That reminds me of my Wife's first experience with a mac laptop. She inserted a floppy disc and we could NOT figure out how to get it out.
In the PC world you simply pushed a button right next to the drive. No such luck there.
After a few days I finally had to call a friend of mine to explain it to me. And to this day I don't understand why deleting the floppy icon from the desktop is more "insanely great" than simply pushing one button. Then again, maybe the emphasis isn't on the "great" but is on the "insane."
After Scientists tackled the perplexing problem of getting light through a wall, via what is now called a "window," they moved on to the even more confounding "wheel," "fire," and "walking erect" problems. More news on these stories as they develop.
Giving a legal letter to some booth lackey at a convention is NOT how you get a company's attention. Send it to the CEO, the resident agent, the law department, heck ANYONE who won't simply throw it away.
I pay for an email account through usa.net. I pay because it's worth getting entirely spam free emails that I can check anywhere. (Although, I have to admit free gmail is pretty good too and I'm thinking about changing.)
I also pay five measly bucks to access www.weatherunderground.com each year. That's works out to about a penny a day. Certainly worth the price.
The problem with news sites is this: who wants to subscribe to only one? Sure, the far right would sign up to foxnews.com and be done with it. But the vast majority of people want news from a variety of sources to get a balance. I just wouldn't want to pay to get only one source nor would I want to pay a lot to get balance.
So you admit that Apple lies. Go to Apple.com/ipod and look at the REQUIREMENTS for the iPod. In addition to a USB port, and Windows 2k/XP, Apple REQUIRES iTunes.
So I'll say it again, WHY BUY FROM A COMPANY THAT LIES TO YOU?!
You don't get it. If you need iTunes to use an iPod, APPLE controls what goes on and comes off. Not me. Not you. ONLY Apple. The fact that you can use it how you want is ONLY due to the fact that Apple lets you.
I'd never buy a music player where someone else controls the content.
I'm an American. I reserve the right to flame my country for any reason. I consider someone un-American who refuses to criticize even our most obvious faults.
A love of one's country isn't based on blind faith. And when profits comes before speech, I see our country turning in the wrong direction. If you feel the heat from my words as being a flame. That's your problem, not mine.
So, lets say Petrochemical Inc. was poisoning our water supply with a specific chemical. People are dying. That chemical is a trade secret. Are you SERIOUSLY saying it should be illegal for the journalist to publish the name of the chemical, merely because some employee of Petrochemical Inc. got it by illegal means?!
Because IF you believe that, then you believe that profit is more important than free speech. Heck, it's worse than that. You believe that profit is more important than human life!
I can see there could be some circumstances where a journalist would have to turn over his sources. For example, in circumstances where the trade secret had no public interest and where the divulging of the trade secret could seriously harm the corporation.
For example, if a journalist provided a schematic on how to build an iPod. First, I seriously doubt if the majority of citizens would care to see such a schematic. And secondly, that schematic would easily allow for cheap knock-offs to be made.
But what the judge doesn't seem to realize, is that there ARE circumstances where the interests of the citizens outweighs the profits of a corporation.
I'm NOT saying this is such a circumstance. But the Judge is moron for not realizing that there EVER COULD be such a circumstance!
I guess you didn't read the article. The part I quoted came from "Gnome developers who don't work for a Gnome-related corporation."
Since these guys do not work for a Gnome-related corporation, but yet they are still working on Gnome, I think it's reasonable to assume they are doing it as a hobby.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, and try ramming your car into a tree while you're driving 90 mph. Merely because you can do something stupid, doesn't mean you will.
But your comment certainly shows what Apple thinks of its users' intelligence.
That reminds me of my Wife's first experience with a mac laptop. She inserted a floppy disc and we could NOT figure out how to get it out.
In the PC world you simply pushed a button right next to the drive. No such luck there.
After a few days I finally had to call a friend of mine to explain it to me. And to this day I don't understand why deleting the floppy icon from the desktop is more "insanely great" than simply pushing one button. Then again, maybe the emphasis isn't on the "great" but is on the "insane."
... It's nice to see that eminent scientist Wile E. Coyote, PhD, has finally put the past behind him and is concentrating on real work nowadays.
April 4th is coming sooner and sooner!
