I wonder when they adjust their numbers for all the returned copies of the software.
I bought it, and returned it to Walmart within a week. I had activated it too, but I couldn't get it to go past a certain part of the install.\
Tech support still hasn't responded to my email, and this was back in Feb.
I bought taxcut instead, and will use that from now on.
But even next year, when their numbers for this year's sales are shown, I suspect they won't admit to the losses due to returns. I have a feeling they will hide that number somehow.
Right. That was what I was confused about, and why I said it wasn't a big deal.
The article hadn't made it clear that only CA residents would be charged tax made on purchases online.
Here in IL, we've always had the use tax form on the state tax forms, as far as I remember.
I was merely trying to be funny when I suggested that, since interstate tax is unconstitutional (per the previous poster), they should just call in an interstate online use tax instead of an interstate sales tax.
If the internet part of their business is run from somewhere besides California, they moved the primary HQ away from California, would they still have to charge a non-californian resident sales tax for California merely because they have some retail shops there?
If the customer is in a different state that also charges internet sales tax and the internet store has retail shops in THAT state, which state gets the sales tax? The customer's home state?
If it IS the customer's home state, then does CA only charge sales tax for the purchase if the customer's state doesn't charge a sales tax?
If it's based on the seller's state, then does the customer's purchase get charged sales tax for EVERY state that the seller has retail shops?
In other words, if I buy from Barnes and Noble, and 12 states that have B&N stores have passed similar laws, do I then get charged a sales tax on my purchase to each state?
Where and how do they draw the line? Do they pick the max tax? Do they split it up? It seems insane.
"Not that there is anything wrong with that, but the point is programming is a passion, and no degree in the world will change that. Smart employers learn to look for those with the passion, not the degree."
I quite agree. Even in the college I attended, where all of my fellow classmates were also CS majors, many of them didn't really do it because they loved it. They did it because programmers were finding jobs.
"Conceptual ability is much more important than rote knowledge of implementations."
Also true. I find that knowing that something is possible, and how it probably should work, is far more important to my job than having done it before. I've done things not documented nor obvious just because I figured out what should be possible and tried it.
Hey, I'm 37, and I've been in the field professionally since I was 22. I'm not the youngest at my current client, but I'm hardly the oldest.
In fact, most people I see in this business fell into it from other fields entirely. I've only met a few out here in the real world that actually went to school specifically for programming. Most got degrees in other fields.
I really don't know that age is that much of a factor either, except that the younger ones actually chose the field during college instead of afterwards.
So now people who run mailing lists would have to file paperwork with the federal government to be classed as a charity?
I can just see the IRS forms now.
I just love the solutions people envision. There's a problem. Let's throw the government at it. They can fix ANYTHING.
The top level poster is right. This will probably kill spammers. Unfortunately, it will do it by killing email.
What will happen is that emailing people will be too painful due to taxes or the red-tape involved. People will switch to using alternatives or just stop using email altogether.
Aside from your emotional need to swear at me, the ac who already replied has answered the question.
Frankly, I don't even pay $20 for movies, only $15 or less, and I can play them on my computer without worrying about them not working.
DRM and copy protection has existed long before p2p filesharing. I've seen it on machines since high school in the mid '80s for software. It never really worked, and largely disappeared. The only ones it disrupts are the legit buyers.
That was the original suggestion. My point to that is if a judge orders verizon to provide the logs, verizon isn't providing the logs if they can't be legally read.
The riaa makes it expensive to buy, painful to use, and objects when people find ways around their control.
If you've ever gotten on kazaa or grokster, you'd realize that the "high-bit rate" mp3s aren't that great a quality. If people had the option to pay a fair price without being screwed over in the purchase, they wouldn't need to take the trouble to pirate them.
People can go to the library, borrow the cd, and copy the cd's for free. You don't see the riaa complaining about that.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the musicians that actually take advantage of p2p to advertise their music actually make money. According to the riaa, that's impossible.
The story I had read about it didn't mention that they had simply asked the judge to reconsider. The story I'm referring to was about the judge refusing Verizon's request, and Verizon having 14 days. When I miss details like that, it really throws the story out of whack.
