"Shows the reason why a patent is needed. To allow an intentor the right to make reasonable return on his work."
That was never the intention of patents. That was the reward offered to the inventor in exchange for his disclosure and it is a restriction to a free market.
The original poster was right, patents are offered to encourage the development of knowledge. If no such encouragement is needed any longer, then the need for patents is called into question.
"It wasn't the Life Savers style of Apple's machines that made them good. It was the combination or hardware, OS and customer support that spoke English and actually gave a damn."
Yet you recognize that other companies had customer support that spoke English and actually gave a damn as well. I had no experience with Apple at the time but I have had recently and my experience with Apple is the same as with other companies; some give a damn and others don't. Personally, I think it was shine and polish that created a hip appeal to the machines. The hardware was mediocre, the processors were falling behind, and the OS remained outdated until OS X (which required subsequent releases to become usable). I think it WAS the Life Savers style that turned the company around.
"I have no doubt that some of the people there didn't give a damn either way, but a lot of the ones I had to deal with were quite helpful."
It's certainly disingenuous to suggest that Apple cares where others do not then, isn't it?
"...I was referring to the decision to candy coat the product lineup."
I don't see Dell's or Toshiba's current business situation to be anything like Apple's was nor do I see either of them producing candy-colored machines in hopes of improving their results. I certainly don't expect them to, either, since they are totally different companies with totally different customers.
As if that were somehow a new thing. It seems like Apple's iTV has certainly got a lot of press despite the fact that it's a long way from being a product and it's mostly a ripoff of a Windows Media Center Extender. How is that any different?
"...has only as much power as a Mac PowerBook having less than half the weight..."
What kind of bullshit is that? A Powerbook is in no way comparable to the Dell machine you are referring to, and anyone considering either product wouldn't consider the other. Does a Powerbook have a 20" screen or two hard drive bays? I think not. By your standards, no one should want to buy an iMac either. After all, an iMac "has only as much power as a Mac PowerBook having less than half the weight."
"...and people think that this is interesting?"
I would imagine Dell will find out. It's obviously targeted at users that wish to transport their computers but not use them in their laps, and it's not the first time a machine like this has been made. The article itself includes a picture of a very early example.
"The problem is that companies like Dell aren't involved in the entire manufacturing process."
Now THERE's a claim that couldn't be more wrong. Dell is totally involved in the "entire manufacturing process". That is their contribution.
"They're normally designing an existing shell, so they're always going to be constrained in how creative they can get."
You speak like that's a bad thing. Continuity is a good thing especially when you ship in high volumes. "Creativity" is not a high value quality to volume business customers. "Creativity" is vastly more important to Apple than to Dell.
"It doesn't help that they're normally trying cut corners to reduce costs."
It doesn't help what? You appear to be starting out with an invalid assumption that Dell is trying to be creative and failing. It is not.
"They're involved in the design and engineering process at every step."
Now that they outsource motherboards to Intel, Apple is no different than Dell in this regard. From a hardware standpoint, Apple specifies parts and performs final assembly, just like Dell. Arguably, Dell provides real engineering content to Apple's boxes because it is a leading, perhaps THE leading, tester of Intel hardware.
"It's also why the software integrates so well with the system."
No, that's totally wrong. Apple is in control of 100% of its firmware and OS (and many of the apps). Additionally, Apple controls the list of supported platforms and peripherals. Dell's process is much more complicated since it must work with board vendors, chipset suppliers, Microsoft, and sometimes firmware developers.
"...unless Microsoft began designing and manufacturing PCs."
The fact is that Microsoft already designs PCs through the publications of specs. There is a large, inefficient feedback loop that runs through Intel and the box makers like Dell, but Windows PCs are designed to MS specs. That has to be done to get the "designed for Windows" subsidy.
"Where devices used to have nice clean lines and designed in more thoughtful colors too many products today are bloated, overly organic, covered in contrasting textures and almost always come in frosted silver or black."
Don't forget the ones that come in stark white that discolors so easily or the ones that are excessively shiny and show the slightest scratches as soon as they are used.
"A mark of good design is how it ages. If something was well-designed it should look good 10, 20 or 50 years later. Its style might look out-of-date, but it should still be appreciated for it's good design. The vast majority of current PC cases don't look good today, let alone how they will look 5 years ago."
