Re:This is not just for laughs
on
SimChurch
·
· Score: 5, Funny
would love to go to a church on Sundays but can't (e.g., those who are sick, those who live in rural areas)?
Uh, what rural areas are you talking about? I used to live in an unincorporated town in Mississippi. It was seven miles to the nearest gas station, and there were no fast food restaurants or video rental stores. But we had three churches. Believe me, the places that are too rural to support churches are probably too rural to support internet access. Or electricity.
"Make it fit." Many an undergraduate's paper has been stretched from seven to ten pages with that little gem, and it's so much more visually innocuous than the standard tack of big chunky margins and 14-point font.
I found out (thanks to the strong dollar and subsidies or something), you could buy textbooks from amazon.co.uk for 25% to 50% of what you could buy in the US.
You ain't kidding! I got a $100 textbook from the UK for only 54.37 quid! (You don't even want to know how much they tried to scalp me when I ordered from Japan, though.)
Does he really believe any significant number of people really wants to read books on a computer?
Does he really believe any significant number of people really wants to read books written by Harlan Ellison?
Re:the Maginot Line of Spam
on
Gates on Spam
·
· Score: 1
There's a fatal flaw to this plan: email wants to be free (as in beer).
Such a global decentralized pay-as-you-go service can only take off if millions of users agree to it. As long as a free alternative exists (and just try stamping out good old-fashioned SMTP) the majority of users will prefer to delete a few spam messages rather than pay for each email they send. And if the people you wish to communicate with are still using the old free service, why pay for the new one?
The DivX fiasco should have taught us one thing: there are some things people just won't pay for.
the Maginot Line of Spam
on
Gates on Spam
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Charging people postage for letters works because there is one centralized postal service which makes all the deliveries. Charging people for sending email will never work because nobody, not even Microsoft, owns the "email service." Because there isn't one. Just the SMTP protocol, and millions of computers which comply with it.
Maybe in a few decades people will catch on to the fact that the internet is global and decentralized, and that schemes like this are doomed to failure. You can't devise a pay-for-email scheme that doesn't have a dozen ways to get around it-- especially since this plan appears to be destined for the US only. As if every unsolicited email I get can't be traced to Taiwan, Korea, or Russia.
This plan is like the automatic security gate at my apartment complex-- annoying to legitimate users, absolutely ineffective against all but the most inept criminals.
As if having they care if the hood is welded shut.
You know, if you're going to engage in gender stereotypes, you could at least have the courtesy to demonstrate some knowledge of the English language in doing so.
Just to clarify: I realize that the law does protect speaking out against the government and does not protect many forms of speaking out against corporations. My point is that I see no reason why there should be such a distinction. If I spread vicious rumours about a Congressman or President, and those rumours create enough doubt to keep him from getting reelected, the consequenses to the United States are much greater than if I claim some company is a bad investment.
My personal view is that we should prohibit neither speaking out against the government, nor speaking out against a corporation (slander, libel). It should be the obligation of everyone, voters and investors alike, to do a thorough job of investigating the facts rather than relying on hearsay. It is not our job to protect them from hearsay.
Once again, I am struck by the double standard that, while our country's assurances of freedom of speech rightly protect claims made against our elected officials, whether substantiated or unsubstantiated, saying bad things about a company-- even a company that allegedly barely exists-- can result in threats of legal action. Is there a reason why some fly-by-night electronics outfit is entitled to protections not even the President enjoys?
"Civil disobedience" would be refusing to comply with a law or government order on principle, such as Henry David Thoreau's refusal to pay taxes to a country which practiced slavery. Refusing to pay protection money to a private company whose claims have yet to be justified is not civil disobedience, it is just good sense.
Heck, I even remember seeing one recent news story about a kid who sets off those scanners just by walking through them without anything in his pockets at all, just because his body happens to generate the precise frequency of electromagnetic energy they're keyed to.
And when the security guard came to take him away, the kid said, "There's something different about you... too much iron in your blood?"
