1. Lawyers have been paid up front, including appeals. 2. None of the remaining claims affect Linux, they are contract claims against IBM. At this point, even if IBM lost, SCO could not get license fees for Linux usage.
By that reasoning, again, free local calling while charging for long distance should be considered anticompetitive, should it not?
What kind of phone contract do you have which charges more for long distance? I haven't seen that for a long time.
A more relevant example would be when long-distance and mobile companies charged more to connect calls to other networks. But in those cases, the cost to connect those calls at that time was not trivial.
Why should an ISP be prohibited from charging a customer more for services that actually cost *THEM* more, because the content isn't already on their their own network?
Because the cost differences are below the noise level of their cost structure? Seriously, do you think that Comcast would not allow Netflix (1/3 of ALL traffic) to install their CDN boxes that would make the Netflox packets cheaper to transport if the savings for Comcast were significant?
This zero rating is an anti-competitive move that is unrelated to costs.
Seriously, in African countries, lead pipes were removed about 100 years ago already. WTF is wrong with America?
The danger from lead pipes can be managed. Lead doesn't dissolve well in water and chemicals can be used to reduce this further. The Flint water was safe until the source was switched to water that was acidic which greatly increased the lead in solution.
Only religions try to dictate how people should live.
Societies the world over regulate the way people live, when it affects other people in society. That's clearly the case here. By not vaccinating their own kids, some parents endanger other kids who either cannot be vaccinated, or the vaccination was not effective.
I suspect that it would be very interesting to see the actual settlement. Microsoft can afford to settle, and the presence of a patent troll in the ecosystem can make life difficult for Microsoft's competitors.
It's quite possible that the settlement contains terms that both sides felt benefited them.
Spam is largely a solved problem. I see little spam. However, I am receiving increasing numbers of telemarketing calls. These calls used spoofed caller-id so that the source appears to be very local. Because they are spoofing caller-id, they don't care about do-not-call lists.
What we need is for telecom companies to block spoofed caller-id.
That's the problem you have with this? The problem that I have is that someone is being accused of something he supposedly did outside the U.S. but is being forcibly brought to the U.S. We supposedly can't re-try known murderer O.J. because of double jeopardy. but now anyone who does anything while outside the U.S. can be subject to U.S. extradition!
Yeah, that too. But I think that the fact that what he did was no different from what a group of companies do millions (billions?) of times per day, with no criminal indictment in sight, seems to be the bigger issue. As other have pointed out, his real crime was merely taking part in the riches that the mega-wealthy indulge in.
Or somebody has stock that has a sell restriction on it. Because, you see, there isn't a good TAX reason to take a loan against the stock. You have to pay that loan back, with interest. How do you pay the loan back? With... wait for it... MONEY! That money has to come from somewhere. Probably from, oh, I don't know, selling some stock? Which generates a taxable gain. So they haven't avoided any taxes at all.
Your understanding is also flawed. If you have enough stock, you don't need to repay loan during your lifetime. When you die, the loan is repaid from your estate. Crucially, this repayment happens before estate taxes are paid.
So, yes, there is a way to avoid paying taxes on stocks that you receive, even though you were able to turn the stocks into cash.
are you really comparing the cost of software as an advantage, and not the fact that the west has faster internet, more reliable power, clean water, less disease, much less poverty, better transport....etc, etc, etc?
When the software costs (in the west) $1M per seat, yes.
I personally have no issue with regions with lower incomes paying less for the same content
And thus aiding the move of jobs from from high cost of living countries to low cost of living countries. I have seen this in one industry and the fact that software was sold at low prices in India gave a huge advantage to the buyers of that software in comparison to buyers in the west.
Sadly most of the media companies haven't become savvy enough to realize the internet is global and this silly crap of geolimiting things is last century.
Sadly, most of these companies have realized that an Indian viewer will pay a fraction of what a US viewer will pay and that a European viewer will pay even more than the US viewer. That's why the rights are not licensed worldwide.
I'm having trouble locating the exact requirements the device had to fulfill to satisfy the SME PED program; but depending on what levels of physical tamper resistance and software quality assurance were involved, $4,750/unit for a fairly low volume device might actually be a pretty decent price.
Perhaps the requirements are based on campaign contributions from the seller?
