"why can't a public utilities company provide a public utility if their rate payers want it?"
"What's wrong with additional competition? And why should legislative bodies protect telecommunications monopolies?"
Because governmental entities do not give money to political causes. Also, government businesss do not raise taxes.
Accordingly, if a legislature is faced with helping and protecting a private business versus a government business, the legislature will ALWAYS support the private business.
I totally agree. I'm at attorney and in my dealings with other attorneys I couldn't help but wonder why some make millions and while other barely survive.
It certainly wasn't the education, intelligence, or looks. The one factor that all highly successful attorneys have is that they are optimists. In other words, they know they are going to win and won't let anything change that opinion.
They're almost like compulsive gamblers, except the odds are not against them.
I opened an account with usa.net. I ONLY use it for friends and family I trust.
Via my ISP I create other accounts, e.g., one for Newegg, one for Amazon, etc. If I ever buy from someone and that account starts getting spam, I can cancel it immediately. It has only happened once.
I also give out a secondary email account to friends and family to test them. If they don't sign me up for crap and don't forward me crappy jokes, I then give them my real account.
Like my subject says, I've never received any spam in my usa.net account. The only spam I've got in the last three years was in an account I opened to use the pcmag.com forums. Needless to say that one was immediately cancelled and I use a fake address there now.
Under the new overtime rules, a factory worker could be denied overtime pay merely if his employer sent him to a seminar for training.
As an attorney, I have no problem not getting overtime pay when I work over 40 hours per week. I didn't spend 7+ years in school to spend my work day looking at the clock.
But anyone doing drudge work should certainly be paid overtime for more than 40 hours per week.
Re:Thomas Jefferson's opinion
on
Is IP Property?
·
· Score: 1
Well duh. Jefferson says that ideas are not property, but, society can give monopolies over the ideas in order to benefit. But that does NOT change the fact that the ideas are not property.
Let's see. Sign up for Netflix's 40 dollars a month service. It allows you to have 8 DVDs at a time. On average you can get about 10 DVDs a week. That's 520 a year for only 92 cents per CD.
Buy DVDFab for $40.
Get some cheap blank DVDs from Newegg, currently about 42 cents a disc.
About half of the movies can be copied without compression onto one disc. But even assuming you want all the bonus materials and use 2 discs for each movie. Your grand total comes to $1.86 per movie.
So to answer your question as to why use Netflix, you can get all the movies you want for less than 2 bucks each.
Thomas Jefferson's opinion
on
Is IP Property?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself, but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it.
He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density at any point, and like the air in which we breath, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation.
Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property."
Actually, it is affecting the rights of the students to use a portion of the public spectrum. The FCC has ruled that only it can regulated access to that spectrum. Thus, the unversities are clealy violating student's rights.
However, I do think that any university has the right to keep its own network from being accessed via a WAP.
So, for example, let's assume a dorm with two students with one computer each. They have the right to set up file sharing between those computers via a WAP. The university has no right to stop that. However, the university has every right to restrict the sharing of its network.
I guess it all depends on how a university is banning WAPs. If its an all-out ban. Than the univeristy is violating the students' rights. However, if a university is only banning WAPs which connect to its own network, such a ban would be legal.
The case Microsoft is relying on is Playboy v. Terri Welles. Welles was a Playboy Playmate of the year. She put that information in the metatags of her website. Playboy sued saying that Welles' use of the terms Playboy and Playmate violated its trademarks.
The court ruled that the fact that Welles a Playboy Playmate of the year is, well, a specific fact. And because she was exactly what she claimed to be, there could be no confusion in the marketplace.
Microsoft's use of stations' call letters, however, will obviously lead to confusion. It would be like Pepsi putting it's "like Coke" right on its labels. Sure, Pepsi does takes "like coke." but the confusion in the marketplace would be too great. Basically, the fact is too generalized.
This will never go to trial though. Some higher up at Microsoft will come to his or her senses and put a stop to this nonsense.
I rechecked, and SoundStorm lost more than it won. I'm not saying it's a bad sound solution. What I'm saying is that the article is pure propaganda. Exactly how many times can it repeat "on the fly Dolby" before you get a little suspicious. My god, it was obviously written by a PR person!
Oh come one, the US federal government has been bending over backwards to avoid taxes on VOIP. I hardly consider the contrast between the UK and the US to be "stark."
It starts off with the premise that SoundStorm is "the benchmark" to judge all other audio cards against. And then SoundStorm loses in all but one benchmark.
How would you like to be a multi-millionaire witnessing the destruction of the business-model that made you rich? These corporate suits might actually have to go out and earn a living someday doing REAL work for possibly the first times in their richly lived lives. How about a little sympathy?
Let's face it, most poor people were born that way and are used to it. But if you've lived the high-life for your entire life and are suddenly faced with the prospect of losing that life, it could be scary.
So let's cut some slack. Let's let them lash out with their feeble lawsuits and legal threats. We all know their time is almost up.
Slashdot Mirror
...considering you don't stand a better chance at winning the election than the drunk homeless guy I saw pissing on the sidewalk this morning.
It simply doesn't matter. If the program works, Microsoft will simply buy it and bury it. If it doesn't work, then who cares!?
I've got answers:
"why can't a public utilities company provide a public utility if their rate payers want it?"
"What's wrong with additional competition? And why should legislative bodies protect telecommunications monopolies?"
Because governmental entities do not give money to political causes. Also, government businesss do not raise taxes.
Accordingly, if a legislature is faced with helping and protecting a private business versus a government business, the legislature will ALWAYS support the private business.
I'm glad that one form of organized crime is finally standing up to fight a different form of organized crime.
the fact that AMD is catching up?!