I was just thinking how good looking the original AT and Amiga were and contrasting that with the first two generations of iMacs, the plastic Powermacs, toy iBooks, Mac Cubes, etc. Apple may be good at establishing design trends but they haven't proven capable of producing design classics (at least by your definition). Personally I think the current iPods and iMacs are nice. That doesn't mean they'll withstand the test of time.
Apple is a boutique electronics manufacturer and they thrive on their *image* as a provider of superior product. Because of that, people believe that they actually offer a superior product, true or not. Gucci sells plenty of low quality bags (among many things) at 4x the price of competitors that are demonstrably superior. Although Apple is far more competitive in price and quality, it still uses the same techniques as Gucci to appeal to emotions of its customers. As a result, Apple is obligated to be creative in its industrial design or risk losing its image as a premier brand. Dell doesn't need or want to do this because it's customers value substance over style. When I'm buying computers for 10,000 employees I'd prefer long-wearing denim to guccissima leather.
I think you're mixing eras. Outsourcing support is more recent than the candy-colored macs.
"...and actually gave a damn."
From my experience, Apple's no different than anyone else there.
"Dell and Toshiba are only going to reproduce the least important reason why Apple survived the dark times. And when it doesn't help them, they still won't get it."
Actually, Dell and Toshiba are very different companies and neither is much like Apple at all. Any strategy that is successful for one has little bearing on the others. I'm curious though, what is "the least important reason why Apple survived the dark times" that Dell and Toshiba are going to reproduce?
"A good job includes reducing the number of drunk driving accidents and deaths as well as sufficient treatment programs, funding for alternative transportation programs (like cab funding), and the like."
Since you consider yourself an expert on how to improve their performance, perhaps you should offer your advice to MADD. I'm sure they'd like to know how to do a better job.
"Their policies are bad because they do not get effective laws passed which REDUCE drunk driving, thus allowing drunks to continue drunk driving, and meanwhile harrass regular folk by overzealous police, road checks/blocks, random pullovers, etc."
MADD cannot harrass regular folk through "overzealous police, road checks/blocks, random pullovers, etc." That would be the police doing that. Just what "effective laws" do you think will prevent drunk driving? Just where is MADD falling down on the job? They aren't the legislature you know.
"Stupid. Get off your lazy ass and do some work yourself by looking it up yourself."
I can't because they don't exist. You claim to have seen the reports so let's see them.
"MADD is more interested in selling magazines for funding and tramping civil liberties in the name of reducing DUIs than actually stopping drunk driving."
Prove that, Mr. AC. MADD cannot trample civil liberties, they don't have the authority.
Any pre-existing doubly linked list is prior art. The fact that doubly linked lists frequently provide a forward and reverse order is of no consequence. Furthermore, there is no such thing as "traversing a doubly-linked list in the reverse direction". There is only traversing through one link path or the other link path. If you want the second link path to be the reverse of the first then you set it up and maintain it that way. That has no bearing on whether it's prior art or not as the patent doesn't consider the relationship between the orderings of the lists.
Of course I can. How about this: just because I buy gas for my car doesn't mean I don't care about the price. Again, here's the quote:
"..the overwhelming majority don't care because if they don't do it they won't be let in."
The overwhelming majority (who submit to the ID check) may or may not like having to do so. It may be true that they all detest the practice. They do it, though, because they prefer the option of getting in. Just because you do something doesn't mean you like it.
I'm cleaning my bathroom right now. I don't care for bathroom cleaning, however.
The standard for displays (which is already outdated by the way) is 100 dpi. Notebooks can go higher because they are typically viewed closer. Even Macbook Pros (which aren't high resolution) exceed 100 dpi.
Meanwhile, your "sufficient" 800x600 resolution equates to 67 dpi at 15". It may be sufficient for you but not for anyone not legally blind. I have no problem using 150 dpi screens on notebooks and I use a 204 dpi screen at home. I even own a a 4.5" WinXP ultraportable that offers 1024x600 resolution (252 dpi) and video iPods are 160 dpi. I will never consider any notebook with resolution as pathetic as 800x600. Sorry, but you are hopelessly wrong.
I'm all for sin but I'm not for drunk driving. Yes, MADD is prohibitionist; they desire to actually prohibit drunk driving. I'd like to see these reports you talk about so I can understand MADD's more devious secret agenda.
