Yeah. It's terrible when political officials in high positions make decisions that conflict with their real world corporate jobs. *coughcheneyhalliburtoncough*
Ok, maybe I'm daft, but shouldn't the punishment fit the crime, or something like that? If the punishment for illegally making $172 million is only a $50 million fine, then one could just work that fine into the equation and still profit. Easily. By $122 million. Last time I checked, a $122 million profit (ok, let's say $121 million because I'm sure Suntasia had some overhead costs in their scam) is well worth the effort (I certainly wouldn't complain if someone (or lots of someones) gave me $121 million...). You'd think the obvious fine would be $222 million - the illegally-gotten $172 million PLUS $50 million in fines. Then again, what do I know?...
Welcome to the new, same as the old. Perhaps I'm stoopid and don't understand things but I'd have thought, after the pretty widely agreed upon failure of Vista that Microsoft would have made strong efforts to do things different with 7. I just don't understand why they'd do more of the same, but updated. Failure updated will still probably be a failure. I know I'm I Mac fanboy (at least I can admit it), but I really think Microsoft needs to take a lesson from Apple here - chuck the old system out, wholesale, and start fresh from the ground up with a strong vision in place to make sure the new system does everything the old system never could. Everything I've heard about Windows 7 suggests that Microsoft clearly is not doing this. Again.
"Looks like they're just trying to attract click revenue."
Agreed but I did my part to foil their plans - Firefox with AdBlock for the win.:)
Seriously though, fluff pieces like this shouldn't appear on Slashdot. They're nothing more than attempts to inflate ad revenue. They have absolutely nothing of substance. That "article" didn't tell me a single thing. Complete waste of thee minutes of my life.
You just dropped a rather sizable chunk of change on a premium car and now you get to deal with unwanted advertising while driving. Yeah. That sounds like the sort of service that people with cash are eager for. What a wonderful service. Were this offered by Kia on a discount car, I wouldn't be terribly surprised (and it'd possibly be an interesting idea - subsidize the car with targeted advertising) but from _Lexus?_ Sometimes marketing people need to be kicked when they come up with moronic ideas like this.
It amuses me when people use a credit card and assume their identity will remain a secret from everyone and anyone involved in the transaction. In my mind, it's akin to people complaining about the lack of privacy on Facebook. If you want privacy, don't use it. If keeping your identity secret is _that_ important to you, pay for things with cash.
Re:TFA says Juniper is doomed. Not so fast.
on
Google Router Rumors
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
"...even if Google is Juniper's biggest customer, one customer does not a demise make..."
That really depends. For smart companies, they've sufficiently diversified their client base such that the loss of one will hurt but not cripple. Some clients, however, just become so damn big and a company simply can't get enough other clients or the increase the volume from the other existing clients high enough to balance against that one mega-client. Once one client represents a massive percentage of your revenue and the loss of that client would force you into immediate emergency restructuring in the hopes of survival, then yes, one client a demise can potentially make.
So, they're setting up a town hall meeting? Shall we start a pool to see which company/*IAA-organization will bus in the most people to occupy seats so that nobody with an honest clue about the subject can show up and be involved in the discussion?
In other news, a new company (name yet to be decided upon) has sprung up. This new company offers big media corporations investigative services for online "crimes". Applications for employment are being reviewed but, at this time, this new company is not looking to hire staff as all positions will be filled by experienced individuals who have conducted similar work for "another" company in the same field.
Totally new company. Honest. New name to be announced real soon. New. Completely new. Totally different.
"Those who do understand DRM, probably never bought from the itunes store in the first place."
Not even remotely true. Lots of people who understand DRM have bought from the iTunes store. Understanding DRM doesn't necessarily mean opposition to it. Or, more specifically, understanding it doesn't mean opposition to it in every and all forms. Some DRM sucks and should be avoided in protest. Some DRM is sufficiently light that people don't mind. Yes, some oppose DRM in any and all forms but some, even though they understand DRM perfectly well, don't object to it in the same way.
