The monopolists argue that a choice of monopoly is choice. Yes, you must pay Tesla to get a Tesla. But you don't need to pay Tesla to get a car. That you find them non-analogous doesn't make it true. They are all cars. If you want an iPhone, you must pay Apple (or go through "authorized resellers" controlled to a point that would be illegal for car dealers). You don't have to buy an Apple to have a phone, but if you want an Apple, you must deal with them, or an authorized representative of them.
And Sony will likely continue with Sony sensors. But the AC specifically said "Canon" who doesn't use their own sensors, and is a candidate for buying a better sensor from the likes of Samsung or others.
Buying a car is not like that. Yes Tesla has a fixed price but it's their price or fuck you.
But I'm still free to buy that same game from Gamestop for another fixed price.
So, you want to buy a Tesla at a Ford dealer. If you don't want to pay Tesla's price, you are free to buy a Ford at a Ford dealer.
Is this why everyone's so mad at Apple on here all the time? It's not that it's expensive, or hard to change a battery, or whatever excuse they are pulling out that day, but that Apple controls the distribution so completely that the end user price changes very little (if any) depending on retailer. You *can't* shop for a good deal, so we should hate Tesla and Apple?
If Tesla feels a fixed price is right for selling their cars then they should sell their vehicles to deals wholesale and subject to contractual obligations on how to present the retail price to customers.
In Texas, Gulf States Toyota (the distributor) can legally fix prices. But it's illegal for the manufacturer to do the same. Though there is less variability in Toyota prices than GM. Back in the '90s (the last time I saw actual price and sale price for thousands of GM cars) the cars were priced with, let's say, $10,000 dealer profit (more or less, much less for the cheap cars and the Corvette). So you'd never buy a car unless it was "on sale". So you never saw a dealer that wasn't running a sale. It was all pretty silly, and designed to let the car dealers cheat buyers. Anyone who has ever bought a new car and didn't get the "dealer cost" written on paper and signed by the manager, was cheated and defrauded. So, having worked at a dealership, I would be happy to see them go.
The reflex relates to a shutter of any type. The fact that at the time the only means to do so at the time the terms were invented was with a mirror doesn't change the meaning of the constituent words. reflex meant shutter, no more. The shutter was a mirror. At the time did they have a shutter behind the mirror, or use the mirror as the shutter? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
They obviously have a shutter behind the mirrors now. But my understanding is that in the Old Days, when those terms were coined, the mirror was part of the shutter system. This means that the "reflex" could mean only the shutter, and the mirror was the shutter, causing confusion for us 10 years later.
That and the point of TLR is that you didn't need the complicated mirror system. The mirror is used to have a viewfinder that's linked to the imaging. With TLR you have separate imaging, no mirror. So by definition, the R in TLR *can't* refer to a mirror.
If someone loses profit because of unethical and illegal actions of another, it's a crime.
Holy circular reasoning. It's a crime because it's illegal. Oh, and copyright violation isn't usually a "crime" but a "tort", well, for most copyright infringement.
So yelling "fire" in a theater isn't criminal negligence (trying to cause harm to others through lie/fraud), but theft, if any of those patrons leave because of the "fire" and request their money back. The person yelling "fire" stole from the theater and movie makers by his actions causing a loss of profit from the movie theater. Would it matter if the person requesting a refund bought popcorn?
Here's webster's definition for stealing as applied to non-tangible goods such as IP:
When you are using words like "illegal" and "crime" you should stick to the legal definitions. Shopping dictionaries to find the one definition you like doesn't work in court. I'm using the legal definition, and no, taking a websters dictionary into court won't sway the judge.
Texas Penal Code Title 7, Section 31
THEFT. (a) A person commits an offense if he unlawfully appropriates property with intent to deprive the owner of property.
