I think we can fix both. Say all those oil/coal subsidies we give to that segment of the population... save it and use it to give incentives when the market moves towards alternative fuels/solar/wind/nuclear. The sticking point with most rational people (people who aren't of the 6,000 year old earth variety) isn't whether or not we should do something about it, but whether or not we use a stick or a carrot. I vote carrot, because in the area of new technology, the United States still kicks major ass. We can, and should, reward them (not giving stupid bulk grants to failing companies like Solyndra) and use the government's meddling in the market for good (for a change.) OR, we can level the playing field so that the market corrects itself (that'd be removing subsidies to the oil/gas/coal too). When people want to change, it's easier to get them to. Beating them over the head "you're killing Mother Earth! You're killing your children! Martians are laughing at us!" will get us nowhere... it hasn't worked in a society not ruled by an iron fist. And I am not for giving Obama a big iron glove to beat us all over the head with his agenda.
Markets work when we let them... meddling for the most part has been shit... because it isn't really market manipulation in the strictest sense... it's rewarding the established players (specifically: those who give the most campaign money). If they want to manipulate the market... shift the balance and see where it leads. Will oil companies piss and moan? Yes. But as a libertarian, I'm tired of them sucking on the government teat and charging ME $4/gallon gasoline for no other reason than they can. Something that has inelastic demand should have a limited fluctuation in pricing when there is sufficient supply (we've not had a "shortage" since the 1970's... and that was artificial.) But I'm going offtopic.... time to submit...
The reason our federal government is set up this way is PRECISELY for keeping the mob rule (House) or the aristocracy (Senate) from becoming a battering ram to shove whatever agenda they see fit through the process. The process is geared towards compromise. The Founders meant for it to be this way (ever wonder why it's so damn hard to amend the Constitution? Same logic.) If you read the Founders' writings (Jefferson and Adams in particular) you'll see that their purpose was not to create a "juggernaut" that trampled over anything in its path, but a slow tortoise that didn't rush into legislation and learned from compromise rather than intimidation.
Granted, there are exceptions to the rule, but the point being, we don't WANT a speedy federal government (remember the PATRIOT Act?)... we want a lukewarm slow moving behemoth that doesn't fuck things up every 2 years.
Exactly... well said. I don't understand how artists did it before the internet. I guess there weren't any successful artists before Pandora and the wealth of listener data that accompanies it.
Wasn't there someone (or more than one) here in the states on bath salts who went ape-shit on some people? Or was it that guy who ate off the other guy's face? It's not out of the realm of possibility that while high on bath salts McAfee went all spider monkey and killed someone but doesn't remember. Creepy as hell, and smells like a good movie of the week.:)
Face value isn't the point, but if you've been here so long, its pretty easy to figure out where you stand and if you contribute to the site more than someone who's had a UID for a week and spends that week posting nothing but Microsoft praise and jabs at the GPL. Until those UIDs have been around long enough to post something other than "Windows 8 is the best OS evar" they are going to be seen as a shill. It's just common sense. If that person becomes a pro Microsoft user of slashdot, it'll be when they branch out, discuss other things besides Redmond's finest, and shows everyone else something other than a Windows 8 tattoo.
However, the pattern emerges that there are quite a few high UIDs that do nothing but promote windows and all things Microsoft (including their phones and everything they make except for "Bob"). I can change my mind about who I think are shills... it's not a permanent mark. I'm just posting what I've noticed about the rabidly pro Microsoft posters I've seen lately. I'm not the only one that thinks so, either.
You have to notice a pattern though. Those who start "fresh" and immediately start defending Windows (even against jokes or other geek humor regarding Ballmer's chair-throwing, etc.) and do nothing but post pro-windows information and curiously don't participate in any other conversation. I've seen this more than once... many times more than could be attributed to coincidence. There are exceptions, of course. I spent a crapload of time avoiding any controversial statements or what some would consider "trolling" until I'd developed a posting pattern that people could glean from me that I wasn't a troll... just an opinionated libertarian nerd. (It's easy to see if someone wanted to investigate if I was a shill or not.) I spend more time discussing technology and some politics than anything else on the site. (That's not to say I don't enjoy the science discussions or entertainment discussions about movies and the like...)
