Even if these new stem cells aren't as useful as embryonic stem cells you can be sure that right wing zealots will argue that they are. I just don't get the case against embryonic stem cell research provided that research is carried out on embryos that have been donated with informed consent and would otherwise be destroyed. I could sort of understand the argument if these embryos were going to be implanted and had a real chance to become a baby, but we're talking about embryos that are going to be destroyed. IMHO destroying embryos that could be used in research to try and cure a number of truly horrible diseases is the immoral course of action.
OJ Simpson has cleared himself of any wrongdoing in the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Rod Goldman. OJ's internal investigation revealed that they killed themselves.
I'm a part of that generation and I can tell you I'm not excited. Why should I be? There hasn't been any real space travel occurring since I was born. Sure, it's cool that we've sent probes as far as we have and the recent rover missions to Mars have been cool but there isn't much about the Shuttle program or the ISS that excites or inspires me. It will be kind of cool to go back to the moon since it hasn't happened since I was born but once again it's a been there, done that, kind of deal. I can guarantee you this, if we ever attempt to send someone to Mars everyone in my generation will get excite about it. Right now it's all talk and so far out in the future that it's understandable that people in the me, me, me, now, now, now generation wouldn't get excited about it. Trust me, if we stay the course and as the time approaches people will get very excited.
Newsflash people: Google is a company that is in the game to make money. "Do No Evil".. what a joke. Google is going to do what's in it's own best interest. All smart companies do. So enough of this outrage. Some of you people act like little kids who've just found out there's no Santa Clause. Google screwing someone or some thing to make money? No shit. Deal with it. This crap from Google will continue so stop worshiping them like they are the second coming of Jesus Christ. They are not. If screwing someone will result in making some money they will opt to do it. It's just a matter of degree. It's time to recognize that and deal with it.
Certain carriers in the US like Verizon are notorious for locking down their phones. Other providers, like Cingular, don't tend to do it. I just bought a new LG phone from Cingular and it's not locked down at all. I can transfer mp3's, pictures and videos to and from my phone using either the data cable or via Bluetooth. Granted, the phone didn't come with instructions that talked about how to do it but it was pretty easy to figure out how to transfer files between the phone and my Mac.
Another US-centric article. I think I'll shit my pants like a 2 year old and piss and moan about it. What the hell? Don't you evil USians realize there are other people in the world? How dare a USian site, hosted in the USA, started by a USian and edited primarily by USians post information about something US-centric. You bastards! This wasn't voted on by the UN, it's illegal!
Look man, people don't care. Most computers run Windows. That's all Joe Sixpack knows and he'll never "wake up". Joe Sixpack uses his PC to browse the Internet, read and write e-mail, to write the occasional letter and perhaps some other tasks like balancing the checkbook, doing his taxes, managing photo's, etc. When Joe Sixpack wants to watch TV or listen to music he moves to his living room and pop's in a DVD or a CD and watches or listens that way.
We geeks are the ones who rip and re-mix media. Make backup copies of our DVD's, rip DVD video to our iPods to watch on the go, etc. We are aware that the **AA and companies like Microsoft are trying to take away our ability to do this but Joe Sixpack has no idea it's possible and if he finds out it's possible when he sees the process we have to go through to do it he thinks it's way to complicated anyway. He's not aware that he's losing anything because he isn't since he can't do this stuff in the first place.
He's got bigger problems to deal with like taking care of the family, saving for retirement, watching the game on Sunday, etc.
Web sites existed and prospered before Google. You're making a straw man argument. Whether or not Google has helped certain web sites succeed has no bearing on the fact that it is hypocritical for a company that makes it's money on the backs of content produced by others to be making moves that prevent others from doing essentially the same thing.
The problem is that for every one employee who will actually install and use new software to increase their productivity there are six idiots who will screw up their PC's with viruses and spyware and three employees who will install software so they can waste time.
The solution? Let the smartest, brightest and most productive employees do what they want (within reason). Pay attention and if what they are doing makes sense for others, embrace it and implement it where appropriate.
This isn't about deprecating SOAP in favor of something simpler, is it? Sounds to me like google wants people to visit their website to use their services. Which, once again, proves why the semantic web and web services will never fly. Companies don't want to make their data and services available to each other.
Which makes Google one hell of a hypocritical company. This is a company that couldn't exist if it wasn't for content put out there by other businesses and individuals yet when it comes to sharing it's own content it suddenly has a problem. It makes perfect business sense from Google's point of view, but it exposes those who made the decision for the hypocrites that they are. If they pursue this policy I hope the lawsuits that have been filed against them for copyright infringement are successful and that Google is run into the ground.