"Appropriate" means:
(A) to bring about a transfer or purported transfer of title to or other nonpossessory interest in property, whether to the actor or another; or
(B) to acquire or otherwise exercise control over property other than real property. "Deprive" means:
(A) to withhold property from the owner permanently or for so extended a period of time that a major portion of the value or enjoyment of the property is lost to the owner;
If you are in Texas, that is the *only* valid definition of theft. It's literally defined bylaw. And before you ask, it's nearly identical everywhere. I've looked.
"Huge"? Two keys is "huge"? I could have done it in a single click as well. But I could do the two keys without ever seeing metro.
On Windows 7, I can pick one of about 50 programs from the start menu faster than Windows can draw the start menu, all by keyboard (I touch type). Searching would take more than 10 times as long, not only would I have to wait for Windows to show the search, I would have to read the search results to see when I get the right one (quick: Does searching for "vis" select Visio or Visual Studio? It probably gave Visual Studio ten minutes ago, but then I installed Visio).
You don't need metro to search. Again, when you do it wrong, it gives bad results. That was my point. Not that you (or anyone else) really do like Metro, but that if you hate it, and use it, you are doing it wrong.
And if you touch-type so well, then just click the Win key, and type visio, then hit enter. Before Metro draws, you'll be back at the desktop with Visio loading. No metro required. If you are so Metro averse, and looking at it all the time, that's your error.
Iridium was competing against land lines. Cellular killed it. Iridium was hard-wired to do 9600 baud for data (modem speeds). This time they understand the market, and it isn't on the edge of massive change. Iridium was conceived in the mid '80s, and contracted/designed in the early '90s.
It also was the first of its kind, something that's not the same "this time". They didn't realize it would have very poor coverage, which limited it's usability.
Name your jurisdiction. Mine is valid in Texas and Alaska (the two places in the US I've lived longest, and yes, I read law for fun in my spare time, started as a kid when I'd spend some school breaks at my dad's legal practice).
But this is veering offtopic, and I've already been modded down for that once in this thread, so good night.
Your attack on "theft" that was factually and legally wrong was rightly modded down, but an on-topic discussion 6 deep (on topic because the discussion is about the definition of a word in the title of the submission) won't get you modded down. Sounds more like you are willfully ignorant of the definition of "theft" so you can bash others you don't like. That is what got you modded down, and will when you do it again. Good day.
My wife's Windows 8.1 boots to the desktop. She never sees metro. It took two keys, or one click to get the same in 8 (which I used for a few years). Metro was easily avoidable. Metro was just a start menu replacement. Using Metro is like reading your start menu like a book. Sure, you "could" do it, but reading the start menu then complaining it has a weak plot doesn't make the start menu look dumb.
For the record, I own a copy of Windows 8, and I installed and used it long enough to figure out that I really didn't like the new OS's interface.
I own 8, and I *never* see metro. It'd boot to Metro (fixed in 8.1), and I'd click Win-E to bring up a file explorer window, and never see metro again. Sure, the search would be technically "metro" but it takes 1/10th the screen on the right side.
If you saw metro more than 10 seconds per boot and didn't like it, you were doing it wrong.
Opinions are subjective. It's rather silly to argue with people that "no, your opinion is wrong". It's like arguing with someone about how root beer is the best drink ever with someone who just happens to dislike the taste of root beer.
I'm saying that if you don't like root beer, if the meal comes with free root beer, don't drink it. Metro was technically mandatory, but functionally optional. If you keep drinking the root beer, you must not dislike it that much.
Many DSLRs have no mirror anymore. They have rolling shutters, and that allows them to film video and use a screen on the back as the viewfinder. "SLR" was used to differentiate between cameras with separate viewfinders and ones where you see what comes in the "main" lens. For that purpose, all the discussed cameras are DSLR. That there is no longer a "reflex" isn't a issue for most of the people using that term.
So, rather than buying a Sony lens for a Samsung camera, you'll buy the worse body because you want the name on the body and camera to match?
