The polling was open to anybody who could be bothered to make their way over to The Consumerist, and there were many banks and other financial institutions in the early rounds.
I encourage you to check out the bracket, complete with comments, and next time, maybe you too can participate!
If you've got enough money to "buy" a representative, you've got enough money to set up shell corporations to do your donations. All this would do is make it even harder to follow the money.
I disagree. We should not have laws or rules on the books which -encourage- the one hit wonder, or the 'create ONE work, live forever off of it' mentality.
Shouldn't this be the burden of the music/film/literary industry rather than the federal government?
If Fox wants to spitting out endless seasons of American Idol, let them. It's not the government's place to encourage creativity.
Now, I can't speak for you, but I beg to differ when it comes to the Pittsburgh market.
I personally had two job offers right out of college, and I didn't exactly graduate with honors. Since then, I've had zero trouble finding a decent job, and consulting work on the side.
So, not to brag, but it sounds to me like your job prospects are simply what you make of them.
I'd hardly call solid-state drives a "crackpot" technology.
I'd have to agree, since there's already software out there that will instantly transform your thumb drive into a portable scratch disk. It probably won't be long until such setups are commonplace.
I could be mistaken, but I was pretty sure that Peter Jackson is only suing to have an audit done, as his main allegation has always been that accounting practices on the previous LotR movies were a bit, er, shady.
Sure, he'll probably get some more money out of it (if he's right), but it sounds to me like New Line is attempting one hell of a mischaracterization...
Actually, I don't think Microsoft 'fans' (if such a class of citizenry even exists) would have anything to worry about -- they probably bought their copies of XP legally, and would have nothing to fear over a few 'dirty rotten scoundres' getting their 'illegal' copies of XP turned off.
Because moderators don't look past the first, say, 150-200 points.
I'll admit it, I'm guilty of it too. I actually rather like this idea of condensing a day's discussion into one article. It gives those who may have new insight into the topic a chance to join the discussion.
Does anybody else remember the trend a while back (may still continue today, I don't watch much TV) whereby season premiers were "Brought to you commercial-free by Ford" and other companies?
Those weren't too bad: sure, there were gratuitous car chases in easily-identifiable Ford vehicles, (and, IIRC, a 5-minute pitch on the new Ford truck at halftime) but there weren't 5-minute commercial breaks every 10 minutes, and most of the product placement was subtle enough that it didn't intrude on the show.
"...maybe even pay for Internet filtering research."
Since when does porn have to be regulated like the tobacco industry? It's not like these sites are ruining lives by giving people cancer.
And what's to stop me from making amazingsexvideos.COM and not paying fo the fees? I doubt that not having a.xxx TLD will decrease the amount of traffic I see...
Isn't it also true that most spyware that these programs detect are somewhat-benign tracking cookies for sites like FastClick? I wouldn't necessarily classify those as spyware.
However, if they are, then I'm sure most of the computers I own (Linux, OS X, Win) will have at least a dozen such "spyware" infections...
I do not like the "contest" style of compensation.
It's only a contest if they "entrants" have an idea of what they're in store for should they "win". Apple never gave any mention of any prizes, monetary or otherwise.
It's people like this that force me to carry around a copy of my college transcript to all of my job interviews. Honestly, it shouldn't be this easy to say, "Yeah, I have a degree from xxxx University," without any reputable employer (and I usually lump the Feds into this category) checking up on such claims...
It would seem to me, however, that there's so easy solution to the problem. (Having not RTFA...) If you force (through legislation or otherwise) every retailer to pay a kickback to the publisher for every used game sold, that will immediately piss off the thousands of smaller retailers who simply can't afford that type of extra expense. Although, those smaller retailers are increasingly rare these days, thanks to the 'community store' model that EB has been adopting.
No "levels" for the players to work toward. All you could know is that you used that cool two-handed sword to kill the troll and it was kinda easy....should you go attack that dragon? These games would REALLY be interesting then.
Erm, I dunno about anybody else, but that sounds like a dead-ringer for the fall-asleep "hit" of the year to me...
Roberts is also preparing a series of legal templates based on his case which he will make available for free on his campaigning website found at www.spamlegalaction.co.uk. He told us it will be a "DIY spam self-defence kit". The hope is that without any specialised legal knowledge, even everyday Internet users will be able to sue companies that send them unsolicited email.
This somewhat disturbs me. Although I hate spam as much as the next guy, how bad would it be if someone could just fill out some forms and collect $500 from a company that sent a supposedly "unwanted" email?
