nothing healthy about a low fat, low cholesterol, low mad cow disease diet? is there no reason why doctors tell old people to cut meat from their diets? i'm not saying that it isn't a way you can have a healthy diet and eat meat, but meat, especially red meat, isn't really very good for you.
militant vegans are usually vegan for health reasons or animal rights reasons. assuming he's not a vegan because of animal rights, then it's a safe bet he doesn't drink.
scenario: aoltw gains control of all cable access in mid sized market aol forces dialup comptetions out of business dsl startup is crushed by aoltw, drops service in area because no profit is possible. repeat throughout country in smaller markets. this is a great idea in my opinion, consider the anti-interventionist position of the incoming regime. looks like its time to buy some aol stock. (glad i work on hardware, and not for some non aol isp)
at worst (or best i suppose) congress would just force icann to accept more tld's. i wonder if there is anybody in congress capable of understanding the technical reasons why or why not to have a bunch of tlds (architurally). only thing that's for sure is that this has the potential to become a huge mess.
if they control the broadband networks, and the big content sites, they won't need a law. not that that would stop them from trying. if they bought amazon, they'd be in really good shape.
why wouldn't it? if it was legal, aoltw would definately want to restrict access, both to their content(aol only) and others content(not from aol). this would clearly be in their best interests.
your assumption that people are going to get more tech savvy is just plain wrong. your assumption that im is meaningless is wrong, as that is probably one of the biggest reason people will choose aol in the next few years, seeing that their price, service, and content isn't better or different. well knock on wood about content. because your assumption that tw doesn't provide worthy content is also incorrect. guess you never heard of cnn. and who's to say what they will buy? i would expect them to go after maybe landmark communications. how would restricting content to aol users hurt market share? it would force people to use aol as their provider.
considering that the republican governor most likely to be announced the new commerce secretary (can't remember his name) made a statement that he didn't believe the government should not have been regulating this merger at all, i'd say your claims of a 5-year government microscope are baseless. i think what some people are concerned about is that aol will only let users go to sites they control the content of, including possibly redirecting, unknown to the user. that would surprise me, but if it wouldn't hurt their user base they would probably do it. what i thought was interesting is the one of the commissioners of the fcc who voted for this merger is colin powell's son. colin powell owns about $1 million of stock in aol. if they guy would have just not voted, the merger would have gone through anyway, but he did, and that is disappointing to me, because it looks like corruption, even if it isn't.
there is a wall street journal quote on the lawyers page (in a pdf file) that confirms what you say. which doesn't mean it isn't still illegal. however the evidence appears somewhat circumstansial.
a standard question to get even low level clearance is 'have you ever attempted to use force to overthrow the u.s. government?' i bet that one gets a lot of yesses. (i am tryink to blow up your contry, but pleece geef me cleerence anyway).
some friends and i had the idea to make ambercrombie & bitch t shirts but couldn't get the image to look good. anybody ever seen a shirt like this anywhere? it would have to have the things on the sleeves, with the different colors, what do you call those?
but then people will start just calling it "the gnome". it won't be too much of a problem though, because 2 years after that nobody would talk about it at all.
my experience shows otherwise about getting better rates. you may have a point, you may not. i hope people who read this don't take either of us for experts.
i disagree. you should live within your means, but you should use credit, just don't overextend so that you can't make payments. you can't build credit without borrowing, so you could never get that car or house loan. the better your credit, and the more money you borrow, the better rates you get, so your money goes further. don't rack up huge debts on high interest cards, but if the rate is good, use it, to get a good credit rating. and pay your bills on time.
ok so bose makes crappy speakers for the home. didn't really know that. what about their car speakers, are they also pure hype? anybody have a preference here?