I have to say Samsung has some serious balls pushing so hard to enter a shrinking market against giants like Nikon and Canon...
From the fact that their "weak point" was the lenses, I'm guessing that they have body and chip manufacturing down for other things, and decided to try cameras on a lark, and managed to out-class the leaders on a first attempt. What's that say about the others?
Actually, yes. That's why Grand Theft Auto is separately defined. As stealing a car with the intention of running it out of gas on a joyride is not "theft" by the legal definition of the word. If it's not a permanent "loss", then it isn't theft. A non-loss can't be a theft. And a taking intended to be temporary is also not theft.
I know it confuses you that the legal definition doesn't match your desired emotional use of the word. But reality doesn't bend to your will.
Yeah, and I've ridden in a Lamborghini. It was miserable. Low, hard, rough. But I've driven a Ferrari for a day. It was great. It's the difference between "try" and "use".
"stolen" is taken in a manner that causes a permanent loss, denying the owner the benefit of it. Stealing a movie isn't stealing because they can still sell it another million times. But stealing an identity does deny the previous owner the use of it. That identity no longer "works" so the previous owner must spend real money to create it again. That's a provable loss. Not the same as if I copy a movie in my house, and give a copy to my family, the movie makers would never know, so know "loss" can be recorded.
The winning play is to always do what the other guy does. So if people are cooperating, then they should cooperate. But someone needs to be first to switch. Currently everyone is defecting, so everyone loses.
That and it's more a tragedy of the commons. It's cheaper to outsource our pollution, but it's still our planet.
Until then, he would just put the company out of business - which is why he can't go to the shareholders with this.
So capitalism demands he pollutes as much as possible. Anything else will be hurting the shareholder value.
It's not cheating until the rules change and he is pushing for a rule change.
It's cheating to make something in China designed in the US, sold in the US, and produced abroad to keep prices down in a manner that would be illegal in the US. So, do you want to argue about cheating, or whether he could have taken some action himself, without appealing to the people to force him to change?
Nope. You can search from the desktop. And it's 1 key to go to metro and zero keys to go back to the desktop, so it's not like it's onerous. Win[key], type the thing you want, click it. You pop from desktop to metro and back. If you know it's unique, you can hit Win+"cmd"[enter] and you'll pop from desktop to metro to desktop without even noticing. In fact, do it fast enough, and it'll not even finish loading metro by the time you are back at the desktop, with you program running. Just close your eyes.
Yup. No web developer should know or care what the OS is. And "software developers" should develop for their market. Having OSX and Linux is an undue burden on software developers. Does that mean that we should stamp them out, or just expect that if we are running Linux that we won't be able to run everything. I can't get most things sold today to run on my Win95 machine. My 32-bit XP system can still run Windows 7 only software, so long as the software developers weren't morons. Though it'll only go up to DX9, so the DX11 and such is unusable, but many are still backward compatible with 9, so everything will run, but almost everything is unplayable. I can play remotely on a faster computer better than playing locally.
The problem is that all the programs install system files. So if you reinstall, rather than update, you have to reinstall all your applications anyway. Though with the new app store in 8, maybe we'll move to user managed apps, rather than system managed apps. Very few apps run in user space anyway. Without installing as admin, many won't run. There needs to be a separate API space so that a user can run something (under DirectX or whatever), though when MS tries something like that so you can run games without installing or running as an admin, people complain about DirectX.
So I don't see how they can make anyone here happy. If they make it more open, it'll have more malware. If they make it more closed, it'll be harder to use. I think some people are just permanently unhappy.
He has recognized a problem, he thinks it needs to be fixed. He can, but doesn't fix it himself. He'd be on a higher moral ground if he were doing something, anything, on fixing his factories, now that he knows about them, while also shaming the industry, rather than shaming the industry when he's in a position to do something about it, but doesn't.