In this case, $4,750 is an utterly trivial amount to secure the communications of a secretary of state. It's a fraction of the price of a Vertu phone.
Stuck without representation, they fired their lawyers mid case.
I think that you are rewriting history. The government got the case moved to a court where their existing lawyers could not represent them (not admitted). Finding a new lawyer with the requisite security clearance in the time required wasn't possible.
The government screwed them over with the assistance of the courts. How well would you do in court against the government without a lawyer?
We "Aspire" to be better... Americans aspire towards Liberty, Freedom of Speech, Free elections and when we fall short we are supposed to feel bad about it.
There is a big block of people who do not aspire to these virtues: Trump supporters. They don't feel bad about racism, they don't feel bad about violence against their opponents, they don't feel bad about suppressing dissent, they don't even feel bad about supporting Nazi-like policies (thank you Godwin!).
Trump, Rubio and Cruz are competing to stake out the most extreme position on torture. Who would use the worst torture. Even Rubio: his personal story is that his father was tortured in Cuba, but, using his own definition, his father was not tortured.
To add to my comment above, I am betting that the real problem here is that someone in Comcast realized that the payback on providing service to this little company just wasn't there, so that the permitting process was deliberately sabotaged by Comcast.
When I asked Comcast to quote for installing their service at my office in Santa Clara, they wanted $200,000 (yes, you read that right, 200 grand) just to install. Fast forward a couple of years and now both AT&T and Comcast have brought fiber into the building (paid for by AT&T and Comcast), and Comcast is offering relatively cheap prices.
I mean seriously, this is par for the course. And you know what, you guys deserve it.
Time and time again you elect officials who go out of their way to protect the incumbent ISPs and other special interests even though it is expressly against your own interests. And then everyone makes noise about it and then every does fuck all about it.
In this case, it wasn't special interests acting against him, it was cluelessness and cheapness. In the SF Bay Area, there are lots of options for Internet service, but most of them cost more than Comcast. There are fixed wireless (point-to-point) providers, fiber providers, DSL providers, etc.. I suspect that, had he been prepared to pay close to $1000/month from the outset, he would have been up and running within 2 months.
So what should I do? In cases where I dislike both candidates
Vote for the candidate you like. Who know, there might be a majority of people who would prefer that candidate, but they are all afraid to vote for him/her. If they see enough other people vote for that candidate, they may well decide to do so in subsequent elections.
Also, you are sending a signal that you prefer a certain political position. Over time, if enough people send the same signal, then the center of politics moves that way. Look at how the Koch brothers, the Bechtel descendents and their friends have been successful in moving the center of politics to the right. Most democratic politicians in the US would not be recognized as left-wing in most of the developed world.
Hell, Proposition 8 was a majority opinion in 2008 and Brendan Eich still got fired for it.
Probably because people realized (belatedly) that it was a terrible, bigoted opinion. I think that, quite soon after the Prop 8 vote, opinions in CA changed such that the proposition would have failed.
Slashdot Mirror
For many of the initial buyers, it is much more affordable, because of the $7,500 federal tax rebate.
1. Lawyers have been paid up front, including appeals.
2. None of the remaining claims affect Linux, they are contract claims against IBM. At this point, even if IBM lost, SCO could not get license fees for Linux usage.
FTFY
What kind of phone contract do you have which charges more for long distance? I haven't seen that for a long time.
A more relevant example would be when long-distance and mobile companies charged more to connect calls to other networks. But in those cases, the cost to connect those calls at that time was not trivial.
Because the cost differences are below the noise level of their cost structure? Seriously, do you think that Comcast would not allow Netflix (1/3 of ALL traffic) to install their CDN boxes that would make the Netflox packets cheaper to transport if the savings for Comcast were significant?
This zero rating is an anti-competitive move that is unrelated to costs.
The danger from lead pipes can be managed. Lead doesn't dissolve well in water and chemicals can be used to reduce this further. The Flint water was safe until the source was switched to water that was acidic which greatly increased the lead in solution.
Societies the world over regulate the way people live, when it affects other people in society. That's clearly the case here. By not vaccinating their own kids, some parents endanger other kids who either cannot be vaccinated, or the vaccination was not effective.
