I think you've got it all wrong. My understanding is that a "hypervisor" is like a supervisor - only way more super. It's a shorter way of saying a super-super-visor. Except, you probably couldn't trademark a super-super-visor.
Sadly, the string probably voids your warranty and places you in peril of prosecution in violation of the DMCA as a disallowed modification/hack that circumvents certain behaviors of the system as Microsoft designed it. I wonder how long before Gamespot receives a cease-and-disist order.
Oh wait, Gamespot (like Myspace) is owned by Rupert Murdoc. So . ..probably never.
You're right. Nobody squats on domains or domain-rapes by similar domains or domains under other TLDs and they certainly wouldn't jump for the "one ring" domain if they could push you out by putting $1240 at it. Yeah. That would NEVER happen. Absolutely not. Hell no. No way in the world. *cough*
Walmart provides health coverage and their premiums for an employee and spouse are about as much as mine are for the employee alone. Also, I suspect walmart has a large percentage of employees that are not full time.
My point is really that I'm either paying for the music or the media. Or rather, you're trying to license the music to me and sell the physical media to me. It costs me more and then when I lose it or it is damaged or stolen, I no longer have the license for the intellectual content or the physical media to use it. With an MP3 that I can re-download, I'm pretty much paying for the license to use the intellectual property and nothing additional.
Since I can't pay a buck to get a damaged MEDIA replaced when I have a license for the CONTENT, MP3 wins out. The place I use for my music lets me download it for as long as I want and even keeps a list of everything I've ever downloaded. Then again, they're not iTunes. And uh.. they're not in the US either.
It's really the music industry that's trying to have their cake and eat it too. Sort of the same way with a videogame on CD when you think about it though. And a DVD. And a book. To a degree, it's understandable since there are costs involved in production and distribution (although the fee for marketing and distribution and so forth shouldn't be applied since it's long after you've done all of that and already sold me the music and I'm just asking for you to send me a replacement copy).
I'm a US resident and citizen, born and bred. I had to wait 3 months for a dermatologist appointment. I had to wait 4 months for an oncologist. I had to wait 6 months for an endocrinologist. I had to wait 2 months for a dentist appointment. My serpents got same-day service for their ills - ninety year old pythons need lots of medical attention.
Not much difference in capitalism or near-socialism as far as I can tell
BZZT! Wrong.
Do you know why your reptiles got instance service? Because you PAID for their service. Now, imagine how long it would take for them to have gotten attention if your pet's had to have government subsidized and controlled health care coverage from a government run animal clinic? You'd have more paper work. More delays. Less coverage. More frustration. Just like you have now with health care for humans.
Should we include starving artists in that as well? If you're a depressed starving artist living in a loft and you spend your days drinking coffee and splattering paint on a canvas (or eating your body's impression out of a bread-mattress) that nobody will want to buy, you are OWED health care. Hell, society should owe you a fucking CAR! And a nice one, too!
Most HMOs cover your children as long as they're in school up until the age of 20-24. Many (or even most) schools offer very affordable health plans through the school (they're often subsidized by tuition).
Not to mention, many or most students work. Many work full time and have coverage of their own. Nevertheless, why should all of society accept lower quality coverage so that a handful of people can get coverage? That doesn't seem terribly just.
And can you imagine - with the amount of drinking, fucking, drugs, bad driving and partying done in college - what the health care costs could be?!
And in case anyone wants to cry about how fast food people deserve health coverage too - don't worry. They get it. My mom works in fast food and has health coverage. My brother works at Radio Shack and has health coverage. Fuck, my girlfriend is a stripper and even SHE has health coverage.
So where are all these full-time employed adults without any health coverage that I keep hearing about? I mean, everyone makes it sound like there are more people driving Escalades than have health coverage, so . . . I want to know. And of those who aren't full-time employed adults with employee health coverage - how many aren't getting health coverage from the state?
How many people who are working full time at something other than fast food or pumping gas don't have health coverage? Come on now. I tend to think that health coverage gets to the peopel who produce the most. When I pumped gas for a few days as a teenager, I didn't have health coverage. What was I contributing to the world? A decade later, I have a professional career and great health insurance, because I produce valuable results and am worth something to my employer and society in general.