... would that work for the shaking associated with "one hand surfing"?!
After Scientists tackled the perplexing problem of getting light through a wall, via what is now called a "window," they moved on to the even more confounding "wheel," "fire," and "walking erect" problems. More news on these stories as they develop.
Giving a legal letter to some booth lackey at a convention is NOT how you get a company's attention. Send it to the CEO, the resident agent, the law department, heck ANYONE who won't simply throw it away.
...it's that spyware authors have a GREAT sense of humor!
It does not matter if the government has actually abused citizens via the Patriot Act. The only thing that matters is that it can.
Luckily our overlord W has rid ourselves from godless science. We may die of diseases, but we'll live forever in Heaven!
I pay for an email account through usa.net. I pay because it's worth getting entirely spam free emails that I can check anywhere. (Although, I have to admit free gmail is pretty good too and I'm thinking about changing.)
I also pay five measly bucks to access www.weatherunderground.com each year. That's works out to about a penny a day. Certainly worth the price.
The problem with news sites is this: who wants to subscribe to only one? Sure, the far right would sign up to foxnews.com and be done with it. But the vast majority of people want news from a variety of sources to get a balance. I just wouldn't want to pay to get only one source nor would I want to pay a lot to get balance.
So you admit that Apple lies. Go to Apple.com/ipod and look at the REQUIREMENTS for the iPod. In addition to a USB port, and Windows 2k/XP, Apple REQUIRES iTunes.
So I'll say it again, WHY BUY FROM A COMPANY THAT LIES TO YOU?!
You don't get it. If you need iTunes to use an iPod, APPLE controls what goes on and comes off. Not me. Not you. ONLY Apple. The fact that you can use it how you want is ONLY due to the fact that Apple lets you.
I'd never buy a music player where someone else controls the content.
So let's say you're right. You don't need iTunes to use it. Apple lies. Then why in the fuck would I want to buy from a company that lies to me?!
I looked into getting a Shuffle, and according to Apple's site you NEED iTunes to put music on it.
Except it has more features, doesn't require a proprietary program to use it, and costs less.
I'm an American. I reserve the right to flame my country for any reason. I consider someone un-American who refuses to criticize even our most obvious faults.
A love of one's country isn't based on blind faith. And when profits comes before speech, I see our country turning in the wrong direction. If you feel the heat from my words as being a flame. That's your problem, not mine.
He was a nerd/geek. It's not like he was getting laid or being invited to parties or anything.
So, lets say Petrochemical Inc. was poisoning our water supply with a specific chemical. People are dying. That chemical is a trade secret. Are you SERIOUSLY saying it should be illegal for the journalist to publish the name of the chemical, merely because some employee of Petrochemical Inc. got it by illegal means?!
Because IF you believe that, then you believe that profit is more important than free speech. Heck, it's worse than that. You believe that profit is more important than human life!
What is it about the definitions of "cannot" and "no one" which are so hard for you to understand?
"Cannot" means never. "No one" means no single person. Is that so hard to understand?!
From the article:
"Kleinberg, however, ruled that NO ONE has the right to publish trade secrets that only could have been provided by someone breaking the law."
Also from the article:
"For example, journalists CANNOT refuse to disclose information when it relates to a crime."
I can see there could be some circumstances where a journalist would have to turn over his sources. For example, in circumstances where the trade secret had no public interest and where the divulging of the trade secret could seriously harm the corporation.
For example, if a journalist provided a schematic on how to build an iPod. First, I seriously doubt if the majority of citizens would care to see such a schematic. And secondly, that schematic would easily allow for cheap knock-offs to be made.
But what the judge doesn't seem to realize, is that there ARE circumstances where the interests of the citizens outweighs the profits of a corporation.
I'm NOT saying this is such a circumstance. But the Judge is moron for not realizing that there EVER COULD be such a circumstance!
So profits are more important that free speech?
Nevermind, I forgot for a second that I live in America!
Thanks, it's always nice to get the feedback you expected!
I guess you didn't read the article. The part I quoted came from "Gnome developers who don't work for a Gnome-related corporation."
Since these guys do not work for a Gnome-related corporation, but yet they are still working on Gnome, I think it's reasonable to assume they are doing it as a hobby.
If I'm wrong about that, please set me straight.