Slashdot Mirror
nothing healthy about a low fat, low cholesterol, low mad cow disease diet? is there no reason why doctors tell old people to cut meat from their diets? i'm not saying that it isn't a way you can have a healthy diet and eat meat, but meat, especially red meat, isn't really very good for you.
anybody do this in dallas?
militant vegans are usually vegan for health reasons or animal rights reasons. assuming he's not a vegan because of animal rights, then it's a safe bet he doesn't drink.
scenario:
aoltw gains control of all cable access in mid sized market
aol forces dialup comptetions out of business
dsl startup is crushed by aoltw, drops service in area because no profit is possible.
repeat throughout country in smaller markets.
this is a great idea in my opinion, consider the anti-interventionist position of the incoming regime. looks like its time to buy some aol stock. (glad i work on hardware, and not for some non aol isp)
at worst (or best i suppose) congress would just force icann to accept more tld's. i wonder if there is anybody in congress capable of understanding the technical reasons why or why not to have a bunch of tlds (architurally). only thing that's for sure is that this has the potential to become a huge mess.
if they control the broadband networks, and the big content sites, they won't need a law. not that that would stop them from trying. if they bought amazon, they'd be in really good shape.
why wouldn't it? if it was legal, aoltw would definately want to restrict access, both to their content(aol only) and others content(not from aol). this would clearly be in their best interests.
your assumption that people are going to get more tech savvy is just plain wrong. your assumption that im is meaningless is wrong, as that is probably one of the biggest reason people will choose aol in the next few years, seeing that their price, service, and content isn't better or different. well knock on wood about content. because your assumption that tw doesn't provide worthy content is also incorrect. guess you never heard of cnn. and who's to say what they will buy? i would expect them to go after maybe landmark communications. how would restricting content to aol users hurt market share? it would force people to use aol as their provider.
it's a news source with a different point of view. what if you could only go to websites owned by aoltw?
what i heard reported is that *any* new version would have to work with competitors.
should have previewed. i mean he didn't believe the government should be regulating the merger.
considering that the republican governor most likely to be announced the new commerce secretary (can't remember his name) made a statement that he didn't believe the government should not have been regulating this merger at all, i'd say your claims of a 5-year government microscope are baseless. i think what some people are concerned about is that aol will only let users go to sites they control the content of, including possibly redirecting, unknown to the user. that would surprise me, but if it wouldn't hurt their user base they would probably do it. what i thought was interesting is the one of the commissioners of the fcc who voted for this merger is colin powell's son. colin powell owns about $1 million of stock in aol. if they guy would have just not voted, the merger would have gone through anyway, but he did, and that is disappointing to me, because it looks like corruption, even if it isn't.
umm instant messaging is the reason probably one third of the people online are online. you don't think thats why people get aol?
there is a wall street journal quote on the lawyers page (in a pdf file) that confirms what you say. which doesn't mean it isn't still illegal. however the evidence appears somewhat circumstansial.
a standard question to get even low level clearance is 'have you ever attempted to use force to overthrow the u.s. government?' i bet that one gets a lot of yesses. (i am tryink to blow up your contry, but pleece geef me cleerence anyway).
some friends and i had the idea to make ambercrombie & bitch t shirts but couldn't get the image to look good. anybody ever seen a shirt like this anywhere? it would have to have the things on the sleeves, with the different colors, what do you call those?
but then people will start just calling it "the gnome". it won't be too much of a problem though, because 2 years after that nobody would talk about it at all.
mmm engineer I. in a few years....engineer II. someday, maybe, senior engineer. very useful. lets people know which decade i was born in (+/- 1.5)
what about this place? free credit report sounds kind of questionable to me.
my experience shows otherwise about getting better rates. you may have a point, you may not. i hope people who read this don't take either of us for experts.
anybody have a link to a place that shows you your credit rating?
i disagree. you should live within your means, but you should use credit, just don't overextend so that you can't make payments. you can't build credit without borrowing, so you could never get that car or house loan. the better your credit, and the more money you borrow, the better rates you get, so your money goes further. don't rack up huge debts on high interest cards, but if the rate is good, use it, to get a good credit rating. and pay your bills on time.
see if you can get like a $100 loan from a local bank
don't waste a bunch of money on speaker wires. expensive wires aren't really different from average wires.
ok so bose makes crappy speakers for the home. didn't really know that. what about their car speakers, are they also pure hype? anybody have a preference here?