F ree agent signings that don't pan out I rate fans R etreads at QB who failed on other teams E xtreme incompetence
M arty, Mooch and now Marinelli I ll-advised draft picks L osingest GM presently in the NFL L aughingstock of the sports world E mbarassment to the city of Detroit N ever won more than 2 games back to back
It makes perfect business sense for Microsoft to produce versions of their software that requires new hardware or hardware upgrades to get acceptable performance. New hardware generally equals new OEM Microsoft licenses. Think about it. To the average consumer if you've got to upgrade your processor, motherboard, RAM and/or hard drive you might as well buy a new system and that means you're probably going to be paying the Microsoft tax. It's very much in Microsoft's interest to require you to upgrade your hardware to run the latest version of their products. It's no accident and by now no one should be naive enough to chalk it up to bad coding. It's done on purpose and for very sound business rea$ons...
The integration with Visual Studio makes it far and away the best DB to use to develop data driven applications and it's a breeze to upgrade your applications and their databases to SQL Server if you need to make the move. If you've got to use MS, there's no better way to go.
How stupid do you have to be to believe that a random sample of only 2,000 credit card accounts could show any kind of trend as it relates to iTunes sales. Only a small fraction of people with credit cards buy music on iTunes anyway. A random sample of 2,000 isn't going to show you any kind of trend when the the overall number of people who use their card for that kind of activity is so small. You'd need either need a much, much larger random sample or a targeted sample of likely online music buyers to determine any kind of trend. The fact that a report that is so obviously flawed could even get mentioned on a site like Slashdot is laughable. What a joke.
This settlement gets HP to admit to wrongdoing, puts some measures in place (pathetic though they may be) to try and keep them from doing it again, and not only saves the state money, but gives them a warchest to go after the real villains in this case: the executives who felt that the shield of incorporation gave them the right to condone and engage in unethical behavior.
No, they engaged in illegal behavior. Not everything that is unethical is illegal. See our current political system and the campaign finance system that supports it. Tell me what is ethical about the fact that elected Senators and Congressman don't even bother to read most of the bills they vote on. They don't even write the bills anymore, their staffers do. You know, the same staffers who will eventually leave to take high paying jobs with lobbying firms after paying their dues writing bills that are friendly to the interest those lobbyist represent. Completely unethical, 100% legal.
In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see most of these five individuals get what amounts to a slap on the wrist after a large donation or two is made to the proper re-election campaign committees or PACs. Sure one of them will have the book thrown at them so it appears action is being taken. Probably the lowest person on the totem pole. Then, after the smoke clears from that conviction suddenly the state will find no compelling reason to drag these remaining cases out. The poor defendants will have been put through enough. A small fine and 6 months probation will suddenly be more than enough punishment. After all, their names will have already been drug through the mud. That punishment alone will have done more damage than anything they state could do. They will have learned their lessons. I can see it now. What a joke.
As much as I hate the RIAA (and the tracks in question), I'll be buying these tracks and encouraging everyone I know to buy them as well! I'll probably even send an e-mail to Yahoo customer service and to the label as well thanking them. The bottom line is that we need to reward those labels that will release DRM free music to try and send them the message that we want DRM free music. Vote with your dollars on this one. If there is success here they might try it with other tracks.
Copyright infringement is not stealing. They are two completely different and unequal things and nobody is fooled despite the RIAA and MPAA's best efforts. Newsflash you idiots, if you would have had foresight enough to begin distributing music digitally with no DRM and the appropriate pricing in place this never would have blown up in your face as it now has. $0.99 cents a track, $9.99 for an album with no DRM and you'd have had yourselves a huge winner. The MPAA better learn from the RIAA's mistakes. Offer $9.99 standard definition digital downloads of movies with no extra's that can be burned to a DVD an unlimited number of times and you'll have yourselves a winner. Offer DVD's for customers that want the extra's and HD-DVD's and/or Blue-Ray Discs for customers that want HD.
Most people I know don't see much of a difference between using a P2P program to get a track which is how to get free music in the digital age and the method we used when we were younger, using a blank tape to record the good songs when they came on the radio. It's essentially the same thing, just quicker and more convenient.
I purchase new tracks on iTunes now because it's cheap, quick and easy but I can understand why many people avoid it due to DRM and the iPod lock in. If the RIAA would pull their heads out of their collective asses and offer music at a fair price with no DRM they'd have a huge winner on their hands. The music industry needs to recognize they can't sue their way out of this one and alienating you customers is a sure fire way to go out of business. Wise up and give the consumer what they want. Affordable music with no DRM that will work on any device they might choose to listen to it on. Would there still be piracy? Yes, but it wouldn't be anywhere near the level that it is at now. It would be prevalent among high school and college kids, but all one has to do is look at the alcohol industry to see how it's possible to get kids who are used to getting something for free when they are young to pony up for it when they are older and can afford to buy it.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if these new stem cells aren't as useful as embryonic stem cells you can be sure that right wing zealots will argue that they are. I just don't get the case against embryonic stem cell research provided that research is carried out on embryos that have been donated with informed consent and would otherwise be destroyed. I could sort of understand the argument if these embryos were going to be implanted and had a real chance to become a baby, but we're talking about embryos that are going to be destroyed. IMHO destroying embryos that could be used in research to try and cure a number of truly horrible diseases is the immoral course of action.