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15690
I totally agree. I'm at attorney and in my dealings with other attorneys I couldn't help but wonder why some make millions and while other barely survive.
It certainly wasn't the education, intelligence, or looks. The one factor that all highly successful attorneys have is that they are optimists. In other words, they know they are going to win and won't let anything change that opinion.
They're almost like compulsive gamblers, except the odds are not against them.
First, you don't have to believe me. I'm not sure why I would lie though.
Second, exactly why would I need either a whitelist or "Matador" when I'm spam free?! That makes NO sense.
I would think that, but I'm guessing my real name is sufficiently unique to avoid that problem.
Here's how:
I opened an account with usa.net. I ONLY use it for friends and family I trust.
Via my ISP I create other accounts, e.g., one for Newegg, one for Amazon, etc. If I ever buy from someone and that account starts getting spam, I can cancel it immediately. It has only happened once.
I also give out a secondary email account to friends and family to test them. If they don't sign me up for crap and don't forward me crappy jokes, I then give them my real account.
Like my subject says, I've never received any spam in my usa.net account. The only spam I've got in the last three years was in an account I opened to use the pcmag.com forums. Needless to say that one was immediately cancelled and I use a fake address there now.
Not that I would ever do what I suggested, I like planning scams, but I lack the guts to perpetrate them.
However, I watch movies because I like movies, not because of the pretty packaging.
Under the new overtime rules, a factory worker could be denied overtime pay merely if his employer sent him to a seminar for training.
As an attorney, I have no problem not getting overtime pay when I work over 40 hours per week. I didn't spend 7+ years in school to spend my work day looking at the clock.
But anyone doing drudge work should certainly be paid overtime for more than 40 hours per week.
Well duh. Jefferson says that ideas are not property, but, society can give monopolies over the ideas in order to benefit. But that does NOT change the fact that the ideas are not property.
Let's see. Sign up for Netflix's 40 dollars a month service. It allows you to have 8 DVDs at a time. On average you can get about 10 DVDs a week. That's 520 a year for only 92 cents per CD.
Buy DVDFab for $40.
Get some cheap blank DVDs from Newegg, currently about 42 cents a disc.
About half of the movies can be copied without compression onto one disc. But even assuming you want all the bonus materials and use 2 discs for each movie. Your grand total comes to $1.86 per movie.
So to answer your question as to why use Netflix, you can get all the movies you want for less than 2 bucks each.
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself, but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it.
He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density at any point, and like the air in which we breath, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation.
Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property."
Makes sense to me!
Actually, it is affecting the rights of the students to use a portion of the public spectrum. The FCC has ruled that only it can regulated access to that spectrum. Thus, the unversities are clealy violating student's rights.
However, I do think that any university has the right to keep its own network from being accessed via a WAP.
So, for example, let's assume a dorm with two students with one computer each. They have the right to set up file sharing between those computers via a WAP. The university has no right to stop that. However, the university has every right to restrict the sharing of its network.
I guess it all depends on how a university is banning WAPs. If its an all-out ban. Than the univeristy is violating the students' rights. However, if a university is only banning WAPs which connect to its own network, such a ban would be legal.
Hollywood generally doesn't like when end-users prefer edited content.
5 -0 5-clearplay-main_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2004-0
I can easily imagine a director complaining that allowing the user to zoom a movie would change his picture and ruin the film.
The case Microsoft is relying on is Playboy v. Terri Welles. Welles was a Playboy Playmate of the year. She put that information in the metatags of her website. Playboy sued saying that Welles' use of the terms Playboy and Playmate violated its trademarks.
The court ruled that the fact that Welles a Playboy Playmate of the year is, well, a specific fact. And because she was exactly what she claimed to be, there could be no confusion in the marketplace.
Microsoft's use of stations' call letters, however, will obviously lead to confusion. It would be like Pepsi putting it's "like Coke" right on its labels. Sure, Pepsi does takes "like coke." but the confusion in the marketplace would be too great. Basically, the fact is too generalized.
This will never go to trial though. Some higher up at Microsoft will come to his or her senses and put a stop to this nonsense.
But all the terrorists involved in the 9/11 attacks HAD VALID IDs!!!! Thus, the secret law serves absolutely NO purpose!
I always use PS/2 ports for mice and keyboards. They are NEVER flakey, always work, and they don't tie up USB ports.
Sure, I could buy yet another hub, but why would I when I have two working PS/2 ports?!
"Is it that difficult to respect international spellings?"
Yes.
I rechecked, and SoundStorm lost more than it won. I'm not saying it's a bad sound solution. What I'm saying is that the article is pure propaganda. Exactly how many times can it repeat "on the fly Dolby" before you get a little suspicious. My god, it was obviously written by a PR person!
We're actually going to have to start paying for all those Adobe programs we illegally downloaded and installed but never bothered to use?!
Oh come one, the US federal government has been bending over backwards to avoid taxes on VOIP. I hardly consider the contrast between the UK and the US to be "stark."
It starts off with the premise that SoundStorm is "the benchmark" to judge all other audio cards against. And then SoundStorm loses in all but one benchmark.
Shouldn't the BEST card be "the benchmark"?!
How would you like to be a multi-millionaire witnessing the destruction of the business-model that made you rich? These corporate suits might actually have to go out and earn a living someday doing REAL work for possibly the first times in their richly lived lives. How about a little sympathy?
Let's face it, most poor people were born that way and are used to it. But if you've lived the high-life for your entire life and are suddenly faced with the prospect of losing that life, it could be scary.
So let's cut some slack. Let's let them lash out with their feeble lawsuits and legal threats. We all know their time is almost up.