Slashdot's been a pro-linux site from its inception... It has a built-in bias. And since the title is "News for Nerds"... since we recall for a long time anyone using Linux was a "nerd" or a "geek" because it was "harder" to use and it didn't have the lavish support Windows (or even Mac) had in terms of hardware and software. The title of the site is still appropriate, IMHO.
But compared to most any other site, this one has a disproportionately high number of article trolling or flaming Microsoft products.
This site has been anti-Microsoft for as long as I can remember. The icon for Microsoft stories was a Bill Gates Borg for such a long time. If you're looking for unbiased commentary... I'm not sure where to go... people accuse Arstechnica of being pro-Apple. And osnews has always been unapologetic about its support for BeOS, and its hatred for Apple and much of the rest of the OS world.. (though with the new fellow running things, it has become a pro Microsoft site.)
What I tried to convey in my original point was that you see people deriding Linux and Apple (and Android) for no other reason than they're not Microsoft. Then you see their UID and notice they've not been on Slashdot very long at all. There are exceptions to the rule, of course. But for the most part, when someone posts something about Microsoft being anti-competitive, OSS hostile, etc. people seem to come out of the woodwork to "debunk" that opinion, bolstered with nothing more than a love for all things Microsoft. I have a Windows XP machine I use for old games. I used to use Windows 98 as my primary OS (ever so briefly)... And I used OS X until it became iOS for Macs. I still come back to Linux. I haven't been "faithfully" using Linux since 1993, but I have been using it. My opinions about Microsoft are well known, and I've amended my earlier defense of Apple (they're no longer Unix with a cool UI)... but I never can find anything good to amend my opinions about Microsoft. They rub me the wrong way (Steve Ballmer in particular...) I do not hide my bias. I do not pretend to like Microsoft then criticize its products. That's rather like Slashdot. There is no pretense of Microsoft acceptance here. There are Microsoft supporters here, but the site has never been about being anything but critical of Microsoft.
Using the term "trolling" or "flaming" Microsoft products can be said for many pro Microsoft sites when they "flame" or spread misinformation about Linux. I can link you to 100's of articles that are not press-releases from Microsoft, but they're so biased it's almost as if they're reprints from Redmond itself. They spread misinformation about the GPL and OSS in ways that infuriate those of us who use Linux... The fact that Microsoft has actively supported the legal challenges by notorious patent trolls and anti Microsoft companies (remember the infringement lawsuits brought by a certain failed commercial Unix company against IBM and "all Linux users"? Microsoft bankrolled their legal defense in a not-so-subtle way.)
All corporations are capable of evil given enough time. Those who aren't quite evil enough, or haven't done their superbly evil act get praise on Slashdot, much to the chagrin of the "well they're corporations too!" crowd (usually the same as Microsoft supporters, but not always). That's not a hidden "feature" of Slashdot. It's well known.
Defend your choices when you see obvious trolling. Just don't expect the site to rally around your Microsoft flag.. It's a personal choice to support Microsoft. I can't speak for anyone else, but as for Doctor Jest, I hate Microsoft (and Disney, the RIAA, the MPAA, Time Warner, BMG, Sony... you name it... I hate them at one time or another.) They can be redeemed in my eyes... but for the most part, corporations like those I listed (and shills for the corporations like the *AAs) continue to do the same things over and over and try to fuck the little guy at every opportunity. When (if) they change... I'll stop hating them... well, all of them except Disney and Microsoft. I just plain hate them.:)
oooh... you can spell.:) Everyone knew who I was talking about. After all I wrote, you bitch about that? Ok... here's an easier one. Substitute SALMA Hayek with Scarlett Johansson. There I spelled that right. Here's another... If I were a female, I'd have made a female-appropriate incentive....