The penis of your vagina is the planet Uranus.
Fire Millen!
OJ Simpson has cleared himself of any wrongdoing in the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Rod Goldman. OJ's internal investigation revealed that they killed themselves.
I'm a part of that generation and I can tell you I'm not excited. Why should I be? There hasn't been any real space travel occurring since I was born. Sure, it's cool that we've sent probes as far as we have and the recent rover missions to Mars have been cool but there isn't much about the Shuttle program or the ISS that excites or inspires me. It will be kind of cool to go back to the moon since it hasn't happened since I was born but once again it's a been there, done that, kind of deal. I can guarantee you this, if we ever attempt to send someone to Mars everyone in my generation will get excite about it. Right now it's all talk and so far out in the future that it's understandable that people in the me, me, me, now, now, now generation wouldn't get excited about it. Trust me, if we stay the course and as the time approaches people will get very excited.
Newsflash people: Google is a company that is in the game to make money. "Do No Evil" .. what a joke. Google is going to do what's in it's own best interest. All smart companies do. So enough of this outrage. Some of you people act like little kids who've just found out there's no Santa Clause. Google screwing someone or some thing to make money? No shit. Deal with it. This crap from Google will continue so stop worshiping them like they are the second coming of Jesus Christ. They are not. If screwing someone will result in making some money they will opt to do it. It's just a matter of degree. It's time to recognize that and deal with it.
Certain carriers in the US like Verizon are notorious for locking down their phones. Other providers, like Cingular, don't tend to do it. I just bought a new LG phone from Cingular and it's not locked down at all. I can transfer mp3's, pictures and videos to and from my phone using either the data cable or via Bluetooth. Granted, the phone didn't come with instructions that talked about how to do it but it was pretty easy to figure out how to transfer files between the phone and my Mac.
A company giving away freebies to impress the media and generate buzz? No ....
Another US-centric article. I think I'll shit my pants like a 2 year old and piss and moan about it. What the hell? Don't you evil USians realize there are other people in the world? How dare a USian site, hosted in the USA, started by a USian and edited primarily by USians post information about something US-centric. You bastards! This wasn't voted on by the UN, it's illegal!
This is an American site. There will be articles of interest only to Americans from time to time. Get over it.
Look man, people don't care. Most computers run Windows. That's all Joe Sixpack knows and he'll never "wake up". Joe Sixpack uses his PC to browse the Internet, read and write e-mail, to write the occasional letter and perhaps some other tasks like balancing the checkbook, doing his taxes, managing photo's, etc. When Joe Sixpack wants to watch TV or listen to music he moves to his living room and pop's in a DVD or a CD and watches or listens that way.
We geeks are the ones who rip and re-mix media. Make backup copies of our DVD's, rip DVD video to our iPods to watch on the go, etc. We are aware that the **AA and companies like Microsoft are trying to take away our ability to do this but Joe Sixpack has no idea it's possible and if he finds out it's possible when he sees the process we have to go through to do it he thinks it's way to complicated anyway. He's not aware that he's losing anything because he isn't since he can't do this stuff in the first place.
He's got bigger problems to deal with like taking care of the family, saving for retirement, watching the game on Sunday, etc.
Web sites existed and prospered before Google. You're making a straw man argument. Whether or not Google has helped certain web sites succeed has no bearing on the fact that it is hypocritical for a company that makes it's money on the backs of content produced by others to be making moves that prevent others from doing essentially the same thing.
The problem is that for every one employee who will actually install and use new software to increase their productivity there are six idiots who will screw up their PC's with viruses and spyware and three employees who will install software so they can waste time. The solution? Let the smartest, brightest and most productive employees do what they want (within reason). Pay attention and if what they are doing makes sense for others, embrace it and implement it where appropriate.
Which makes Google one hell of a hypocritical company. This is a company that couldn't exist if it wasn't for content put out there by other businesses and individuals yet when it comes to sharing it's own content it suddenly has a problem. It makes perfect business sense from Google's point of view, but it exposes those who made the decision for the hypocrites that they are. If they pursue this policy I hope the lawsuits that have been filed against them for copyright infringement are successful and that Google is run into the ground.