Slashdot Mirror
The monopolists argue that a choice of monopoly is choice. Yes, you must pay Tesla to get a Tesla. But you don't need to pay Tesla to get a car. That you find them non-analogous doesn't make it true. They are all cars. If you want an iPhone, you must pay Apple (or go through "authorized resellers" controlled to a point that would be illegal for car dealers). You don't have to buy an Apple to have a phone, but if you want an Apple, you must deal with them, or an authorized representative of them.
And Sony will likely continue with Sony sensors. But the AC specifically said "Canon" who doesn't use their own sensors, and is a candidate for buying a better sensor from the likes of Samsung or others.
Buying a car is not like that. Yes Tesla has a fixed price but it's their price or fuck you.
But I'm still free to buy that same game from Gamestop for another fixed price.
So, you want to buy a Tesla at a Ford dealer. If you don't want to pay Tesla's price, you are free to buy a Ford at a Ford dealer.
Is this why everyone's so mad at Apple on here all the time? It's not that it's expensive, or hard to change a battery, or whatever excuse they are pulling out that day, but that Apple controls the distribution so completely that the end user price changes very little (if any) depending on retailer. You *can't* shop for a good deal, so we should hate Tesla and Apple?
If Tesla feels a fixed price is right for selling their cars then they should sell their vehicles to deals wholesale and subject to contractual obligations on how to present the retail price to customers.
In Texas, Gulf States Toyota (the distributor) can legally fix prices. But it's illegal for the manufacturer to do the same. Though there is less variability in Toyota prices than GM. Back in the '90s (the last time I saw actual price and sale price for thousands of GM cars) the cars were priced with, let's say, $10,000 dealer profit (more or less, much less for the cheap cars and the Corvette). So you'd never buy a car unless it was "on sale". So you never saw a dealer that wasn't running a sale. It was all pretty silly, and designed to let the car dealers cheat buyers. Anyone who has ever bought a new car and didn't get the "dealer cost" written on paper and signed by the manager, was cheated and defrauded. So, having worked at a dealership, I would be happy to see them go.
The reflex relates to a shutter of any type. The fact that at the time the only means to do so at the time the terms were invented was with a mirror doesn't change the meaning of the constituent words. reflex meant shutter, no more. The shutter was a mirror. At the time did they have a shutter behind the mirror, or use the mirror as the shutter? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
They obviously have a shutter behind the mirrors now. But my understanding is that in the Old Days, when those terms were coined, the mirror was part of the shutter system. This means that the "reflex" could mean only the shutter, and the mirror was the shutter, causing confusion for us 10 years later.
That and the point of TLR is that you didn't need the complicated mirror system. The mirror is used to have a viewfinder that's linked to the imaging. With TLR you have separate imaging, no mirror. So by definition, the R in TLR *can't* refer to a mirror.
If someone loses profit because of unethical and illegal actions of another, it's a crime.
Holy circular reasoning. It's a crime because it's illegal. Oh, and copyright violation isn't usually a "crime" but a "tort", well, for most copyright infringement.
So yelling "fire" in a theater isn't criminal negligence (trying to cause harm to others through lie/fraud), but theft, if any of those patrons leave because of the "fire" and request their money back. The person yelling "fire" stole from the theater and movie makers by his actions causing a loss of profit from the movie theater. Would it matter if the person requesting a refund bought popcorn?
Here's webster's definition for stealing as applied to non-tangible goods such as IP:
When you are using words like "illegal" and "crime" you should stick to the legal definitions. Shopping dictionaries to find the one definition you like doesn't work in court. I'm using the legal definition, and no, taking a websters dictionary into court won't sway the judge.
Texas Penal Code Title 7, Section 31
THEFT. (a) A person commits an offense if he unlawfully appropriates property with intent to deprive the owner of property.
"Appropriate" means: (A) to bring about a transfer or purported transfer of title to or other nonpossessory interest in property, whether to the actor or another; or (B) to acquire or otherwise exercise control over property other than real property.