Such as: defending their fanboyness to people who wouldn't use windows if it came with a full body massage from Johnny Depp. Or if it came with a free shoes for life from (insert awesome designer name here)... Sexist? Not really... there are a shit-ton of commercials that celebrate a woman's love for shoes. Hell, wasn't that show with horseface glad about new shoes and handbags? I forget the name... they made two movies... crap. I'll think of it after I hit submit.... bah!
Considering most of the supporters of Microsoft (dare I say "fanboys") have REALLY high UID's or are anonymous cowards.... yes, it is hard to believe, and it is hard to understand why after all the years of abuse from the Linux/Apple crowd the Microsoft fans would continue to come in and spend most of their time defending their fanboyness to people who wouldn't use windows if it came with a blowjob from Selma Hayek.
It's good that you're getting better battery life (the "one reboot" is a bit of a stretch), and "several weeks" seems funny since AT&T just started selling them on Nov. 11th. But glad you like your purchase. If you just come here to shill for Ballmer... well that's another story, isn't it?:)
Calm down, Ballmer. You're getting worked up for no good reason. You know what the doctors said. Any more excitement and you can't throw chairs anymore. You don't want that, now do you?
I don't think there's anything wrong with Nintendo's approach. I'm disappointed that the media convergence is such a focus for the other two console makers... I'm too old to care about most of the "media center" capabilities of my consoles... I just want to play games.:) I do realize the Wii U will start down that path with some additional features involving movies and music, if I'm remembering the press releases I mean... but still, Nintendo has a good feel for gaming first, other stuff optional.
I expect to see Jesus riding a dinosaur and Moses selling sneakers in Venice Beach before I see the Republicans OR Democrats interest in the individual's rights or plight. Forget common man, they are against individuals. They both hate that we have the power to unseat them and ditch their sorry asses. So they obfuscate everything from voting to getting a building permit in order to keep the People in the dark and constantly busy so they don't pay attention to the freedom robbing practices both the GOP and Democrats constantly implement... in spite of their rhetoric and "ooh, I'm better than that guy because that guy rapes puppies and hates Jesus" or "I'm better than the guy who hates brown people and wants to tell you to eat broccoli!)
That's why they should've all voted against Romney AND Obama (two sides of the same coin) and voted for Gary Johnson. I watched the "other" party debates and I found Gary Johnson to be 85% to 90% there when it comes to Constitutionally restricted government, individual liberty, and sensible budget reform... light years ahead of the other candidates.
Shit, Obama and Romney's foreign policy were so similar it sounded like the same person talking. Why the hell people voted for the man who not only continued, but extended, everything that made Bush suck eggs is a mystery. Obama deported more immigrants than Bush did in 8 years. He kills American citizens with drones, signs the NDAA, closes everything up tighter than a drum (way to go "open and transparent" government), and gets Ambassadors and ex-Seals killed in Libya because there's something more than a stupid fucking "video" at work here.
Yet Obama ran on "we've got work to do... let me finish"... when he made it WORSE. Talk about irony.... (I'll get modded troll for this because I mentioned the drone attacks, and it appears people on Slashdot are against giving Constitutional protections to citizens if they agree with some nebulous terrorist organization. They're for legalizing pot, but not making sure individual liberty is protected... and constitutionally enumerated rights are not raped by the very government that is supposed to uphold the Constitution.... not rape it and piss on it. This goes for Bush Jr. too.. and hell, Clinton... they're all out to ass-fuck our rights and liberties...)
Neoconservatives are basically liberal democrats (progressives) who favored much more international intervention and flexing of the US military's power across the globe to "reshape the world" in the neo-con's "progressive" image. Let's face it... Obama is the next Bush in that regard. Neoconservatives are critical when he DOESN'T act like Bush.. and since the last 4 years are officially in the can, we can say Obama acted like Bush way more than he acted like the Obama who campaigned in 2008.
Neoconservatives are basically hawkish Progressives... more like Teddy Roosevelt Progressives than other progressives.
The problem is, unfortunately, the Democratic party wouldn't support this either. Sure there are elements that agree copyright has gotten out of control within the Democrats (and Republicans for that matter), they remain a minority. An unfortunately small minority.