If you don't contribute to society, why should you be allowed to sit around and do nothing and drain society? Exceptions, of course, for those who are truly sick and disabled. But most people are able bodied and simply lack the motivation to do something.
I can only speak from my own experience, but I'm not a CEO or a manager or anything and about five years ago I felt a lump and thought I might have testicular cancer. I called my doctor and got in the same day. He sent me to the hospital for further examination the next morning. I had my results 24 hours after that. The cost to me? $10 for the doctor's visit. $20 for the hospital visit. Would I have gotten that in Canada? If not, then what good is it to me? Great, so someone who sits at home and watches television all day and works at a mcdonald's for 10 hours a week is able to get some form of coverage as long as they wait long enough (and who knows about the quality of care - I have no iddea). How does that help me or my employer if I have to take an entire day (or days or weeks) off to deal with something that I could have done instantly here?
As soon as you get full health care coverage for every person with excellent service and quality and speed, let me know. The system here isn't perfect or even all that great - but neither is yours.
You're kidding about the respect thing and the health care thing, right? I have plenty of canadian friends and ex-girlfriends and such and I've never heard any of them talk positively about the health care system. And you don't so much have the world's respect as you just aren't enough of an influence or threat to most of the world for anyone to care.
I'm not a nationalist twit and I take people one at a time. I couldn't care less about Canada or America or whatever else. They're all boundaries that separate people who are on an individual basis, not all that different or unlikable. I'm just saying - you know - let's not go overboard here on our delusions.
Besides, a few things don't make sense:
+ They want to keep jobs inside their borders - but they're going to hire people outside the country? So, basically, H1Bs. Talk to Americans (or even those working on becoming one) about that monstrosity.
+ If they're going to hire from outside of the country and bring people in, why would they hire a materialistic American who expects to make wages that allow them to buy a gallon of milk when they could hire someone from far overseas and treat them accordingly, as we do in America?
Also - murder rate is a pretty crappy way to guage quality of life. How about other violent crime? Taxes? Wages? Can I get to see whatever doctor I need or want with no more than a 15 minute wait?
The only real difference between the two countries is the perception in each person's own mind. Canadians and Americans are about as different as people in Portland Oregon and people in Los Angeles.
To avoid having a plugin involved (or bribing ISPs to do something in the middle), I'm sure you'd have to get buy-in from existing registrars. I don't see that as being impossible, though. with $1,000 and $240 per year and domain, there's enough cash involved to make the registrar happy and do your own thing. Patent the idea so Verisign can't use it without your approval. Or pay them off so that all non TLD domains are then forwarded to your company's DNS servers and handle all of the non TLD resolution from that point on to the actual destination IP. Any number of things could probably be done. The only matter is one of cash.
I'll continue with my own situation as an example since it probably represents that of many other people out there.
I operate a very niche auction site that has been around since 1998. It has about 35,000 members. It is completely free. I don't make a dime and the very specialized and unobtrusive advertising I sell on the site goes entirely to pay the hardware and bandwidth fees. I don't charge or make a single dime off of the site (in fact, I've spent about $25,000 out of my own pocket since I started it seven years ago).
Now, if I were a business of any sort making any kind of profit whatsoever, $1,000 up front and $240/yr might be tolerable for one domain. Then again - what if said business has multiple domains?
I have a related but separate site in addition to my auction site that is focused on niche reviews submitted by members. So now to protect myself from being steamrolled by unscrupulous people or businesses, I have to pay $2,000 and $480/yr (or more, if I have other domains)?
I have had interest from a number of well known companies who mad offers for my site. Everything from Hot Topic to venture-capital style companies that buy a domain, invest in it and resell it for a huge profit. Even companies that wanted to buy me out and have me continue working on the project. Or people running related sites or businesses wanting to buy my site.
So they could essentially squeeze me out by, instead of competing fairly or paying me money, spending $1,240? That's hardly fair.