Naturally, I can't find the story again. Not sure if it was on theregister or here on slashdot. No big deal however.
It seems to me that Verizon providing encrypted logs to the riaa would not actually be providing anything. I doubt if a judge would agree that providing even trivially encrypted logs is making them available.
What struck me as really weird was that, in the Verizon case, the SAME judge that found for the RIAA also found for them again in the appeal. I thought the appeal would go to another judge.
I bought my HP inkjet printer in '97 before they decided to include any of these "features".
It came with two cartridges. A black ink, and a color ink cartridge. I've only had to replace one of them since I bought the printer, and that cartidge was about $30.
True, I don't print much, and $30 for a cartridge is a rip-off. But I feel I'm being ripped-off much less than people with more recent models, so I'm relatively happy.
I meant to write "I am just not familiar enough with the products to get the joke." rather than "I am just familiar with each..."
My bad.
Regardless, thanks for the link. I am going to download the trailer on the game when I get home. Not that I need another time-waster, but what the heck.
Thanks for the info on "Alice". I was aware that two entities were involved, and that American McGee, which did the game, wasn't American Greeting, which owns the Strawberry Shortcake character.
I am just familiar with each of the products enough to get the joke of the strip.
Regardless, my point was that due to American Greetings letter, they have probably increased the viewing of the controversial strip 10-fold.
I never noticed those at the top before. Probably because they are so dang hard to read.
Ok, so I should have been able to notice that, but seriously, a white font with a black shadow on a grey tab on a blue page is not eye-friendly.
It also doesn't help that there is a banner ad below the menu bar. I'm accustomed to ignoring anything from the banner ad on up. I doubt if I'm the only one.
I suspect that the C&S letter has actually caused more people to see the original cartoon than would otherwise have seen it.
I personally don't frequent PA that often. IMO, the site is too slow, and it's too much of a pain to find the link to the current strip. It also doesn't help that that strip was 218k.
But, on hearing about the yanking of the strip, I was intrigued enough to visit the site, and go searching for it on the web. Finally saw it on one of the mirrors listed in the top post today.
I am not familiar with American McGee or it's products, so it didn't strike me as very funny. I frankly didn't see much humor in it.
But I saved the image, and have it to pass around to others. I'm also convinced that American Greeting is a company with which has lost my respect. They could have just laughed it off and ignored it. Few of their customers would have been likely to see it. It strikes me that the target audience of PA and American Greetings aren't the same.
Instead, they have escalated it to be news, and made sure that far more people will see the strip than would have otherwise.
What kind of proof does one need? I'm fortunate in that I'm still working, but my sister has been laid off since last September or so. Living in IL, she doesn't have to do much more than say she's been looking. (she has)
But I'm curious how one would prove they looked for work. I can understand that if you get interviews, you can ask the interviewer to sign something. But if you can't even get an interview and you aren't given the courtesy of rejection letters for your resume, what do you do?
It used to be that people could show receipts for resumes printed up, but nowadays people can print them at home.
AOL, MSN, and Compuserve are all basically ISPs. They don't offer the last mile connection themselves.
If users don't like them, the users can switch to another provider, usually with a wide variety.
However, a high-speed user has at most two options: Cable-internet and DSL. If one of these providers decides to limit sites and services, it makes it really easy for the other one to limit sites and services as well.
If that happens, users will have to either suffer limited sites and services with high-speed, or slow connections.
Of course, the slow connections are only available until everyone has switched to high speed service. After that, what are the chances that the local ISPs will survive?
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder when they adjust their numbers for all the returned copies of the software.
I bought it, and returned it to Walmart within a week. I had activated it too, but I couldn't get it to go past a certain part of the install.\
Tech support still hasn't responded to my email, and this was back in Feb.
I bought taxcut instead, and will use that from now on.
But even next year, when their numbers for this year's sales are shown, I suspect they won't admit to the losses due to returns. I have a feeling they will hide that number somehow.
I've yet to throw a computer out, even if it doesn't work.
I've still got my original 286 desktop, and an old & busted 286 laptop, sitting around.
Right. That was what I was confused about, and why I said it wasn't a big deal.
