This seems to cater to the special interest of "the corporation"....
Who is "the corporation?" I like Ben Stein's answer: "The widows and orphans."
In their urge to oversimplify everything, people like to use the term "corporations" or "corporate interests" to signify some tiny but extremely powerful cabal who exercise inordinate influence, effectively enslaving "the little people."
Now, there was a time when "big business" really was in the hands of a relative few: the Rockefellers, the Gettys, the Carnegies, etc. But that was more than a century ago.
The fact is that "corporations" are made up of shareholders, including (in a great many instances) the people who work there. By a HUGE margin, the majority category of shareholder is the typical pension fund the beneficiaries of which are retirees or their surviving dependents.
That's who primarily benefits from the success of corporate business. And yes, that even includes the petroleum business--who happen to be benefitting currently from the bidding-up of the price of their product by commodities traders in every country who are reacting (rightly or wrongly) to what they perceive to be the state of the world's affairs.
In the end, there's no conspiracy to take all your stuff so that some CEO somewhere can have another yacht.
A substantial rewrite of the rules of Congress might help,...
Starting, IMO, with "normalizing" congressional numbers back to the representative level they were in the Nineteenth Century--that is, there ought to be about 1,200 Representatives by now.
FWIW, I do understand that we are "a republic, not a democracy." However, the term "democracy" and "democratic" are appropriate with reference to the "majority rules" feature of so much of how we are governed.
The fact is that people who scream about "special interests" seem not to consider that in a representative democracy like ours, EVERYONE is a "special interest."
I am sure that this bill originated among the "special interests" that make proprietary streaming music formats. It will take the "special interests" of those who want to hold onto the freedom to stream media in whatever format is best, to convince them otherwise.
I love it! Not content with going full-tilt in advocating some Linux distro with 15,000 users, some of us have the overwhelming need to advocate one with 15 users!
(I guess "a lot of activity" would be--what--six packages submitted per month?)
I heard impressionist Frank Caliendo (whose John Madden impression has to be better than the original!) on a local Houston radio station this morning on my drive into work.
I'd LOVE to hear him say "EA Madden for Revolution, uh-huh, yeah..." (The guy seriously cracks me up!)
Beyond the whiz-bang implications of this sort of technology lies the simple fact that this might interest people in games who are not normally disposed.
I enjoy the occasional PC game, but I can't stand the notion that every time I sit down to play a new title I've got to learn a whole new set of commands.
I'm not as familiar with console games--which you'd think would benefit from interface standardizaation, but they, too, seem to have a steep learning curve. When you're an old fart like myself, you just don't want to expend the time.
A true, intuitive neural interface that would allow you to just sit and play without taking the time to learn a new interface, would overcome that barrier and perhaps enhance the market.
Sophistry. You know what he's trying to do, and it stinks.
Like I said, Jerry Falwell ain't my cup o' tea, but everyone has the right to be able to have a presence on the web without people using nefarious schemes against them to redirect their web traffic.
I guarantee you, if this was a redirect from your favorite pr0n site to the Assemby of God website, you'd be screaming.
I think some folks need to look beyond their distaste for Jerry Falwell, and see that there is a principle involved here that goes beyond your socio-political leanings.
It's false to infer that the reaction to "snobbery" is "anti-snobbery."
More likely, it is a reaction to the "snobbery that excludes me and my friends" by creating a "snobbery that INCLUDES me and my friends--and to hell with everybody else."
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I guess that's why everyone's dumped all their stock from their 401k's.
I stand corrected. I was thinking back to a conversation on the radio I heard a few years back.
I didn't even know that Apache had NOT been the leader in this category.
Who is "the corporation?" I like Ben Stein's answer: "The widows and orphans."
In their urge to oversimplify everything, people like to use the term "corporations" or "corporate interests" to signify some tiny but extremely powerful cabal who exercise inordinate influence, effectively enslaving "the little people."
Now, there was a time when "big business" really was in the hands of a relative few: the Rockefellers, the Gettys, the Carnegies, etc. But that was more than a century ago.