Do you really want to use a battery pack from Belkin? It probably highjacks the audio stream so that every other track is an ad for more Belkin products.
Actually, this keeps fluctuating. The original top result was the official White House bio of George W. Bush. Soon those from across the aisle got pissed off and waged a counter-googlebombing campaign, and since then the top spot has fluctuated between Michael Moore, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter.
When I was at Mississippi State University, a similar website was started to allow students to review professors. While some of the posts were informative or insightful (maybe they need a karma system?) others were clearly the result of some trustfund kids slamming good professors because they actually made them do work.
When word got around that some departments were actually taking comments about teachers at face value, I decided to engage in some creative culture jamming to demonstrate the fact that just anyone could post just anything. So I started adding reviews for professors who did not, in fact, exist, or at least were never employed at MSU. Highlights included this
army ROTC instructor, this history
instructor, and this French instructor. I also included a review of Paul Erdos in the Math department-- one of the departments that had been taking the reviews a bit too seriously-- and found it mysteriously deleted. But at least they realized that there is no "fact-checking" mechanism on that site.
In retrospect I can't say whether I had any effect on school or society, but it at least provided a few hours' entertainment.
Considering the fact that sco.com is apparently still down, it may be that the page simply no longer comes up in search results at all. Searching for just SCO
also failed to turn up the company's webpage.
Slashdot Mirror
would love to go to a church on Sundays but can't (e.g., those who are sick, those who live in rural areas)?
Uh, what rural areas are you talking about? I used to live in an unincorporated town in Mississippi. It was seven miles to the nearest gas station, and there were no fast food restaurants or video rental stores. But we had three churches. Believe me, the places that are too rural to support churches are probably too rural to support internet access. Or electricity.
Britian spread English throughout the world during it's rampant empire building in the 15th and 16th centuries,
. . . yet still failed to get American know-it-alls to learn the difference between the possessive pronoun "its" and the contraction "it's".
"Make it fit." Many an undergraduate's paper has been stretched from seven to ten pages with that little gem, and it's so much more visually innocuous than the standard tack of big chunky margins and 14-point font.
I found out (thanks to the strong dollar and subsidies or something), you could buy textbooks from amazon.co.uk for 25% to 50% of what you could buy in the US.
You ain't kidding! I got a $100 textbook from the UK for only 54.37 quid! (You don't even want to know how much they tried to scalp me when I ordered from Japan, though.)
Does he really believe any significant number of people really wants to read books on a computer?
Does he really believe any significant number of people really wants to read books written by Harlan Ellison?
There's a fatal flaw to this plan: email wants to be free (as in beer).
Such a global decentralized pay-as-you-go service can only take off if millions of users agree to it. As long as a free alternative exists (and just try stamping out good old-fashioned SMTP) the majority of users will prefer to delete a few spam messages rather than pay for each email they send. And if the people you wish to communicate with are still using the old free service, why pay for the new one?
The DivX fiasco should have taught us one thing: there are some things people just won't pay for.
Charging people postage for letters works because there is one centralized postal service which makes all the deliveries. Charging people for sending email will never work because nobody, not even Microsoft, owns the "email service." Because there isn't one. Just the SMTP protocol, and millions of computers which comply with it.
Maybe in a few decades people will catch on to the fact that the internet is global and decentralized, and that schemes like this are doomed to failure. You can't devise a pay-for-email scheme that doesn't have a dozen ways to get around it-- especially since this plan appears to be destined for the US only. As if every unsolicited email I get can't be traced to Taiwan, Korea, or Russia.
This plan is like the automatic security gate at my apartment complex-- annoying to legitimate users, absolutely ineffective against all but the most inept criminals.
I have to ask: why Flash?
Two words: Homestar Runner.
I'm still waiting for Microsoft to port Office to Linux! Then I'll switch over.
I know what you mean. I'm putting off buying a DVD player until they release Earnest Goes to Camp and the complete episodes of Cop Rock on DVD.
As if having they care if the hood is welded shut.