The article hadn't made it clear that only CA residents would be charged tax made on purchases online.
Here in IL, we've always had the use tax form on the state tax forms, as far as I remember.
I was merely trying to be funny when I suggested that, since interstate tax is unconstitutional (per the previous poster), they should just call in an interstate online use tax instead of an interstate sales tax.
So then California can get away with it in the same fashion.
It's not an interstate sales tax, it's an interstate use tax.
Damn. Now we've given them ideas.
Thanks.
The article didn't define it that well. I guess I'm expecting too much from journalists.
as yet the constitution still identifies interstate commerce as non-taxable.
If that's true, then why does my state tax form have a section to declare purchases I've made out of state, by mail-order for example?
If the internet part of their business is run from somewhere besides California, they moved the primary HQ away from California, would they still have to charge a non-californian resident sales tax for California merely because they have some retail shops there?
If the customer is in a different state that also charges internet sales tax and the internet store has retail shops in THAT state, which state gets the sales tax? The customer's home state?
If it IS the customer's home state, then does CA only charge sales tax for the purchase if the customer's state doesn't charge a sales tax?
If it's based on the seller's state, then does the customer's purchase get charged sales tax for EVERY state that the seller has retail shops?
In other words, if I buy from Barnes and Noble, and 12 states that have B&N stores have passed similar laws, do I then get charged a sales tax on my purchase to each state?
Where and how do they draw the line? Do they pick the max tax? Do they split it up? It seems insane.
Thanks, webmasterjoe.
;)
It -IS- useful information. I hadn't realized that pages could even define a text size in pixels. I learn something every day.
It wouldn't be so bad if they didn't hardcode the text size in the font class. At least then I could enlarge it.
It makes it annoying when, in order to read the dang article, I have to move my eyes to 6 inches from the screen.
Am I the only one who has this problem? I can read slashdot, salon, and other sites fine.
"Not that there is anything wrong with that, but the point is programming is a passion, and no degree in the world will change that. Smart employers learn to look for those with the passion, not the degree."
I quite agree. Even in the college I attended, where all of my fellow classmates were also CS majors, many of them didn't really do it because they loved it. They did it because programmers were finding jobs.
"Conceptual ability is much more important than rote knowledge of implementations."
Also true. I find that knowing that something is possible, and how it probably should work, is far more important to my job than having done it before. I've done things not documented nor obvious just because I figured out what should be possible and tried it.
Hey, I'm 37, and I've been in the field professionally since I was 22. I'm not the youngest at my current client, but I'm hardly the oldest.
In fact, most people I see in this business fell into it from other fields entirely. I've only met a few out here in the real world that actually went to school specifically for programming. Most got degrees in other fields.
I really don't know that age is that much of a factor either, except that the younger ones actually chose the field during college instead of afterwards.
So now people who run mailing lists would have to file paperwork with the federal government to be classed as a charity?
I can just see the IRS forms now.
I just love the solutions people envision. There's a problem. Let's throw the government at it. They can fix ANYTHING.
The top level poster is right. This will probably kill spammers. Unfortunately, it will do it by killing email.
What will happen is that emailing people will be too painful due to taxes or the red-tape involved. People will switch to using alternatives or just stop using email altogether.
Aside from your emotional need to swear at me, the ac who already replied has answered the question.
Frankly, I don't even pay $20 for movies, only $15 or less, and I can play them on my computer without worrying about them not working.
DRM and copy protection has existed long before p2p filesharing. I've seen it on machines since high school in the mid '80s for software. It never really worked, and largely disappeared. The only ones it disrupts are the legit buyers.
Is that the fucking answer you wanted?
That was the original suggestion. My point to that is if a judge orders verizon to provide the logs, verizon isn't providing the logs if they can't be legally read.
Not really. You are missing the real problem.
The riaa makes it expensive to buy, painful to use, and objects when people find ways around their control.
If you've ever gotten on kazaa or grokster, you'd realize that the "high-bit rate" mp3s aren't that great a quality. If people had the option to pay a fair price without being screwed over in the purchase, they wouldn't need to take the trouble to pirate them.