One only needs to look at the biggest donors to both parties to realize neither party will support sensible copyright reform until they are no longer accountable to giant multinationals and Hollywood. This isn't a matter of the GOP being untrustworthy... this is a matter of politicians being bought and sold.
I would contend that the non-standard behavior, while properly implemented (unlike Microsoft's shit-all crazy attempts to pervert standards in the past), should be considered dangerous until they're deemed worthy of the entire standard. As for websites that test only on WebKit... they are doing what they did back when IE was king.. not testing standards compliance, but specific browser compliance (I loathe the days where sites render correctly in only one browser... is this 1996 all over again?)
So while WebKit is technically correct, they are really putting a wrench into the works by going specific implementation nonstandard... (for lack of a better term) It just reeks of balkanization all over again.
No, this is simply a case of "pot, kettle" on Microsoft's part. It's a bloody mess they made back when they refused to comply with standards... now that they do (FINALLY, I might add), it is funny, and a bit sad, that they decry non-standard practices of "the other guy." No one is defending Webkit's actions... but if Microsoft is looking for sympathy after what it pulled for a DECADE it's between shit and syphilis in the dictionary.
Bah! Before the internet we had to find old Playboy magazines and Dad's VHS stash of "All American Hookers" (I believe there were 27 movies made...):) Kids have it too easy with the internet...
Which doesn't invalidate my point. Hardcore is a term that varies depending upon who you ask. I don't (and never will) consider those who mindlessly play FPSes hours on end in multiplayer slur-fests on XBox Live "hardcore" anything, except perhaps hardcore assholes.
Play a game that doesn't reward stupid behavior. When you die in Nethack, you die. No respawn... no apologies.:) That is hardcore.
Slashdot Mirror
I think we can fix both. Say all those oil/coal subsidies we give to that segment of the population... save it and use it to give incentives when the market moves towards alternative fuels/solar/wind/nuclear. The sticking point with most rational people (people who aren't of the 6,000 year old earth variety) isn't whether or not we should do something about it, but whether or not we use a stick or a carrot. I vote carrot, because in the area of new technology, the United States still kicks major ass. We can, and should, reward them (not giving stupid bulk grants to failing companies like Solyndra) and use the government's meddling in the market for good (for a change.) OR, we can level the playing field so that the market corrects itself (that'd be removing subsidies to the oil/gas/coal too). When people want to change, it's easier to get them to. Beating them over the head "you're killing Mother Earth! You're killing your children! Martians are laughing at us!" will get us nowhere... it hasn't worked in a society not ruled by an iron fist. And I am not for giving Obama a big iron glove to beat us all over the head with his agenda.
Markets work when we let them... meddling for the most part has been shit... because it isn't really market manipulation in the strictest sense... it's rewarding the established players (specifically: those who give the most campaign money). If they want to manipulate the market... shift the balance and see where it leads. Will oil companies piss and moan? Yes. But as a libertarian, I'm tired of them sucking on the government teat and charging ME $4/gallon gasoline for no other reason than they can. Something that has inelastic demand should have a limited fluctuation in pricing when there is sufficient supply (we've not had a "shortage" since the 1970's... and that was artificial.) But I'm going offtopic.... time to submit...
The reason our federal government is set up this way is PRECISELY for keeping the mob rule (House) or the aristocracy (Senate) from becoming a battering ram to shove whatever agenda they see fit through the process. The process is geared towards compromise. The Founders meant for it to be this way (ever wonder why it's so damn hard to amend the Constitution? Same logic.) If you read the Founders' writings (Jefferson and Adams in particular) you'll see that their purpose was not to create a "juggernaut" that trampled over anything in its path, but a slow tortoise that didn't rush into legislation and learned from compromise rather than intimidation.
Granted, there are exceptions to the rule, but the point being, we don't WANT a speedy federal government (remember the PATRIOT Act?)... we want a lukewarm slow moving behemoth that doesn't fuck things up every 2 years.