"...anyone think they won't take it straight into the realm of "preventative therapy" using this information?"
Yes, I don't. I also don't believe "they" (MADD) have the authority to implement "preventative therapy" even if "they" wanted to.
"...lead by religious bleeding hearts and hypocritical 60's-era hippy soccer moms."
I doubt 60's-era ex-hippies are leading the charge on evangelical sin prohibitions. Soccer moms may contribute to MADD, but MADD isn't about sin prohibition, it's about saving lives.
"I genuinely feel bad for the coming generations of Americans and the pseudo-fascist oppression under which they will be burdened in the name of "for the children"."
I bet you do. Meanwhile, drunk driving isn't illegal because it's "for the children".
"No matter my age, I will fully support and understand their inevitable backlash."
When you're older and suffer the damage of a teenage drunk driver rather than just being one, perhaps you'll have a different perspective.
"And who gets to be the judge of what constitutes "inflicting suffering on others"? You?"
That would be fine with me.
If you are suggesting that racism doesn't qualify as using hatred to inflict suffering on others, then I'd be very interested in hearing your arguments.
It's not necessary to judge what constitutes "inflicting suffering on others". Laws that fight discriminatory practices benefit society and are a no-brainer. We're all created equal, right? If such laws tend to redirect suffering onto those that would discriminate then so much the better.
No, you completely misunderstand. I was answering the following question:
"I ask you: Which scenario is worse?
1) A white supremacist advertises housing for rent using neutral language, since the law says he has to. He gets contacted by lots of people of color whom he dismisses with verbal insults, since he feels safer expressing his views one-on-one.
2) A white supremacist advertises housing for rent stating his viewpoint and his desire to rent to whites only. He does not get contacted by any people of color or any other people who dislike his views."
I said simply that I believe that he won't get his house rented that way at all.
"I don't like racism either, but you combat that with education and encouragement of critical thinking, not with misguided laws that overstep the bounds of what the government is allowed to do."
Which misguided laws are you referring to? Certainly not the ones that are being discussed. Those certainly don't overstep the bounds of government either.
That's about the dumbest explanation I've ever read. To summarize:
1. Skin on the private parts hosts lethal bacteria. 2. This bacteria can't be washed off no matter what. 3. It does, however, transfer instantaneously to your hands when you touch it. 4. After touching your penis, you become a "Typhoid Mary". 5. Those bacteria that couldn't be washed off before are now easily washed off the hands.
You would think that anyone who ever gave a blow/rim job would end up dead. Apparently the touching someone's genitals is a death sentence for anyone not trained in sterile techniques. It's not just penises according to the article, it's all skin (male or female) in proximity to the anus. We've got to stop shitting all over ourselves!
I guess by "Straight Dope" he means he's a heterosexual fool.
"You're free to associate with whoever you want. You just have to associate with other people too, or get a new line of work."
Yes, exactly. We may have to accept their hatred but not when it damages society.
"The problem with allowing bigotry to stand is that it fails the ultimate test of ethics: "What if everyone did it?" "
Exactly right, and it is within the scope of government to engage in this kind of social engineering.
"When has liberal meant anything but "everyone will be better off if the government makes them do it my way". The fact that the Republicans suddenly went off the loopy end of the scale and started dictating how people should live doesn't change what liberal and conservative meant, only who people are voting for."
Here I totally disagree. Liberal and authoritarian are unrelated and one can be either socially liberal or conservative while being libertarian or authoritarian. Republicans and Democrats are nearly equally authoritarian, and IMO way too much.
I vote that the white supremacist not get to rent out his housing at all. Doesn't matter, because if he's as radical as I believe you are suggesting, then he'll seek tenants that subscribe to his views through his private social contacts anyway.
There is nothing wrong with isolating people who use hatred to inflict suffering on others. Anything to cause the suffering to be felt bt that person instead is the right thing to do.
If you had bothered to read the claims in the patent, you'd realize that the Apple machine you referenced does none of those things. Apple wasn't "selling this in 1993".
The Byte article was interesting, though, for showing just how lame Apple machines were in those times. It was 1994 and macs were just getting SCSI DMA? Apple integrates a DSP that isn't fast enough to emulate (then) current modem standards? It's no wonder their business went down the drain.