People can go to the library, borrow the cd, and copy the cd's for free. You don't see the riaa complaining about that.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the musicians that actually take advantage of p2p to advertise their music actually make money. According to the riaa, that's impossible.
Ok, that isn't so bad then.
The story I had read about it didn't mention that they had simply asked the judge to reconsider. The story I'm referring to was about the judge refusing Verizon's request, and Verizon having 14 days. When I miss details like that, it really throws the story out of whack.
Naturally, I can't find the story again. Not sure if it was on theregister or here on slashdot. No big deal however.
Thanks for the update.
I read your solution to the riaa/verizon fight.
It seems to me that Verizon providing encrypted logs to the riaa would not actually be providing anything. I doubt if a judge would agree that providing even trivially encrypted logs is making them available.
What struck me as really weird was that, in the Verizon case, the SAME judge that found for the RIAA also found for them again in the appeal. I thought the appeal would go to another judge.
I bought my HP inkjet printer in '97 before they decided to include any of these "features".
It came with two cartridges. A black ink, and a color ink cartridge. I've only had to replace one of them since I bought the printer, and that cartidge was about $30.
True, I don't print much, and $30 for a cartridge is a rip-off. But I feel I'm being ripped-off much less than people with more recent models, so I'm relatively happy.
Woo hoo! I'm being ripped-off less than others!
I meant to write "I am just not familiar enough with the products to get the joke." rather than "I am just familiar with each ..."
My bad.
Regardless, thanks for the link. I am going to download the trailer on the game when I get home. Not that I need another time-waster, but what the heck.
Thanks for the info on "Alice". I was aware that two entities were involved, and that American McGee, which did the game, wasn't American Greeting, which owns the Strawberry Shortcake character.
I am just familiar with each of the products enough to get the joke of the strip.
Regardless, my point was that due to American Greetings letter, they have probably increased the viewing of the controversial strip 10-fold.
I never noticed those at the top before. Probably because they are so dang hard to read.
Ok, so I should have been able to notice that, but seriously, a white font with a black shadow on a grey tab on a blue page is not eye-friendly.
It also doesn't help that there is a banner ad below the menu bar. I'm accustomed to ignoring anything from the banner ad on up. I doubt if I'm the only one.
I suspect that the C&S letter has actually caused more people to see the original cartoon than would otherwise have seen it.
I personally don't frequent PA that often. IMO, the site is too slow, and it's too much of a pain to find the link to the current strip. It also doesn't help that that strip was 218k.
But, on hearing about the yanking of the strip, I was intrigued enough to visit the site, and go searching for it on the web. Finally saw it on one of the mirrors listed in the top post today.
I am not familiar with American McGee or it's products, so it didn't strike me as very funny. I frankly didn't see much humor in it.
But I saved the image, and have it to pass around to others. I'm also convinced that American Greeting is a company with which has lost my respect. They could have just laughed it off and ignored it. Few of their customers would have been likely to see it. It strikes me that the target audience of PA and American Greetings aren't the same.
Instead, they have escalated it to be news, and made sure that far more people will see the strip than would have otherwise.
What kind of proof does one need? I'm fortunate in that I'm still working, but my sister has been laid off since last September or so. Living in IL, she doesn't have to do much more than say she's been looking. (she has)
But I'm curious how one would prove they looked for work. I can understand that if you get interviews, you can ask the interviewer to sign something. But if you can't even get an interview and you aren't given the courtesy of rejection letters for your resume, what do you do?
It used to be that people could show receipts for resumes printed up, but nowadays people can print them at home.
AOL, MSN, and Compuserve are all basically ISPs. They don't offer the last mile connection themselves.
If users don't like them, the users can switch to another provider, usually with a wide variety.
However, a high-speed user has at most two options: Cable-internet and DSL. If one of these providers decides to limit sites and services, it makes it really easy for the other one to limit sites and services as well.
If that happens, users will have to either suffer limited sites and services with high-speed, or slow connections.
Of course, the slow connections are only available until everyone has switched to high speed service. After that, what are the chances that the local ISPs will survive?
Excuse me, but the budget deficit and the state of the economy aren't the same thing.