It doesn't matter who has a claim to a domain. It matters who has the money to register it and whether their victim has the resources to take the issue to court. I've been the victim of malicious slander by downright sociopathic people on the internet before, but I can't afford to get the appropriate legal representation and take the issue to court. I've been the victim of people registering my domain (which is a rather popular auction-related.com) as a.net or a.org or just changing the domain name by one character and offering the same unique service (which would be similar to opening a fast food burger joint and calling it McDonald instead of McDonald's). It even confuses the hell out of people who will email me and complain about something that went horribly wrong at this competing / underhanded site only for me to eventually figure out they were talking about the OTHER site but got confused and emailed ME instead (thus negatively impacting consumer association with my site - which has been around years longer than the other one). But guess what? I can't afford to register the name as a trademark. It's pretty expensive. And I can't afford a trademark or IP lawyer to take such people doing these things to court.
So unless you're well-off, you pretty much have to sit and take it from all sides with no possible recourse.
Why would that be necessary? Verisign didn't have any problem redirecting 404s to an advertisement a year or two ago. They wouldn't have any problem redirecting (if given a financial reason) to something else, based on the keyword, either.
The point here is that for $1,000 up front and $240/yr, anyone could have the word "slashdot" automatically direct them wherever the registered owner wants without having to worry about silly things like pagerank.
In other words, anyone with $1,240 the first year can own you.
I'm a small fry with a non-commercialized, free site and service that can't afford $1,000 + $240/yr.
Big company comes in and wants to roll right over me. It's bad enough when someone takes your domain name (but under.net/.org, etc - instead of your own.com). Imagine when someone decides to pony up the cash to completely wipe you out by taking out a rootless domain in your.com domain's name?
And sure, technically you may be able to fight it in court. But if you can't afford the $1,000 + $240/yr, how the hell are you going to afford an IP / trademark lawyer and a lawsuit?
Slashdot Mirror
And back when the average geek had his last shower. :P
(Says I, at work on a Sunday, stinking because I stayed up all night playing Civilization IV and didn't have time for a shower!).
I think you've got it all wrong. My understanding is that a "hypervisor" is like a supervisor - only way more super. It's a shorter way of saying a super-super-visor. Except, you probably couldn't trademark a super-super-visor.
Sadly, the string probably voids your warranty and places you in peril of prosecution in violation of the DMCA as a disallowed modification/hack that circumvents certain behaviors of the system as Microsoft designed it. I wonder how long before Gamespot receives a cease-and-disist order.
.probably never.
Oh wait, Gamespot (like Myspace) is owned by Rupert Murdoc. So . .
You're right. Nobody squats on domains or domain-rapes by similar domains or domains under other TLDs and they certainly wouldn't jump for the "one ring" domain if they could push you out by putting $1240 at it. Yeah. That would NEVER happen. Absolutely not. Hell no. No way in the world. *cough*
Your username is appropriate.
They post articles citing Bill O'Reilly as a news source.
Walmart provides health coverage and their premiums for an employee and spouse are about as much as mine are for the employee alone. Also, I suspect walmart has a large percentage of employees that are not full time.
That "argument" proves nobody has medical coverage as much as "most sex offenders consume porn" proves porn turns you into a sex offender.
Without artists you can't have culture
I'm an American. I don't have any culture as it stands!
My point is really that I'm either paying for the music or the media. Or rather, you're trying to license the music to me and sell the physical media to me. It costs me more and then when I lose it or it is damaged or stolen, I no longer have the license for the intellectual content or the physical media to use it. With an MP3 that I can re-download, I'm pretty much paying for the license to use the intellectual property and nothing additional.
Since I can't pay a buck to get a damaged MEDIA replaced when I have a license for the CONTENT, MP3 wins out. The place I use for my music lets me download it for as long as I want and even keeps a list of everything I've ever downloaded. Then again, they're not iTunes. And uh.. they're not in the US either.
It's really the music industry that's trying to have their cake and eat it too. Sort of the same way with a videogame on CD when you think about it though. And a DVD. And a book. To a degree, it's understandable since there are costs involved in production and distribution (although the fee for marketing and distribution and so forth shouldn't be applied since it's long after you've done all of that and already sold me the music and I'm just asking for you to send me a replacement copy).
Except a .net, .org and .com would run you about $15/yr. Not $1,000+$240/yr.