The fact is that "corporations" are made up of shareholders, including (in a great many instances) the people who work there. By a HUGE margin, the majority category of shareholder is the typical pension fund the beneficiaries of which are retirees or their surviving dependents.
That's who primarily benefits from the success of corporate business. And yes, that even includes the petroleum business--who happen to be benefitting currently from the bidding-up of the price of their product by commodities traders in every country who are reacting (rightly or wrongly) to what they perceive to be the state of the world's affairs.
In the end, there's no conspiracy to take all your stuff so that some CEO somewhere can have another yacht.
Sorry.
Starting, IMO, with "normalizing" congressional numbers back to the representative level they were in the Nineteenth Century--that is, there ought to be about 1,200 Representatives by now.
FWIW, I do understand that we are "a republic, not a democracy." However, the term "democracy" and "democratic" are appropriate with reference to the "majority rules" feature of so much of how we are governed.
In other words, a voice working hard to make sure we're as much like Europe--with half the productivity and none of the job growth of the U.S.A.
You don't wanna work lots of hours, then go get a job where you don't have to work lots of hours.
Sheesh.
I am sure that this bill originated among the "special interests" that make proprietary streaming music formats. It will take the "special interests" of those who want to hold onto the freedom to stream media in whatever format is best, to convince them otherwise.
As opposed to "the bad one" with AppleOS, MacOS through 9, Nu-Bus, etc.?
Wasn't that the same guys? (Or Jobs, anyway).
What makes the OP think that these guys are such altruists?
I love it! Not content with going full-tilt in advocating some Linux distro with 15,000 users, some of us have the overwhelming need to advocate one with 15 users!
(I guess "a lot of activity" would be--what--six packages submitted per month?)
I'd LOVE to hear him say "EA Madden for Revolution, uh-huh, yeah..." (The guy seriously cracks me up!)
$270 American vs. $150? Linspire vs. whatever PRC government-approved distro this is?
Big deal (or not, really).
If that were true it would be useless. Hence my proviso.
I enjoy the occasional PC game, but I can't stand the notion that every time I sit down to play a new title I've got to learn a whole new set of commands.
I'm not as familiar with console games--which you'd think would benefit from interface standardizaation, but they, too, seem to have a steep learning curve. When you're an old fart like myself, you just don't want to expend the time.
A true, intuitive neural interface that would allow you to just sit and play without taking the time to learn a new interface, would overcome that barrier and perhaps enhance the market.
IF it works, that is.
Linspire, in contrast, is rather staid and unadventurous. One questions whether a "bleeding edge" is even required for that distro.
So what is the purpose of "Freespire"?
I thought it was going to talk about MS' strategies to "speed up" the performance of Vista.
But wouldn't God know what should be constant and what should be variable?
Sorry, I have a far, far more difficult time getting my mind around "it's all just mere chance" than "God is in the details."
Shouldn't that be "Trekkerer"?
Like I said, Jerry Falwell ain't my cup o' tea, but everyone has the right to be able to have a presence on the web without people using nefarious schemes against them to redirect their web traffic.
I guarantee you, if this was a redirect from your favorite pr0n site to the Assemby of God website, you'd be screaming.
I said it was a "misspelling trap site," or whatever the official term is.
For example, I want to go to the Bank of America website, and I accidentally type in http://www.bankofamrica.com./ It sends me to http://www.sedoparking.com/bankofamrica.com, a "parked" website that tries to be my friend, become my "new homepage," etc.
I think some folks need to look beyond their distaste for Jerry Falwell, and see that there is a principle involved here that goes beyond your socio-political leanings.
If someone wants to go there, fine. But how many hits result from people who have no desire to contribute to the site's luminosity whatsoever?
Yesterday, the quote at the bottom of the /. page said something like:
"The girl with a future studiously avoids the man with a past."
You wanna write that down somewhere?
No. They're just far more likely to be heavily in debt.
Everyone you know is under the age of 18?
It's false to infer that the reaction to "snobbery" is "anti-snobbery."
More likely, it is a reaction to the "snobbery that excludes me and my friends" by creating a "snobbery that INCLUDES me and my friends--and to hell with everybody else."