Exactly... well said. I don't understand how artists did it before the internet. I guess there weren't any successful artists before Pandora and the wealth of listener data that accompanies it.
Wasn't there someone (or more than one) here in the states on bath salts who went ape-shit on some people? Or was it that guy who ate off the other guy's face? It's not out of the realm of possibility that while high on bath salts McAfee went all spider monkey and killed someone but doesn't remember. Creepy as hell, and smells like a good movie of the week. :)
Face value isn't the point, but if you've been here so long, its pretty easy to figure out where you stand and if you contribute to the site more than someone who's had a UID for a week and spends that week posting nothing but Microsoft praise and jabs at the GPL. Until those UIDs have been around long enough to post something other than "Windows 8 is the best OS evar" they are going to be seen as a shill. It's just common sense. If that person becomes a pro Microsoft user of slashdot, it'll be when they branch out, discuss other things besides Redmond's finest, and shows everyone else something other than a Windows 8 tattoo.
However, the pattern emerges that there are quite a few high UIDs that do nothing but promote windows and all things Microsoft (including their phones and everything they make except for "Bob"). I can change my mind about who I think are shills... it's not a permanent mark. I'm just posting what I've noticed about the rabidly pro Microsoft posters I've seen lately. I'm not the only one that thinks so, either.
You have to notice a pattern though. Those who start "fresh" and immediately start defending Windows (even against jokes or other geek humor regarding Ballmer's chair-throwing, etc.) and do nothing but post pro-windows information and curiously don't participate in any other conversation. I've seen this more than once... many times more than could be attributed to coincidence. There are exceptions, of course. I spent a crapload of time avoiding any controversial statements or what some would consider "trolling" until I'd developed a posting pattern that people could glean from me that I wasn't a troll... just an opinionated libertarian nerd. (It's easy to see if someone wanted to investigate if I was a shill or not.) I spend more time discussing technology and some politics than anything else on the site. (That's not to say I don't enjoy the science discussions or entertainment discussions about movies and the like...)
Slashdot's been a pro-linux site from its inception... It has a built-in bias. And since the title is "News for Nerds"... since we recall for a long time anyone using Linux was a "nerd" or a "geek" because it was "harder" to use and it didn't have the lavish support Windows (or even Mac) had in terms of hardware and software. The title of the site is still appropriate, IMHO.
But compared to most any other site, this one has a disproportionately high number of article trolling or flaming Microsoft products.
This site has been anti-Microsoft for as long as I can remember. The icon for Microsoft stories was a Bill Gates Borg for such a long time. If you're looking for unbiased commentary... I'm not sure where to go... people accuse Arstechnica of being pro-Apple. And osnews has always been unapologetic about its support for BeOS, and its hatred for Apple and much of the rest of the OS world.. (though with the new fellow running things, it has become a pro Microsoft site.)
What I tried to convey in my original point was that you see people deriding Linux and Apple (and Android) for no other reason than they're not Microsoft. Then you see their UID and notice they've not been on Slashdot very long at all. There are exceptions to the rule, of course. But for the most part, when someone posts something about Microsoft being anti-competitive, OSS hostile, etc. people seem to come out of the woodwork to "debunk" that opinion, bolstered with nothing more than a love for all things Microsoft. I have a Windows XP machine I use for old games. I used to use Windows 98 as my primary OS (ever so briefly)... And I used OS X until it became iOS for Macs. I still come back to Linux. I haven't been "faithfully" using Linux since 1993, but I have been using it. My opinions about Microsoft are well known, and I've amended my earlier defense of Apple (they're no longer Unix with a cool UI)... but I never can find anything good to amend my opinions about Microsoft. They rub me the wrong way (Steve Ballmer in particular...) I do not hide my bias. I do not pretend to like Microsoft then criticize its products. That's rather like Slashdot. There is no pretense of Microsoft acceptance here. There are Microsoft supporters here, but the site has never been about being anything but critical of Microsoft.