F ree agent signings that don't pan out
I rate fans
R etreads at QB who failed on other teams
E xtreme incompetence
M arty, Mooch and now Marinelli
I ll-advised draft picks
L osingest GM presently in the NFL
L aughingstock of the sports world
E mbarassment to the city of Detroit
N ever won more than 2 games back to back
These results were accurately predicted on this very site, much to the chagrin of Microsoft fanboys.
It makes perfect business sense for Microsoft to produce versions of their software that requires new hardware or hardware upgrades to get acceptable performance. New hardware generally equals new OEM Microsoft licenses. Think about it. To the average consumer if you've got to upgrade your processor, motherboard, RAM and/or hard drive you might as well buy a new system and that means you're probably going to be paying the Microsoft tax. It's very much in Microsoft's interest to require you to upgrade your hardware to run the latest version of their products. It's no accident and by now no one should be naive enough to chalk it up to bad coding. It's done on purpose and for very sound business rea$ons...
The integration with Visual Studio makes it far and away the best DB to use to develop data driven applications and it's a breeze to upgrade your applications and their databases to SQL Server if you need to make the move. If you've got to use MS, there's no better way to go.
How stupid do you have to be to believe that a random sample of only 2,000 credit card accounts could show any kind of trend as it relates to iTunes sales. Only a small fraction of people with credit cards buy music on iTunes anyway. A random sample of 2,000 isn't going to show you any kind of trend when the the overall number of people who use their card for that kind of activity is so small. You'd need either need a much, much larger random sample or a targeted sample of likely online music buyers to determine any kind of trend. The fact that a report that is so obviously flawed could even get mentioned on a site like Slashdot is laughable. What a joke.
No, they engaged in illegal behavior. Not everything that is unethical is illegal. See our current political system and the campaign finance system that supports it. Tell me what is ethical about the fact that elected Senators and Congressman don't even bother to read most of the bills they vote on. They don't even write the bills anymore, their staffers do. You know, the same staffers who will eventually leave to take high paying jobs with lobbying firms after paying their dues writing bills that are friendly to the interest those lobbyist represent. Completely unethical, 100% legal.
In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see most of these five individuals get what amounts to a slap on the wrist after a large donation or two is made to the proper re-election campaign committees or PACs. Sure one of them will have the book thrown at them so it appears action is being taken. Probably the lowest person on the totem pole. Then, after the smoke clears from that conviction suddenly the state will find no compelling reason to drag these remaining cases out. The poor defendants will have been put through enough. A small fine and 6 months probation will suddenly be more than enough punishment. After all, their names will have already been drug through the mud. That punishment alone will have done more damage than anything they state could do. They will have learned their lessons. I can see it now. What a joke.
As much as I hate the RIAA (and the tracks in question), I'll be buying these tracks and encouraging everyone I know to buy them as well! I'll probably even send an e-mail to Yahoo customer service and to the label as well thanking them. The bottom line is that we need to reward those labels that will release DRM free music to try and send them the message that we want DRM free music. Vote with your dollars on this one. If there is success here they might try it with other tracks.
Copyright infringement is not stealing. They are two completely different and unequal things and nobody is fooled despite the RIAA and MPAA's best efforts. Newsflash you idiots, if you would have had foresight enough to begin distributing music digitally with no DRM and the appropriate pricing in place this never would have blown up in your face as it now has. $0.99 cents a track, $9.99 for an album with no DRM and you'd have had yourselves a huge winner. The MPAA better learn from the RIAA's mistakes. Offer $9.99 standard definition digital downloads of movies with no extra's that can be burned to a DVD an unlimited number of times and you'll have yourselves a winner. Offer DVD's for customers that want the extra's and HD-DVD's and/or Blue-Ray Discs for customers that want HD.
Most people I know don't see much of a difference between using a P2P program to get a track which is how to get free music in the digital age and the method we used when we were younger, using a blank tape to record the good songs when they came on the radio. It's essentially the same thing, just quicker and more convenient.
I purchase new tracks on iTunes now because it's cheap, quick and easy but I can understand why many people avoid it due to DRM and the iPod lock in. If the RIAA would pull their heads out of their collective asses and offer music at a fair price with no DRM they'd have a huge winner on their hands. The music industry needs to recognize they can't sue their way out of this one and alienating you customers is a sure fire way to go out of business. Wise up and give the consumer what they want. Affordable music with no DRM that will work on any device they might choose to listen to it on. Would there still be piracy? Yes, but it wouldn't be anywhere near the level that it is at now. It would be prevalent among high school and college kids, but all one has to do is look at the alcohol industry to see how it's possible to get kids who are used to getting something for free when they are young to pony up for it when they are older and can afford to buy it.
Google isn't obligated to tell him why and if you don't like it you're not obligated to use Google.
We're spared from another craptastic Hollywood remake. Excuse me if I don't shed a tear.