I suspect that it would be very interesting to see the actual settlement. Microsoft can afford to settle, and the presence of a patent troll in the ecosystem can make life difficult for Microsoft's competitors.
It's quite possible that the settlement contains terms that both sides felt benefited them.
Spam is largely a solved problem. I see little spam. However, I am receiving increasing numbers of telemarketing calls. These calls used spoofed caller-id so that the source appears to be very local. Because they are spoofing caller-id, they don't care about do-not-call lists.
What we need is for telecom companies to block spoofed caller-id.
Yeah, that too. But I think that the fact that what he did was no different from what a group of companies do millions (billions?) of times per day, with no criminal indictment in sight, seems to be the bigger issue. As other have pointed out, his real crime was merely taking part in the riches that the mega-wealthy indulge in.
And when you are not buying, but instead, you are licensing? And the license comes with geographic limitations?
Your understanding is also flawed. If you have enough stock, you don't need to repay loan during your lifetime. When you die, the loan is repaid from your estate. Crucially, this repayment happens before estate taxes are paid.
So, yes, there is a way to avoid paying taxes on stocks that you receive, even though you were able to turn the stocks into cash.
When the software costs (in the west) $1M per seat, yes.
And thus aiding the move of jobs from from high cost of living countries to low cost of living countries. I have seen this in one industry and the fact that software was sold at low prices in India gave a huge advantage to the buyers of that software in comparison to buyers in the west.
Sadly, most of these companies have realized that an Indian viewer will pay a fraction of what a US viewer will pay and that a European viewer will pay even more than the US viewer. That's why the rights are not licensed worldwide.
You haven't been to India have you?
It was an auto-rickshaw, known elsewhere as a tuk-tuk.
Perhaps the requirements are based on campaign contributions from the seller?
In this case, $4,750 is an utterly trivial amount to secure the communications of a secretary of state. It's a fraction of the price of a Vertu phone.
Clearly, you did not RTFA. The /. editors (or the submitter) got the capitalization wrong.
I think that you are rewriting history. The government got the case moved to a court where their existing lawyers could not represent them (not admitted). Finding a new lawyer with the requisite security clearance in the time required wasn't possible.
The government screwed them over with the assistance of the courts. How well would you do in court against the government without a lawyer?
There is a big block of people who do not aspire to these virtues: Trump supporters. They don't feel bad about racism, they don't feel bad about violence against their opponents, they don't feel bad about suppressing dissent, they don't even feel bad about supporting Nazi-like policies (thank you Godwin!).
Trump, Rubio and Cruz are competing to stake out the most extreme position on torture. Who would use the worst torture. Even Rubio: his personal story is that his father was tortured in Cuba, but, using his own definition, his father was not tortured.
To add to my comment above, I am betting that the real problem here is that someone in Comcast realized that the payback on providing service to this little company just wasn't there, so that the permitting process was deliberately sabotaged by Comcast.
When I asked Comcast to quote for installing their service at my office in Santa Clara, they wanted $200,000 (yes, you read that right, 200 grand) just to install. Fast forward a couple of years and now both AT&T and Comcast have brought fiber into the building (paid for by AT&T and Comcast), and Comcast is offering relatively cheap prices.
In this case, it wasn't special interests acting against him, it was cluelessness and cheapness. In the SF Bay Area, there are lots of options for Internet service, but most of them cost more than Comcast. There are fixed wireless (point-to-point) providers, fiber providers, DSL providers, etc.. I suspect that, had he been prepared to pay close to $1000/month from the outset, he would have been up and running within 2 months.
Is that better or worse than snakes on a plane?
Vote for the candidate you like. Who know, there might be a majority of people who would prefer that candidate, but they are all afraid to vote for him/her. If they see enough other people vote for that candidate, they may well decide to do so in subsequent elections.
Also, you are sending a signal that you prefer a certain political position. Over time, if enough people send the same signal, then the center of politics moves that way. Look at how the Koch brothers, the Bechtel descendents and their friends have been successful in moving the center of politics to the right. Most democratic politicians in the US would not be recognized as left-wing in most of the developed world.
Probably because people realized (belatedly) that it was a terrible, bigoted opinion. I think that, quite soon after the Prop 8 vote, opinions in CA changed such that the proposition would have failed.