DRM is only an issue when it gets in the way of the customer using the product the way they want. Apple 1) does offer songs DRM free (for a slightly larger fee) and 2) the DRM is so trivial to get around that any user who would be bothered by it can easily ignore it. So, in Apple's case, their DRM is only an issue for people who want zero DRM, no matter what - people who have taken a firm stance against DRM in any and all forms. For the vast majority of other people out there, however, the DRM isn't an issue and likely won't ever be noticed. And, thus, that means it's a well-executed DRM scheme. imho
Yes, because, in today's day and age, human beings look through digital records for anomalies. It's not like we have these fancy things called computers that can sift through all that data to check for that sort of thing. It's not like credit card companies, who deal with dramatically more transactions and customers, don't already do exactly this. So, again, I say, it's not hard for a company like a phone provider to be a bit pro-active and check to see if things are alright when something so blatantly anomalous occurs ($52 THOUSAND - that's a pretty glaring change in pattern).
The phone company did nothing wrong. It isn't their responsibility to screen your phone calls and determine which ones are fraudulent.
It doesn't take a brain surgeon to recognize a distinctly unusual shift in calling patterns. If the company had NEVER called Bulgaria (which is likely because, let's be honest, who among us has ever called Bulgaria?...) and then it suddenly wracks up $52 THOUSAND in calls to Bulgaria, someone at the company should say "hey, that seems odd. Let me make a call to our valued customer and make sure nothing's wonky." Sorry, it's not hard. If we expect it of credit card companies, I see no reason to not expect it from other companies.
indeed on many technical levels they are inferior, especially the ipod.
People keep bringing this up as if it matters. It doesn't. The iPod is, on a technical level, more than adequate for virtually everyone who uses it. More importantly, on a user interface level, it is pure simplicity to use. So, it's easy to use and does what the user wants. The fact that mp3PlayerX may do this better or oggPlayerY may do that better doesn't matter - the iPod does what the vast majority of people want it to do and it does it easily. That's all that matters.
Trism is a very simple example of an app that proves that developers can make money, and a lot of it. Last I hear, the guy that wrote the program has made over $250,000 on an app that he sells for $4.99. Why? It's really simple - it's a great game that's well worth the price. Free is fantastic and a majority of apps on my iPod Touch are free apps but, if the content is of quality and worth it, I'll pay for it. And so will thousands and thousands and thousands of other people. Complaining that some people are willing to do some coding for free isn't a way to make money. Make a quality product. If the people who complain about free apps making it hard for people to make money spent more time coding and making a quality app and less time complaining, they might make more money...
Here's my mini review: Wrath of the Lich King is superb. It isn't perfect (but nothing is) but it does many things exceptionally well. First and foremost among them is that the player's character actually does change the world. From minor things like helping an outpost get a flightmaster to dealing with major political intrigue with the Forsaken, the player's character has a notable impact on the structure of the world. While the game has it's fair share of "Kill 20 grapplegromets", the addition of the world-changing quest chains is wonderful. Also, each zone has at least one notable story arc of quests that really pulls the character into the lore of the world. Wrath of the Lich King's biggest success, among many things that it does well, is it's character immersion. I give Wrath a 9.5/10.
Why did it take this long for schools to fight against the RIAA? Ignoring the possibility that the RIAA might have been right * (which the majority of us would be arguing against, surely...), it just seems to be a perfect opportunity for any law students to actually practice law and earn some valuable experience on high profile cases. Were I a law student, I would salivate at the chance to be involved with something like this in the defense of fellow students. I'm surprised it took this long for law departments to get involved.
*And, really, it doesn't matter if the students being targeted were guilty. In our society, everyone deserves legal representation, even the guilty. Right or wrong, it's just how our system works. The law departments view shouldn't have been "this person is obviously innocent - we should get involved and help them". It should have been "these cases are high profile cases that will involve a lot of complex legal issues and will teach our law students a lot of valuable lessons that will make them better lawyers in the future. We should be involved." In my opinion, of course...
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. It's terrible when political officials in high positions make decisions that conflict with their real world corporate jobs. *coughcheneyhalliburtoncough*
Ok, maybe I'm daft, but shouldn't the punishment fit the crime, or something like that? If the punishment for illegally making $172 million is only a $50 million fine, then one could just work that fine into the equation and still profit. Easily. By $122 million. Last time I checked, a $122 million profit (ok, let's say $121 million because I'm sure Suntasia had some overhead costs in their scam) is well worth the effort (I certainly wouldn't complain if someone (or lots of someones) gave me $121 million...). You'd think the obvious fine would be $222 million - the illegally-gotten $172 million PLUS $50 million in fines. Then again, what do I know?...