"Deprive" means: (A) to withhold property from the owner permanently or for so extended a period of time that a major portion of the value or enjoyment of the property is lost to the owner;
If you are in Texas, that is the *only* valid definition of theft. It's literally defined bylaw. And before you ask, it's nearly identical everywhere. I've looked.
So, you did a huge workaround
"Huge"? Two keys is "huge"? I could have done it in a single click as well. But I could do the two keys without ever seeing metro.
On Windows 7, I can pick one of about 50 programs from the start menu faster than Windows can draw the start menu, all by keyboard (I touch type). Searching would take more than 10 times as long, not only would I have to wait for Windows to show the search, I would have to read the search results to see when I get the right one (quick: Does searching for "vis" select Visio or Visual Studio? It probably gave Visual Studio ten minutes ago, but then I installed Visio).
You don't need metro to search. Again, when you do it wrong, it gives bad results. That was my point. Not that you (or anyone else) really do like Metro, but that if you hate it, and use it, you are doing it wrong.
And if you touch-type so well, then just click the Win key, and type visio, then hit enter. Before Metro draws, you'll be back at the desktop with Visio loading. No metro required. If you are so Metro averse, and looking at it all the time, that's your error.
Iridium was competing against land lines. Cellular killed it. Iridium was hard-wired to do 9600 baud for data (modem speeds). This time they understand the market, and it isn't on the edge of massive change. Iridium was conceived in the mid '80s, and contracted/designed in the early '90s.
It also was the first of its kind, something that's not the same "this time". They didn't realize it would have very poor coverage, which limited it's usability.
But this is veering offtopic, and I've already been modded down for that once in this thread, so good night.
Your attack on "theft" that was factually and legally wrong was rightly modded down, but an on-topic discussion 6 deep (on topic because the discussion is about the definition of a word in the title of the submission) won't get you modded down. Sounds more like you are willfully ignorant of the definition of "theft" so you can bash others you don't like. That is what got you modded down, and will when you do it again. Good day.
The "reflex" part does indeed imply a shutter (optional on digital cameras now). But the reflex of a shutter needn't be a mirror.
My wife's Windows 8.1 boots to the desktop. She never sees metro. It took two keys, or one click to get the same in 8 (which I used for a few years). Metro was easily avoidable. Metro was just a start menu replacement. Using Metro is like reading your start menu like a book. Sure, you "could" do it, but reading the start menu then complaining it has a weak plot doesn't make the start menu look dumb.
For the record, I own a copy of Windows 8, and I installed and used it long enough to figure out that I really didn't like the new OS's interface.
I own 8, and I *never* see metro. It'd boot to Metro (fixed in 8.1), and I'd click Win-E to bring up a file explorer window, and never see metro again. Sure, the search would be technically "metro" but it takes 1/10th the screen on the right side.
If you saw metro more than 10 seconds per boot and didn't like it, you were doing it wrong.
Opinions are subjective. It's rather silly to argue with people that "no, your opinion is wrong". It's like arguing with someone about how root beer is the best drink ever with someone who just happens to dislike the taste of root beer.
I'm saying that if you don't like root beer, if the meal comes with free root beer, don't drink it. Metro was technically mandatory, but functionally optional. If you keep drinking the root beer, you must not dislike it that much.
And when all the Canons and Nikons use Samsung sensors, what will you do?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
"As with other DSLRs, the D90's CMOS sensor captures video frames using a rolling shutter,"
Many DSLRs have no mirror anymore. They have rolling shutters, and that allows them to film video and use a screen on the back as the viewfinder. "SLR" was used to differentiate between cameras with separate viewfinders and ones where you see what comes in the "main" lens. For that purpose, all the discussed cameras are DSLR. That there is no longer a "reflex" isn't a issue for most of the people using that term.
I have to say Samsung has some serious balls pushing so hard to enter a shrinking market against giants like Nikon and Canon...