I owned an E61 for 9 months and its construction is inadequate. After a short time it because flexy and creaky. What made matters worse was the daily freezes that required me to remove the batter to reset. The E61's UI is also the worst of all smartphones (unless you love lots of keypresses) and 3rd party apps are nearly nonexistent. Configuring it was a pain in the ass because the organizational structure was arbitrary. In contrast, my WM5 smartphone Samsung i320 is a breath of fresh air. Yes, the Samsung battery life sucks but it's basically a SLVR with 10mm extra width so that should come as no surprise. Despite the deserved reputation of WM5, my i320 is easily the best QWERTY smartphone I've ever owned (and I've owned plenty).
"Nokia is losing sight of the fact that people buy GSM phones firstly for Telephony, secondly for E-mail and SMS communications and thirdly for use as organizers. Everything else is a bonus."
Isn't that right! Seems like many of these manufacturers have the same problem but Nokia is worst of all. It's a shame that PalmOS sucked so bad because the Treo 650 apps were great for usability.
Yes, the Nokia browser is great but, sadly, it's only one of two browsers on the platform and the other, mediocre one is the default that's used when you follow links from other apps. Furthermore, a web browser isn't the primary app that you run on these devices and the rest of the platform, in the E61 case, is worst of breed. Great browser or no great browser, the E61 isn't worth owning.
"Absolutely. Copyright infringement, as we all should know, does not include taking. I understand Breyer fully: he lied. His fellow justices perhaps recognized this too: in any case, they left his language out of the Court's opinion."
Thanks for sticking to the subject. You prove time and again that you are afraid to argue facts.
I guess your aren't the true champion of the true meanings of words as you claim to be.
Slashdot Mirror
"Shows the reason why a patent is needed. To allow an intentor the right to make reasonable return on his work."
That was never the intention of patents. That was the reward offered to the inventor in exchange for his disclosure and it is a restriction to a free market.
The original poster was right, patents are offered to encourage the development of knowledge. If no such encouragement is needed any longer, then the need for patents is called into question.
"It wasn't the Life Savers style of Apple's machines that made them good. It was the combination or hardware, OS and customer support that spoke English and actually gave a damn."
Yet you recognize that other companies had customer support that spoke English and actually gave a damn as well. I had no experience with Apple at the time but I have had recently and my experience with Apple is the same as with other companies; some give a damn and others don't. Personally, I think it was shine and polish that created a hip appeal to the machines. The hardware was mediocre, the processors were falling behind, and the OS remained outdated until OS X (which required subsequent releases to become usable). I think it WAS the Life Savers style that turned the company around.
"I have no doubt that some of the people there didn't give a damn either way, but a lot of the ones I had to deal with were quite helpful."
It's certainly disingenuous to suggest that Apple cares where others do not then, isn't it?
"...I was referring to the decision to candy coat the product lineup."
I don't see Dell's or Toshiba's current business situation to be anything like Apple's was nor do I see either of them producing candy-colored machines in hopes of improving their results. I certainly don't expect them to, either, since they are totally different companies with totally different customers.
As if that were somehow a new thing. It seems like Apple's iTV has certainly got a lot of press despite the fact that it's a long way from being a product and it's mostly a ripoff of a Windows Media Center Extender. How is that any different?
"...has only as much power as a Mac PowerBook having less than half the weight..."
What kind of bullshit is that? A Powerbook is in no way comparable to the Dell machine you are referring to, and anyone considering either product wouldn't consider the other. Does a Powerbook have a 20" screen or two hard drive bays? I think not. By your standards, no one should want to buy an iMac either. After all, an iMac "has only as much power as a Mac PowerBook having less than half the weight."
"...and people think that this is interesting?"
I would imagine Dell will find out. It's obviously targeted at users that wish to transport their computers but not use them in their laps, and it's not the first time a machine like this has been made. The article itself includes a picture of a very early example.
"The problem is that companies like Dell aren't involved in the entire manufacturing process."
Now THERE's a claim that couldn't be more wrong. Dell is totally involved in the "entire manufacturing process". That is their contribution.
"They're normally designing an existing shell, so they're always going to be constrained in how creative they can get."
You speak like that's a bad thing. Continuity is a good thing especially when you ship in high volumes. "Creativity" is not a high value quality to volume business customers. "Creativity" is vastly more important to Apple than to Dell.
"It doesn't help that they're normally trying cut corners to reduce costs."