Using the term "trolling" or "flaming" Microsoft products can be said for many pro Microsoft sites when they "flame" or spread misinformation about Linux. I can link you to 100's of articles that are not press-releases from Microsoft, but they're so biased it's almost as if they're reprints from Redmond itself. They spread misinformation about the GPL and OSS in ways that infuriate those of us who use Linux... The fact that Microsoft has actively supported the legal challenges by notorious patent trolls and anti Microsoft companies (remember the infringement lawsuits brought by a certain failed commercial Unix company against IBM and "all Linux users"? Microsoft bankrolled their legal defense in a not-so-subtle way.)
All corporations are capable of evil given enough time. Those who aren't quite evil enough, or haven't done their superbly evil act get praise on Slashdot, much to the chagrin of the "well they're corporations too!" crowd (usually the same as Microsoft supporters, but not always). That's not a hidden "feature" of Slashdot. It's well known.
Defend your choices when you see obvious trolling. Just don't expect the site to rally around your Microsoft flag.. It's a personal choice to support Microsoft. I can't speak for anyone else, but as for Doctor Jest, I hate Microsoft (and Disney, the RIAA, the MPAA, Time Warner, BMG, Sony... you name it... I hate them at one time or another.) They can be redeemed in my eyes... but for the most part, corporations like those I listed (and shills for the corporations like the *AAs) continue to do the same things over and over and try to fuck the little guy at every opportunity. When (if) they change... I'll stop hating them... well, all of them except Disney and Microsoft. I just plain hate them. :)
oooh... you can spell. :) Everyone knew who I was talking about. After all I wrote, you bitch about that? Ok... here's an easier one. Substitute SALMA Hayek with Scarlett Johansson. There I spelled that right. Here's another... If I were a female, I'd have made a female-appropriate incentive....
Such as: defending their fanboyness to people who wouldn't use windows if it came with a full body massage from Johnny Depp.
Or if it came with a free shoes for life from (insert awesome designer name here)... Sexist? Not really... there are a shit-ton of commercials that celebrate a woman's love for shoes. Hell, wasn't that show with horseface glad about new shoes and handbags? I forget the name... they made two movies... crap. I'll think of it after I hit submit.... bah!
Lighten up...
Considering most of the supporters of Microsoft (dare I say "fanboys") have REALLY high UID's or are anonymous cowards.... yes, it is hard to believe, and it is hard to understand why after all the years of abuse from the Linux/Apple crowd the Microsoft fans would continue to come in and spend most of their time defending their fanboyness to people who wouldn't use windows if it came with a blowjob from Selma Hayek.
It's good that you're getting better battery life (the "one reboot" is a bit of a stretch), and "several weeks" seems funny since AT&T just started selling them on Nov. 11th. But glad you like your purchase. If you just come here to shill for Ballmer... well that's another story, isn't it? :)
Calm down, Ballmer. You're getting worked up for no good reason. You know what the doctors said. Any more excitement and you can't throw chairs anymore. You don't want that, now do you?
Hey, since we're making stability/usability jokes...
1993 called... they want their OS back.
I don't think there's anything wrong with Nintendo's approach. I'm disappointed that the media convergence is such a focus for the other two console makers... I'm too old to care about most of the "media center" capabilities of my consoles... I just want to play games. :) I do realize the Wii U will start down that path with some additional features involving movies and music, if I'm remembering the press releases I mean... but still, Nintendo has a good feel for gaming first, other stuff optional.
You know, I love the moderators around here. It's becoming increasingly obvious that slashdot moderates based on ePeen measurements rather than facts.
I expect to see Jesus riding a dinosaur and Moses selling sneakers in Venice Beach before I see the Republicans OR Democrats interest in the individual's rights or plight. Forget common man, they are against individuals. They both hate that we have the power to unseat them and ditch their sorry asses. So they obfuscate everything from voting to getting a building permit in order to keep the People in the dark and constantly busy so they don't pay attention to the freedom robbing practices both the GOP and Democrats constantly implement... in spite of their rhetoric and "ooh, I'm better than that guy because that guy rapes puppies and hates Jesus" or "I'm better than the guy who hates brown people and wants to tell you to eat broccoli!)