Welcome to the new, same as the old. Perhaps I'm stoopid and don't understand things but I'd have thought, after the pretty widely agreed upon failure of Vista that Microsoft would have made strong efforts to do things different with 7. I just don't understand why they'd do more of the same, but updated. Failure updated will still probably be a failure. I know I'm I Mac fanboy (at least I can admit it), but I really think Microsoft needs to take a lesson from Apple here - chuck the old system out, wholesale, and start fresh from the ground up with a strong vision in place to make sure the new system does everything the old system never could. Everything I've heard about Windows 7 suggests that Microsoft clearly is not doing this. Again.
"Looks like they're just trying to attract click revenue."
:)
Agreed but I did my part to foil their plans - Firefox with AdBlock for the win.
Seriously though, fluff pieces like this shouldn't appear on Slashdot. They're nothing more than attempts to inflate ad revenue. They have absolutely nothing of substance. That "article" didn't tell me a single thing. Complete waste of thee minutes of my life.
Yay! Nice to see this guy managed to beat the RIAA and avoid having to pay thousands of dollars to make a bogus accusation go away.
Oh. Right. Lawyer's fees.
You just dropped a rather sizable chunk of change on a premium car and now you get to deal with unwanted advertising while driving. Yeah. That sounds like the sort of service that people with cash are eager for. What a wonderful service. Were this offered by Kia on a discount car, I wouldn't be terribly surprised (and it'd possibly be an interesting idea - subsidize the car with targeted advertising) but from _Lexus?_ Sometimes marketing people need to be kicked when they come up with moronic ideas like this.
It amuses me when people use a credit card and assume their identity will remain a secret from everyone and anyone involved in the transaction. In my mind, it's akin to people complaining about the lack of privacy on Facebook. If you want privacy, don't use it. If keeping your identity secret is _that_ important to you, pay for things with cash.
"...even if Google is Juniper's biggest customer, one customer does not a demise make..."
That really depends. For smart companies, they've sufficiently diversified their client base such that the loss of one will hurt but not cripple. Some clients, however, just become so damn big and a company simply can't get enough other clients or the increase the volume from the other existing clients high enough to balance against that one mega-client. Once one client represents a massive percentage of your revenue and the loss of that client would force you into immediate emergency restructuring in the hopes of survival, then yes, one client a demise can potentially make.
"...will bus in _the most_..."
So, they're setting up a town hall meeting? Shall we start a pool to see which company/*IAA-organization will bus in the most people to occupy seats so that nobody with an honest clue about the subject can show up and be involved in the discussion?
It makes one wonder if they'll ask congress for a bailout to save all those jobs...
Nice! The best way to fix something is do nothing at all and hope it works next time. Well done!
In other news, a new company (name yet to be decided upon) has sprung up. This new company offers big media corporations investigative services for online "crimes". Applications for employment are being reviewed but, at this time, this new company is not looking to hire staff as all positions will be filled by experienced individuals who have conducted similar work for "another" company in the same field.
Totally new company. Honest. New name to be announced real soon. New. Completely new. Totally different.
Would we lie to you?
"Those who do understand DRM, probably never bought from the itunes store in the first place."
Not even remotely true. Lots of people who understand DRM have bought from the iTunes store. Understanding DRM doesn't necessarily mean opposition to it. Or, more specifically, understanding it doesn't mean opposition to it in every and all forms. Some DRM sucks and should be avoided in protest. Some DRM is sufficiently light that people don't mind. Yes, some oppose DRM in any and all forms but some, even though they understand DRM perfectly well, don't object to it in the same way.
