby Ridge. You know, that select group of individuals who's intellect makes the Darwin Award winners look like Nobel Laureates. Because the economy crashed before Obama was elected much less took office.
Or is it now officially the Republican's fault that a large Dem majority in congress can't seem to pass any of the Dem's favorite policy initiatives?
No, it's not the Republicans fault at all that so many Democrats are acting like asshat Republicans. But thanks for another pathetic straw man.
Bah, politics: people just vote for the popular team to win the big game with no concern for the consequences.
Speak for yourself, Slick.
I don't think that statement is accurate. I think it is true that generally Republicans/Conservatives frown on federally funded science, because they don't believe that it is a legitimate function of government, but I don't think it is fair to say they don't like science.
They don't like science because it deals with reality, and reality has a well known liberal bias. See: evolution. See: climate change. See: pollution.
And for the record, I'm a Libertarian, now that Republicans are unpopular.
Fixed that up a bit for you.
Republican != Conservative.
Only when Republicans are unpopular.
I have stopped caring about describing myself as a Republican because Republicans have royally fucked the country over and I want to deny any responsibility for my support of Republican politicians and policies
Fixed that for you.
My favorite was the story of how "iCon" was banned from Apple stores. The haters were doing their usual "now if this were Microsoft, you'd all be up in arms" even as many of the +5 posts called Jobs a consummate asshole.
Again, stated several times, device is not for their general saftey.
So it's not about safety, it's about grilling your kids until they make some statement that you can bust them for. Did you work for Ken Starr?
and, for the last time, its a TEMPORARY measure, until TRUST is not only earned, but confirmed.
Trust is a two-way street. If you want to teach your kids about trust, no doubt you'll purchase the deluxe option so they can check up on your location 50 times a day. Maybe you can order it with the next size crash helmet and flame retardant suit, and then find some way to de-program them so they don't turn into chronic snoops.
Hey, moron, he didn't say data centers are relevant to software licensing.
Hey, fucktard, the whole point of this article is Microsoft avoiding taxes on licensing. Talking about data centers is batshit irrelevant.
A businessman (lets call him Warren) who earns a huge amount of money, but invests it back (creating more jobs)
If a business will profit from expansion - it will go ahead and expand. Personal income tax rates on the owners are completely and utterly irrelevant to this equation, as anyone who's taken 6th grade economics should know.
I'm dubious about the concept that Washington state deserves a slice of a cool billion dollars or so from the-rest-of-the-world just because they have developers in the state.
And if you're a Microsoft exec or a major shareholder. If you're not, why do you want to pay more taxes so a corporation with more money than God can dodge their taxes?
Microsoft has already started moving/building data centers out of Washington state, which is both perfectly legal and bound to hurt the shortsighted WA state govt that thought it could just start changing tax laws on companies without any repercussions.
Hardly. Building new datacenters is kind of irrelevant to software licensing.
a company that is probably one of the biggest sources of economic growth in the Seattle metropolitan area
Not if they aren't paying their taxes. I suppose you also support taxpayer funded stadiums for billionaire owners of sports teams in leagues with anti-trust exemption?
If you live in Washington, you have to pay more taxes because Microsoft is avoiding theirs. Your attitude only makes sense if you're a Microsoft exec or major shareholder. If you're not, you're cutting of your nose to spite your face.
A tax on profit != a cost of production.
Products and services are already priced to maximize revenue. If Microsoft (or any other company on the planet) can charge customers more money without consequences to their bottom line - they'll go ahead and charge their customers more.
I'm sure the military won't use outside servers for top secret stuff
You would hope so, but that's probably not the case.
No. We'll just keep calling all opposition racists.
You go girl - unleash those straw men.