It doesn't help what? You appear to be starting out with an invalid assumption that Dell is trying to be creative and failing. It is not.
"They're involved in the design and engineering process at every step."
Now that they outsource motherboards to Intel, Apple is no different than Dell in this regard. From a hardware standpoint, Apple specifies parts and performs final assembly, just like Dell. Arguably, Dell provides real engineering content to Apple's boxes because it is a leading, perhaps THE leading, tester of Intel hardware.
"It's also why the software integrates so well with the system."
No, that's totally wrong. Apple is in control of 100% of its firmware and OS (and many of the apps). Additionally, Apple controls the list of supported platforms and peripherals. Dell's process is much more complicated since it must work with board vendors, chipset suppliers, Microsoft, and sometimes firmware developers.
"...unless Microsoft began designing and manufacturing PCs."
The fact is that Microsoft already designs PCs through the publications of specs. There is a large, inefficient feedback loop that runs through Intel and the box makers like Dell, but Windows PCs are designed to MS specs. That has to be done to get the "designed for Windows" subsidy.
"Where devices used to have nice clean lines and designed in more thoughtful colors too many products today are bloated, overly organic, covered in contrasting textures and almost always come in frosted silver or black."
Don't forget the ones that come in stark white that discolors so easily or the ones that are excessively shiny and show the slightest scratches as soon as they are used.
"A mark of good design is how it ages. If something was well-designed it should look good 10, 20 or 50 years later. Its style might look out-of-date, but it should still be appreciated for it's good design. The vast majority of current PC cases don't look good today, let alone how they will look 5 years ago."
I was just thinking how good looking the original AT and Amiga were and contrasting that with the first two generations of iMacs, the plastic Powermacs, toy iBooks, Mac Cubes, etc. Apple may be good at establishing design trends but they haven't proven capable of producing design classics (at least by your definition). Personally I think the current iPods and iMacs are nice. That doesn't mean they'll withstand the test of time.
Apple is a boutique electronics manufacturer and they thrive on their *image* as a provider of superior product. Because of that, people believe that they actually offer a superior product, true or not. Gucci sells plenty of low quality bags (among many things) at 4x the price of competitors that are demonstrably superior. Although Apple is far more competitive in price and quality, it still uses the same techniques as Gucci to appeal to emotions of its customers. As a result, Apple is obligated to be creative in its industrial design or risk losing its image as a premier brand. Dell doesn't need or want to do this because it's customers value substance over style. When I'm buying computers for 10,000 employees I'd prefer long-wearing denim to guccissima leather.
"...and customer support that spoke English..."
I think you're mixing eras. Outsourcing support is more recent than the candy-colored macs.
"...and actually gave a damn."
From my experience, Apple's no different than anyone else there.
"Dell and Toshiba are only going to reproduce the least important reason why Apple survived the dark times. And when it doesn't help them, they still won't get it."
Actually, Dell and Toshiba are very different companies and neither is much like Apple at all. Any strategy that is successful for one has little bearing on the others. I'm curious though, what is "the least important reason why Apple survived the dark times" that Dell and Toshiba are going to reproduce?
"A good job includes reducing the number of drunk driving accidents and deaths as well as sufficient treatment programs, funding for alternative transportation programs (like cab funding), and the like."
Since you consider yourself an expert on how to improve their performance, perhaps you should offer your advice to MADD. I'm sure they'd like to know how to do a better job.
"Their policies are bad because they do not get effective laws passed which REDUCE drunk driving, thus allowing drunks to continue drunk driving, and meanwhile harrass regular folk by overzealous police, road checks/blocks, random pullovers, etc."
MADD cannot harrass regular folk through "overzealous police, road checks/blocks, random pullovers, etc." That would be the police doing that. Just what "effective laws" do you think will prevent drunk driving? Just where is MADD falling down on the job? They aren't the legislature you know.
"Stupid. Get off your lazy ass and do some work yourself by looking it up yourself."
I can't because they don't exist. You claim to have seen the reports so let's see them.
"MADD is more interested in selling magazines for funding and tramping civil liberties in the name of reducing DUIs than actually stopping drunk driving."
Prove that, Mr. AC. MADD cannot trample civil liberties, they don't have the authority.