DRM is only an issue when it gets in the way of the customer using the product the way they want. Apple 1) does offer songs DRM free (for a slightly larger fee) and 2) the DRM is so trivial to get around that any user who would be bothered by it can easily ignore it. So, in Apple's case, their DRM is only an issue for people who want zero DRM, no matter what - people who have taken a firm stance against DRM in any and all forms. For the vast majority of other people out there, however, the DRM isn't an issue and likely won't ever be noticed. And, thus, that means it's a well-executed DRM scheme. imho
Yes, because, in today's day and age, human beings look through digital records for anomalies. It's not like we have these fancy things called computers that can sift through all that data to check for that sort of thing. It's not like credit card companies, who deal with dramatically more transactions and customers, don't already do exactly this. So, again, I say, it's not hard for a company like a phone provider to be a bit pro-active and check to see if things are alright when something so blatantly anomalous occurs ($52 THOUSAND - that's a pretty glaring change in pattern).
The phone company did nothing wrong. It isn't their responsibility to screen your phone calls and determine which ones are fraudulent.
It doesn't take a brain surgeon to recognize a distinctly unusual shift in calling patterns. If the company had NEVER called Bulgaria (which is likely because, let's be honest, who among us has ever called Bulgaria?...) and then it suddenly wracks up $52 THOUSAND in calls to Bulgaria, someone at the company should say "hey, that seems odd. Let me make a call to our valued customer and make sure nothing's wonky." Sorry, it's not hard. If we expect it of credit card companies, I see no reason to not expect it from other companies.
Really? It's over? Really? This isn't just a ruse to lull people into a false sense of security? This isn't April 1st? Really? Wow...
indeed on many technical levels they are inferior, especially the ipod.
People keep bringing this up as if it matters. It doesn't. The iPod is, on a technical level, more than adequate for virtually everyone who uses it. More importantly, on a user interface level, it is pure simplicity to use. So, it's easy to use and does what the user wants. The fact that mp3PlayerX may do this better or oggPlayerY may do that better doesn't matter - the iPod does what the vast majority of people want it to do and it does it easily. That's all that matters.
Trism is a very simple example of an app that proves that developers can make money, and a lot of it. Last I hear, the guy that wrote the program has made over $250,000 on an app that he sells for $4.99. Why? It's really simple - it's a great game that's well worth the price. Free is fantastic and a majority of apps on my iPod Touch are free apps but, if the content is of quality and worth it, I'll pay for it. And so will thousands and thousands and thousands of other people. Complaining that some people are willing to do some coding for free isn't a way to make money. Make a quality product. If the people who complain about free apps making it hard for people to make money spent more time coding and making a quality app and less time complaining, they might make more money...
As a Canadian, allow me to say these people need to fuck the hell off.
Please.
What? No need for me to be rude...
I really don't get what you're referring to about having a "notable impact on the world."
Complete your Dragonblight quests and you'll get a sense of it. Also, a chunk of Icecrown quests literally changes the landscape.
Unless I'm mistaken, none of the quests in the early stages of those quests are group quests - they can all be completed solo.
Here's my mini review: Wrath of the Lich King is superb. It isn't perfect (but nothing is) but it does many things exceptionally well. First and foremost among them is that the player's character actually does change the world. From minor things like helping an outpost get a flightmaster to dealing with major political intrigue with the Forsaken, the player's character has a notable impact on the structure of the world. While the game has it's fair share of "Kill 20 grapplegromets", the addition of the world-changing quest chains is wonderful. Also, each zone has at least one notable story arc of quests that really pulls the character into the lore of the world. Wrath of the Lich King's biggest success, among many things that it does well, is it's character immersion. I give Wrath a 9.5/10.
Why did it take this long for schools to fight against the RIAA? Ignoring the possibility that the RIAA might have been right * (which the majority of us would be arguing against, surely...), it just seems to be a perfect opportunity for any law students to actually practice law and earn some valuable experience on high profile cases. Were I a law student, I would salivate at the chance to be involved with something like this in the defense of fellow students. I'm surprised it took this long for law departments to get involved.
*And, really, it doesn't matter if the students being targeted were guilty. In our society, everyone deserves legal representation, even the guilty. Right or wrong, it's just how our system works. The law departments view shouldn't have been "this person is obviously innocent - we should get involved and help them". It should have been "these cases are high profile cases that will involve a lot of complex legal issues and will teach our law students a lot of valuable lessons that will make them better lawyers in the future. We should be involved." In my opinion, of course...