I realize that it's not quite that simple, but once a legal precedent is set, how far could someone take this? Again, with precedent, one could theoretically bankrupt a company who didn't bother to use a reputable email ad agency, which raises another interesting question: Who's really at fault here? Most large corporations don't send out their own solicitations, but they do provide marching orders to do so. So in a case like this, are they at fault, or is the company that actually sent the spam?
Now, granted, I don't know much about how standards like these are developed, but shouldn't this sort of far-reaching decision with industry-wide implications not be left up to one entity? Especially one with such a vested interest in its outcome, such as Microsoft?
At the same time, I sort of wonder if maybe it's better to have one source for specifications for a technology, to avoid the kind of industry war that consumed DVD+/-R's development.
Slashdot Mirror
The polling was open to anybody who could be bothered to make their way over to The Consumerist, and there were many banks and other financial institutions in the early rounds.
I encourage you to check out the bracket, complete with comments, and next time, maybe you too can participate!
I don't think this will actually fix anything.
If you've got enough money to "buy" a representative, you've got enough money to set up shell corporations to do your donations. All this would do is make it even harder to follow the money.
AOL user spotted!
I disagree. We should not have laws or rules on the books which -encourage- the one hit wonder, or the 'create ONE work, live forever off of it' mentality.
Shouldn't this be the burden of the music/film/literary industry rather than the federal government?
If Fox wants to spitting out endless seasons of American Idol, let them. It's not the government's place to encourage creativity.
I personally had two job offers right out of college, and I didn't exactly graduate with honors. Since then, I've had zero trouble finding a decent job, and consulting work on the side.
So, not to brag, but it sounds to me like your job prospects are simply what you make of them.
Maybe I'm missing something, but we've been buying T61's with XP for months now, without any difficulty at all.
And we're not some large megacorp either -- we buy maybe 2-3 computers every 6 weeks.
I'd have to agree, since there's already software out there that will instantly transform your thumb drive into a portable scratch disk. It probably won't be long until such setups are commonplace.
Sure, he'll probably get some more money out of it (if he's right), but it sounds to me like New Line is attempting one hell of a mischaracterization...
Twenty two people in Finland were fined 427,000 last week for illegally sharing movies, music, games and software...
Er, 427,000 what exactly?
Or perhaps 427,000 people were fined twenty two of something?
Jeez, color me confused...
I'll admit it, I'm guilty of it too. I actually rather like this idea of condensing a day's discussion into one article. It gives those who may have new insight into the topic a chance to join the discussion.
Thumbs up!
Those weren't too bad: sure, there were gratuitous car chases in easily-identifiable Ford vehicles, (and, IIRC, a 5-minute pitch on the new Ford truck at halftime) but there weren't 5-minute commercial breaks every 10 minutes, and most of the product placement was subtle enough that it didn't intrude on the show.
What kind of sysadmins are they!?
Turn off Google's image filter and search for seemingly benign things...
"Safe for Work"[Ironically, not at all safe for work...]
Since when does porn have to be regulated like the tobacco industry? It's not like these sites are ruining lives by giving people cancer.
And what's to stop me from making amazingsexvideos.COM and not paying fo the fees? I doubt that not having a .xxx TLD will decrease the amount of traffic I see...
However, if they are, then I'm sure most of the computers I own (Linux, OS X, Win) will have at least a dozen such "spyware" infections...
It's only a contest if they "entrants" have an idea of what they're in store for should they "win". Apple never gave any mention of any prizes, monetary or otherwise.
It would seem to me, however, that there's so easy solution to the problem. (Having not RTFA...) If you force (through legislation or otherwise) every retailer to pay a kickback to the publisher for every used game sold, that will immediately piss off the thousands of smaller retailers who simply can't afford that type of extra expense. Although, those smaller retailers are increasingly rare these days, thanks to the 'community store' model that EB has been adopting.
What, exactly are they upgrading??
Erm, I dunno about anybody else, but that sounds like a dead-ringer for the fall-asleep "hit" of the year to me...
This somewhat disturbs me. Although I hate spam as much as the next guy, how bad would it be if someone could just fill out some forms and collect $500 from a company that sent a supposedly "unwanted" email?
I realize that it's not quite that simple, but once a legal precedent is set, how far could someone take this? Again, with precedent, one could theoretically bankrupt a company who didn't bother to use a reputable email ad agency, which raises another interesting question: Who's really at fault here? Most large corporations don't send out their own solicitations, but they do provide marching orders to do so. So in a case like this, are they at fault, or is the company that actually sent the spam?
At the same time, I sort of wonder if maybe it's better to have one source for specifications for a technology, to avoid the kind of industry war that consumed DVD+/-R's development.
Larry Page and Sergey Brin read Slashdot!?