Any pre-existing doubly linked list is prior art. The fact that doubly linked lists frequently provide a forward and reverse order is of no consequence. Furthermore, there is no such thing as "traversing a doubly-linked list in the reverse direction". There is only traversing through one link path or the other link path. If you want the second link path to be the reverse of the first then you set it up and maintain it that way. That has no bearing on whether it's prior art or not as the patent doesn't consider the relationship between the orderings of the lists.
Of course I can. How about this: just because I buy gas for my car doesn't mean I don't care about the price. Again, here's the quote:
"..the overwhelming majority don't care because if they don't do it they won't be let in."
The overwhelming majority (who submit to the ID check) may or may not like having to do so. It may be true that they all detest the practice. They do it, though, because they prefer the option of getting in. Just because you do something doesn't mean you like it.
I'm cleaning my bathroom right now. I don't care for bathroom cleaning, however.
The standard for displays (which is already outdated by the way) is 100 dpi. Notebooks can go higher because they are typically viewed closer. Even Macbook Pros (which aren't high resolution) exceed 100 dpi.
Meanwhile, your "sufficient" 800x600 resolution equates to 67 dpi at 15". It may be sufficient for you but not for anyone not legally blind. I have no problem using 150 dpi screens on notebooks and I use a 204 dpi screen at home. I even own a a 4.5" WinXP ultraportable that offers 1024x600 resolution (252 dpi) and video iPods are 160 dpi. I will never consider any notebook with resolution as pathetic as 800x600. Sorry, but you are hopelessly wrong.
I'm all for sin but I'm not for drunk driving. Yes, MADD is prohibitionist; they desire to actually prohibit drunk driving. I'd like to see these reports you talk about so I can understand MADD's more devious secret agenda.
"...anyone think they won't take it straight into the realm of "preventative therapy" using this information?"
Yes, I don't. I also don't believe "they" (MADD) have the authority to implement "preventative therapy" even if "they" wanted to.
"...lead by religious bleeding hearts and hypocritical 60's-era hippy soccer moms."
I doubt 60's-era ex-hippies are leading the charge on evangelical sin prohibitions. Soccer moms may contribute to MADD, but MADD isn't about sin prohibition, it's about saving lives.
"I genuinely feel bad for the coming generations of Americans and the pseudo-fascist oppression under which they will be burdened in the name of "for the children"."
I bet you do. Meanwhile, drunk driving isn't illegal because it's "for the children".
"No matter my age, I will fully support and understand their inevitable backlash."
When you're older and suffer the damage of a teenage drunk driver rather than just being one, perhaps you'll have a different perspective.
"..the overwhelming majority don't care because if they don't do it they won't be let in."
Just because they submit doesn't mean they don't care. Just because I pay my taxes doesn't mean I don't care that they're too high.
"And who gets to be the judge of what constitutes "inflicting suffering on others"? You?"
That would be fine with me.
If you are suggesting that racism doesn't qualify as using hatred to inflict suffering on others, then I'd be very interested in hearing your arguments.
It's not necessary to judge what constitutes "inflicting suffering on others". Laws that fight discriminatory practices benefit society and are a no-brainer. We're all created equal, right? If such laws tend to redirect suffering onto those that would discriminate then so much the better.
No, you completely misunderstand. I was answering the following question:
"I ask you: Which scenario is worse?
1) A white supremacist advertises housing for rent using neutral language, since the law says he has to. He gets contacted by lots of people of color whom he dismisses with verbal insults, since he feels safer expressing his views one-on-one.
2) A white supremacist advertises housing for rent stating his viewpoint and his desire to rent to whites only. He does not get contacted by any people of color or any other people who dislike his views."
I said simply that I believe that he won't get his house rented that way at all.
"I don't like racism either, but you combat that with education and encouragement of critical thinking, not with misguided laws that overstep the bounds of what the government is allowed to do."
Which misguided laws are you referring to? Certainly not the ones that are being discussed. Those certainly don't overstep the bounds of government either.
That's about the dumbest explanation I've ever read. To summarize:
1. Skin on the private parts hosts lethal bacteria.
2. This bacteria can't be washed off no matter what.
3. It does, however, transfer instantaneously to your hands when you touch it.
4. After touching your penis, you become a "Typhoid Mary".
5. Those bacteria that couldn't be washed off before are now easily washed off the hands.
You would think that anyone who ever gave a blow/rim job would end up dead. Apparently the touching someone's genitals is a death sentence for anyone not trained in sterile techniques. It's not just penises according to the article, it's all skin (male or female) in proximity to the anus. We've got to stop shitting all over ourselves!