I'm a US resident and citizen, born and bred. I had to wait 3 months for a dermatologist appointment. I had to wait 4 months for an oncologist. I had to wait 6 months for an endocrinologist. I had to wait 2 months for a dentist appointment. My serpents got same-day service for their ills - ninety year old pythons need lots of medical attention.
Not much difference in capitalism or near-socialism as far as I can tell
BZZT! Wrong.
Do you know why your reptiles got instance service? Because you PAID for their service. Now, imagine how long it would take for them to have gotten attention if your pet's had to have government subsidized and controlled health care coverage from a government run animal clinic? You'd have more paper work. More delays. Less coverage. More frustration. Just like you have now with health care for humans.
Should we include starving artists in that as well? If you're a depressed starving artist living in a loft and you spend your days drinking coffee and splattering paint on a canvas (or eating your body's impression out of a bread-mattress) that nobody will want to buy, you are OWED health care. Hell, society should owe you a fucking CAR! And a nice one, too!
Most HMOs cover your children as long as they're in school up until the age of 20-24. Many (or even most) schools offer very affordable health plans through the school (they're often subsidized by tuition).
Not to mention, many or most students work. Many work full time and have coverage of their own. Nevertheless, why should all of society accept lower quality coverage so that a handful of people can get coverage? That doesn't seem terribly just.
And can you imagine - with the amount of drinking, fucking, drugs, bad driving and partying done in college - what the health care costs could be?!
I hate to tell you this, but you read the map wrong and didn't go far enough north. You only made it to Utah. :)
And in case anyone wants to cry about how fast food people deserve health coverage too - don't worry. They get it. My mom works in fast food and has health coverage. My brother works at Radio Shack and has health coverage. Fuck, my girlfriend is a stripper and even SHE has health coverage.
So where are all these full-time employed adults without any health coverage that I keep hearing about? I mean, everyone makes it sound like there are more people driving Escalades than have health coverage, so . . . I want to know. And of those who aren't full-time employed adults with employee health coverage - how many aren't getting health coverage from the state?
How many people who are working full time at something other than fast food or pumping gas don't have health coverage? Come on now. I tend to think that health coverage gets to the peopel who produce the most. When I pumped gas for a few days as a teenager, I didn't have health coverage. What was I contributing to the world? A decade later, I have a professional career and great health insurance, because I produce valuable results and am worth something to my employer and society in general.
If you don't contribute to society, why should you be allowed to sit around and do nothing and drain society? Exceptions, of course, for those who are truly sick and disabled. But most people are able bodied and simply lack the motivation to do something.
I can only speak from my own experience, but I'm not a CEO or a manager or anything and about five years ago I felt a lump and thought I might have testicular cancer. I called my doctor and got in the same day. He sent me to the hospital for further examination the next morning. I had my results 24 hours after that. The cost to me? $10 for the doctor's visit. $20 for the hospital visit. Would I have gotten that in Canada? If not, then what good is it to me? Great, so someone who sits at home and watches television all day and works at a mcdonald's for 10 hours a week is able to get some form of coverage as long as they wait long enough (and who knows about the quality of care - I have no iddea). How does that help me or my employer if I have to take an entire day (or days or weeks) off to deal with something that I could have done instantly here?
As soon as you get full health care coverage for every person with excellent service and quality and speed, let me know. The system here isn't perfect or even all that great - but neither is yours.
You're kidding about the respect thing and the health care thing, right? I have plenty of canadian friends and ex-girlfriends and such and I've never heard any of them talk positively about the health care system. And you don't so much have the world's respect as you just aren't enough of an influence or threat to most of the world for anyone to care.
I'm not a nationalist twit and I take people one at a time. I couldn't care less about Canada or America or whatever else. They're all boundaries that separate people who are on an individual basis, not all that different or unlikable. I'm just saying - you know - let's not go overboard here on our delusions.
Besides, a few things don't make sense:
+ They want to keep jobs inside their borders - but they're going to hire people outside the country? So, basically, H1Bs. Talk to Americans (or even those working on becoming one) about that monstrosity.
+ If they're going to hire from outside of the country and bring people in, why would they hire a materialistic American who expects to make wages that allow them to buy a gallon of milk when they could hire someone from far overseas and treat them accordingly, as we do in America?