You know, if you're going to engage in gender stereotypes, you could at least have the courtesy to demonstrate some knowledge of the English language in doing so.
How SCO will stall around this deadline:
I don't know, it'll be pretty hard to top their previous "we forgot when the Christmas holidays were" excuse.
Just to clarify: I realize that the law does protect speaking out against the government and does not protect many forms of speaking out against corporations. My point is that I see no reason why there should be such a distinction. If I spread vicious rumours about a Congressman or President, and those rumours create enough doubt to keep him from getting reelected, the consequenses to the United States are much greater than if I claim some company is a bad investment.
My personal view is that we should prohibit neither speaking out against the government, nor speaking out against a corporation (slander, libel). It should be the obligation of everyone, voters and investors alike, to do a thorough job of investigating the facts rather than relying on hearsay. It is not our job to protect them from hearsay.
Once again, I am struck by the double standard that, while our country's assurances of freedom of speech rightly protect claims made against our elected officials, whether substantiated or unsubstantiated, saying bad things about a company-- even a company that allegedly barely exists-- can result in threats of legal action. Is there a reason why some fly-by-night electronics outfit is entitled to protections not even the President enjoys?
SCO already has like $60 million on hand and our small fee would not go very far defending an action such as this, much less prosecuting one.
"dude, they've got, like, way more money than that, so like, we figured it was like cool and stuff."
SCO or no SCO, I wouldn't want to do business with a company whose CEO has the spelling and diction of a twelve-year-old sk8r.
Civil disobedience is not a good business model.
"Civil disobedience" would be refusing to comply with a law or government order on principle, such as Henry David Thoreau's refusal to pay taxes to a country which practiced slavery. Refusing to pay protection money to a private company whose claims have yet to be justified is not civil disobedience, it is just good sense.
Heck, I even remember seeing one recent news story about a kid who sets off those scanners just by walking through them without anything in his pockets at all, just because his body happens to generate the precise frequency of electromagnetic energy they're keyed to.
And when the security guard came to take him away, the kid said, "There's something different about you... too much iron in your blood?"
Why are you posting in Swedish? Slashdot is nothing but linux geeks. It's not like any of them speak Swedish.
Google to Darl: "You throw suit? Fscking come on then!"
Do you really want to use a battery pack from Belkin? It probably highjacks the audio stream so that every other track is an ad for more Belkin products.
The *songs* will be copyright-ed (copywritten?)
"Copyrighted" is correct, as it refers to the right to copy, whereas "written" is a form of "write." Unless you listen to SNAP.
Barely audible? It was practically the only thing in the song.
The Rolling Stones sample was not the string riff that is repeated throughout the song. The offending sample is in fact barely audible.
Actually, this keeps fluctuating. The original top result was the official White House bio of George W. Bush. Soon those from across the aisle got pissed off and waged a counter-googlebombing campaign, and since then the top spot has fluctuated between Michael Moore, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter.
When I was at Mississippi State University, a similar website was started to allow students to review professors. While some of the posts were informative or insightful (maybe they need a karma system?) others were clearly the result of some trustfund kids slamming good professors because they actually made them do work.
When word got around that some departments were actually taking comments about teachers at face value, I decided to engage in some creative culture jamming to demonstrate the fact that just anyone could post just anything. So I started adding reviews for professors who did not, in fact, exist, or at least were never employed at MSU. Highlights included this army ROTC instructor, this history instructor, and this French instructor. I also included a review of Paul Erdos in the Math department-- one of the departments that had been taking the reviews a bit too seriously-- and found it mysteriously deleted. But at least they realized that there is no "fact-checking" mechanism on that site.
In retrospect I can't say whether I had any effect on school or society, but it at least provided a few hours' entertainment.
Think of how many links you could have generated if you had of spent some time with the dictionary.
"Had of"? Would you like some grammar with your dictionary?
Considering the fact that sco.com is apparently still down, it may be that the page simply no longer comes up in search results at all. Searching for just SCO also failed to turn up the company's webpage.