From the fact that their "weak point" was the lenses, I'm guessing that they have body and chip manufacturing down for other things, and decided to try cameras on a lark, and managed to out-class the leaders on a first attempt. What's that say about the others?
Actually, yes. That's why Grand Theft Auto is separately defined. As stealing a car with the intention of running it out of gas on a joyride is not "theft" by the legal definition of the word. If it's not a permanent "loss", then it isn't theft. A non-loss can't be a theft. And a taking intended to be temporary is also not theft.
I know it confuses you that the legal definition doesn't match your desired emotional use of the word. But reality doesn't bend to your will.
I tried it and absolutely loathed it.
Yeah, and I've ridden in a Lamborghini. It was miserable. Low, hard, rough. But I've driven a Ferrari for a day. It was great. It's the difference between "try" and "use".
"stolen" is taken in a manner that causes a permanent loss, denying the owner the benefit of it. Stealing a movie isn't stealing because they can still sell it another million times. But stealing an identity does deny the previous owner the use of it. That identity no longer "works" so the previous owner must spend real money to create it again. That's a provable loss. Not the same as if I copy a movie in my house, and give a copy to my family, the movie makers would never know, so know "loss" can be recorded.
The winning play is to always do what the other guy does. So if people are cooperating, then they should cooperate. But someone needs to be first to switch. Currently everyone is defecting, so everyone loses.
That and it's more a tragedy of the commons. It's cheaper to outsource our pollution, but it's still our planet.
How many is "non trivial"? With things lik https://www.techinasia.com/chi... seems that jailbreaking is no longer as necessary as before.
Until then, he would just put the company out of business - which is why he can't go to the shareholders with this.
So capitalism demands he pollutes as much as possible. Anything else will be hurting the shareholder value.
It's not cheating until the rules change and he is pushing for a rule change.
It's cheating to make something in China designed in the US, sold in the US, and produced abroad to keep prices down in a manner that would be illegal in the US. So, do you want to argue about cheating, or whether he could have taken some action himself, without appealing to the people to force him to change?
Nope. You can search from the desktop. And it's 1 key to go to metro and zero keys to go back to the desktop, so it's not like it's onerous. Win[key], type the thing you want, click it. You pop from desktop to metro and back. If you know it's unique, you can hit Win+"cmd"[enter] and you'll pop from desktop to metro to desktop without even noticing. In fact, do it fast enough, and it'll not even finish loading metro by the time you are back at the desktop, with you program running. Just close your eyes.
The only people who hated the interface never used it.
Yup. No web developer should know or care what the OS is. And "software developers" should develop for their market. Having OSX and Linux is an undue burden on software developers. Does that mean that we should stamp them out, or just expect that if we are running Linux that we won't be able to run everything. I can't get most things sold today to run on my Win95 machine. My 32-bit XP system can still run Windows 7 only software, so long as the software developers weren't morons. Though it'll only go up to DX9, so the DX11 and such is unusable, but many are still backward compatible with 9, so everything will run, but almost everything is unplayable. I can play remotely on a faster computer better than playing locally.
The problem is that all the programs install system files. So if you reinstall, rather than update, you have to reinstall all your applications anyway. Though with the new app store in 8, maybe we'll move to user managed apps, rather than system managed apps. Very few apps run in user space anyway. Without installing as admin, many won't run. There needs to be a separate API space so that a user can run something (under DirectX or whatever), though when MS tries something like that so you can run games without installing or running as an admin, people complain about DirectX.
So I don't see how they can make anyone here happy. If they make it more open, it'll have more malware. If they make it more closed, it'll be harder to use. I think some people are just permanently unhappy.
He has recognized a problem, he thinks it needs to be fixed. He can, but doesn't fix it himself. He'd be on a higher moral ground if he were doing something, anything, on fixing his factories, now that he knows about them, while also shaming the industry, rather than shaming the industry when he's in a position to do something about it, but doesn't.