That's why they should've all voted against Romney AND Obama (two sides of the same coin) and voted for Gary Johnson. I watched the "other" party debates and I found Gary Johnson to be 85% to 90% there when it comes to Constitutionally restricted government, individual liberty, and sensible budget reform... light years ahead of the other candidates.
Shit, Obama and Romney's foreign policy were so similar it sounded like the same person talking. Why the hell people voted for the man who not only continued, but extended, everything that made Bush suck eggs is a mystery. Obama deported more immigrants than Bush did in 8 years. He kills American citizens with drones, signs the NDAA, closes everything up tighter than a drum (way to go "open and transparent" government), and gets Ambassadors and ex-Seals killed in Libya because there's something more than a stupid fucking "video" at work here.
Yet Obama ran on "we've got work to do... let me finish"... when he made it WORSE. Talk about irony.... (I'll get modded troll for this because I mentioned the drone attacks, and it appears people on Slashdot are against giving Constitutional protections to citizens if they agree with some nebulous terrorist organization. They're for legalizing pot, but not making sure individual liberty is protected... and constitutionally enumerated rights are not raped by the very government that is supposed to uphold the Constitution.... not rape it and piss on it. This goes for Bush Jr. too.. and hell, Clinton... they're all out to ass-fuck our rights and liberties...)
Neoconservatives are basically liberal democrats (progressives) who favored much more international intervention and flexing of the US military's power across the globe to "reshape the world" in the neo-con's "progressive" image. Let's face it... Obama is the next Bush in that regard. Neoconservatives are critical when he DOESN'T act like Bush.. and since the last 4 years are officially in the can, we can say Obama acted like Bush way more than he acted like the Obama who campaigned in 2008.
Neoconservatives are basically hawkish Progressives... more like Teddy Roosevelt Progressives than other progressives.
The problem is, unfortunately, the Democratic party wouldn't support this either. Sure there are elements that agree copyright has gotten out of control within the Democrats (and Republicans for that matter), they remain a minority. An unfortunately small minority.
One only needs to look at the biggest donors to both parties to realize neither party will support sensible copyright reform until they are no longer accountable to giant multinationals and Hollywood. This isn't a matter of the GOP being untrustworthy... this is a matter of politicians being bought and sold.
I would contend that the non-standard behavior, while properly implemented (unlike Microsoft's shit-all crazy attempts to pervert standards in the past), should be considered dangerous until they're deemed worthy of the entire standard. As for websites that test only on WebKit... they are doing what they did back when IE was king.. not testing standards compliance, but specific browser compliance (I loathe the days where sites render correctly in only one browser... is this 1996 all over again?)
So while WebKit is technically correct, they are really putting a wrench into the works by going specific implementation nonstandard... (for lack of a better term) It just reeks of balkanization all over again.
No, this is simply a case of "pot, kettle" on Microsoft's part. It's a bloody mess they made back when they refused to comply with standards... now that they do (FINALLY, I might add), it is funny, and a bit sad, that they decry non-standard practices of "the other guy." No one is defending Webkit's actions... but if Microsoft is looking for sympathy after what it pulled for a DECADE it's between shit and syphilis in the dictionary.
Welcome to the United Kingdom... making the United States seem sexually progressive since 1789...
Bah! Before the internet we had to find old Playboy magazines and Dad's VHS stash of "All American Hookers" (I believe there were 27 movies made...) :) Kids have it too easy with the internet...
now get off my lawn!
Maybe she meant "free to collude" rather than compete... after all they both start with 'c'. :)
Which doesn't invalidate my point. Hardcore is a term that varies depending upon who you ask. I don't (and never will) consider those who mindlessly play FPSes hours on end in multiplayer slur-fests on XBox Live "hardcore" anything, except perhaps hardcore assholes.
Play a game that doesn't reward stupid behavior. When you die in Nethack, you die. No respawn... no apologies. :) That is hardcore.
the RIAA continues to equate infringement with theft. I for one, am shocked.