Also - murder rate is a pretty crappy way to guage quality of life. How about other violent crime? Taxes? Wages? Can I get to see whatever doctor I need or want with no more than a 15 minute wait?
The only real difference between the two countries is the perception in each person's own mind. Canadians and Americans are about as different as people in Portland Oregon and people in Los Angeles.
To avoid having a plugin involved (or bribing ISPs to do something in the middle), I'm sure you'd have to get buy-in from existing registrars. I don't see that as being impossible, though. with $1,000 and $240 per year and domain, there's enough cash involved to make the registrar happy and do your own thing. Patent the idea so Verisign can't use it without your approval. Or pay them off so that all non TLD domains are then forwarded to your company's DNS servers and handle all of the non TLD resolution from that point on to the actual destination IP. Any number of things could probably be done. The only matter is one of cash.
Whatever happened to being able to click on ANY message (not just your own) and seeing the full moderation audit log for that post? I miss that.
Not everyone is a small company, however.
I'll continue with my own situation as an example since it probably represents that of many other people out there.
I operate a very niche auction site that has been around since 1998. It has about 35,000 members. It is completely free. I don't make a dime and the very specialized and unobtrusive advertising I sell on the site goes entirely to pay the hardware and bandwidth fees. I don't charge or make a single dime off of the site (in fact, I've spent about $25,000 out of my own pocket since I started it seven years ago).
Now, if I were a business of any sort making any kind of profit whatsoever, $1,000 up front and $240/yr might be tolerable for one domain. Then again - what if said business has multiple domains?
I have a related but separate site in addition to my auction site that is focused on niche reviews submitted by members. So now to protect myself from being steamrolled by unscrupulous people or businesses, I have to pay $2,000 and $480/yr (or more, if I have other domains)?
I have had interest from a number of well known companies who mad offers for my site. Everything from Hot Topic to venture-capital style companies that buy a domain, invest in it and resell it for a huge profit. Even companies that wanted to buy me out and have me continue working on the project. Or people running related sites or businesses wanting to buy my site.
So they could essentially squeeze me out by, instead of competing fairly or paying me money, spending $1,240? That's hardly fair.
It doesn't matter who has a claim to a domain. It matters who has the money to register it and whether their victim has the resources to take the issue to court. I've been the victim of malicious slander by downright sociopathic people on the internet before, but I can't afford to get the appropriate legal representation and take the issue to court. I've been the victim of people registering my domain (which is a rather popular auction-related .com) as a .net or a .org or just changing the domain name by one character and offering the same unique service (which would be similar to opening a fast food burger joint and calling it McDonald instead of McDonald's). It even confuses the hell out of people who will email me and complain about something that went horribly wrong at this competing / underhanded site only for me to eventually figure out they were talking about the OTHER site but got confused and emailed ME instead (thus negatively impacting consumer association with my site - which has been around years longer than the other one). But guess what? I can't afford to register the name as a trademark. It's pretty expensive. And I can't afford a trademark or IP lawyer to take such people doing these things to court.
So unless you're well-off, you pretty much have to sit and take it from all sides with no possible recourse.
Why would that be necessary? Verisign didn't have any problem redirecting 404s to an advertisement a year or two ago. They wouldn't have any problem redirecting (if given a financial reason) to something else, based on the keyword, either.
Wow. Who moderated this down?! Morons . . .
The point here is that for $1,000 up front and $240/yr, anyone could have the word "slashdot" automatically direct them wherever the registered owner wants without having to worry about silly things like pagerank.
In other words, anyone with $1,240 the first year can own you.
I'm a small fry with a non-commercialized, free site and service that can't afford $1,000 + $240/yr.
.net/.org, etc - instead of your own .com). Imagine when someone decides to pony up the cash to completely wipe you out by taking out a rootless domain in your .com domain's name?
Big company comes in and wants to roll right over me. It's bad enough when someone takes your domain name (but under
And sure, technically you may be able to fight it in court. But if you can't afford the $1,000 + $240/yr, how the hell are you going to afford an IP / trademark lawyer and a lawsuit?
Not to mention, such an investment would pay off in spades down the road when we start returning from trips to uranus.