I guess by "Straight Dope" he means he's a heterosexual fool.
"You're free to associate with whoever you want. You just have to associate with other people too, or get a new line of work."
Yes, exactly. We may have to accept their hatred but not when it damages society.
"The problem with allowing bigotry to stand is that it fails the ultimate test of ethics: "What if everyone did it?" "
Exactly right, and it is within the scope of government to engage in this kind of social engineering.
"When has liberal meant anything but "everyone will be better off if the government makes them do it my way". The fact that the Republicans suddenly went off the loopy end of the scale and started dictating how people should live doesn't change what liberal and conservative meant, only who people are voting for."
Here I totally disagree. Liberal and authoritarian are unrelated and one can be either socially liberal or conservative while being libertarian or authoritarian. Republicans and Democrats are nearly equally authoritarian, and IMO way too much.
Look here: http://www.politicalcompass.org/
I vote that the white supremacist not get to rent out his housing at all. Doesn't matter, because if he's as radical as I believe you are suggesting, then he'll seek tenants that subscribe to his views through his private social contacts anyway.
There is nothing wrong with isolating people who use hatred to inflict suffering on others. Anything to cause the suffering to be felt bt that person instead is the right thing to do.
If you had bothered to read the claims in the patent, you'd realize that the Apple machine you referenced does none of those things. Apple wasn't "selling this in 1993".
The Byte article was interesting, though, for showing just how lame Apple machines were in those times. It was 1994 and macs were just getting SCSI DMA? Apple integrates a DSP that isn't fast enough to emulate (then) current modem standards? It's no wonder their business went down the drain.
I owned an E61 for 9 months and its construction is inadequate. After a short time it because flexy and creaky. What made matters worse was the daily freezes that required me to remove the batter to reset. The E61's UI is also the worst of all smartphones (unless you love lots of keypresses) and 3rd party apps are nearly nonexistent. Configuring it was a pain in the ass because the organizational structure was arbitrary. In contrast, my WM5 smartphone Samsung i320 is a breath of fresh air. Yes, the Samsung battery life sucks but it's basically a SLVR with 10mm extra width so that should come as no surprise. Despite the deserved reputation of WM5, my i320 is easily the best QWERTY smartphone I've ever owned (and I've owned plenty).
"Nokia is losing sight of the fact that people buy GSM phones firstly for Telephony, secondly for E-mail and SMS communications and thirdly for use as organizers. Everything else is a bonus."
Isn't that right! Seems like many of these manufacturers have the same problem but Nokia is worst of all. It's a shame that PalmOS sucked so bad because the Treo 650 apps were great for usability.
Yes, the Nokia browser is great but, sadly, it's only one of two browsers on the platform and the other, mediocre one is the default that's used when you follow links from other apps. Furthermore, a web browser isn't the primary app that you run on these devices and the rest of the platform, in the E61 case, is worst of breed. Great browser or no great browser, the E61 isn't worth owning.
I know! Odd to hear that coming from you...
What's more outrageous, making a statement backed up with quotes from a supreme court justice, or calling that justice a liar?
"He asked you to verify YOUR claims, not to have his own questioned as proof that you're right."
/., certainly not on a topic like this nor from a sociopath like krell. Don't think that I'm after his respect.
Haha, krell has never "asked me to verify" anything. It is not his style.
Yes, IP rights are "property". Are you now saying they aren't?
"Backwards logic is still logic, but won't get you much respect in a discussion like this."
There is no respect to be had here at
She admits to her willingness to steal software and admits to illegally downloading content from bittorrent. That makes her and admitted thief.
Why must you insert yourself into other conversations, krell, when you are unable to handle your own?
"Absolutely. Copyright infringement, as we all should know, does not include taking. I understand Breyer fully: he lied. His fellow justices perhaps recognized this too: in any case, they left his language out of the Court's opinion."
Thanks for sticking to the subject. You prove time and again that you are afraid to argue facts.
I guess your aren't the true champion of the true meanings of words as you claim to be.
Is that your explanation?
Just so long as you accept that it's you arguing King Bush and not me. I have no position on that matter.
Now, if you have an actual argument that "IP theft" is simply a term fabricated by me then, by all means, let's hear it.