I certainly hate censorship, but considering what's on Stern's show, I don't think the fines are outrageous.
You just contradicted yourself in the SAME SENTENCE.
The government should not dictate what can be said over ANY MEDIUM. As George Carlin once said, there are two knobs on your radio: one changes the station, and the other one turns it off. Pick one! Don't let the government make that decision for you or your family.
If you listen to only whatever the radio stations spin, sure, I'll give you that. But wtf do you expect from mainstream radio stations?
U2 aren't relevant anymore, really.
"Relevance" is just a way for musical elitists to try and put down a band that is popular but not up to their "high standards." If you think this definition is wrong, please define relevance for me.
If you don't like U2, that's fine. Don't hide behind stupid malapropisms.
What a warped world we live in where people feel campaigning is counterproductive to being a senator. Any serious presidential candidate (not just Kerry) raises awareness of issues and influences other senators far beyond what he could by simply speaking on the Senate floor. The people of Massachusetts are getting their money's worth, as are we all.
Are you fucking kidding me?
How are we getting our money's worth as politicians:
- Glad-hand to raise money, promising favors or "face-time" if/when they are [re-]elected.
- Say anything and everything, whether it is really true or not, to please as many people as possible, with the hopes of being [re-]elected.
I can count on one hand the actual true, un-spinned statements I've ever heard a candidate say while campaigning that might actually "raise awareness of issues."
I know you'd like to put a political slant on this, but I only singled Kerry out because the person I was responding to was talking about him. I feel it is a waste for any elected official to spend time raising money and campaigning for re-election.
I wouldn't be betting 3500$ on this at the moment.
Me neither. But if I could afford $3500 for a cat, I might be willingly to bet the amount they are actually requesting for a deposit ($250):
"Please note that reservations require a deposit of $250 that will apply to the purchase price. On completion of your online reservation, we will provide you with an attractive personalized ALLERCA Reservation Certificate."
So you think U2 hasn't been relevant enough since the EIGHTIES to warrant an iPod, even though they've had countless hits and grammies, right up into the 2000's (Beautiful Day).
Yet you think Little Feat and Stax are relevant enough for an iPod.
This is why you are commenting on slashdot, and a marketing genious is putting the finishing touches on the U2 iPod.
U2 has an enormous fan base, huge staying power, and still puts on wildly popular concerts wherever they go. They are popular in the US and overseas. They have a huge stockpile of music. Their music is also pretty timeless. One of the few bands whose music from the 80's I can listen to and not have that 80's feel.
I believe if you are elected to public office, you should not spend any work time (or money) campaigning for any other job -- including re-election. I feel every person should get ONE TERM. We need fewer lifetime politicians.
It tells me that he's busy on the campaign trail and not wasting his time trying to write bills he knows wouldn't pass given the current Senate configuration.
What a warped world we live in where people feel Kerry's job is to campaign, while it is a waste of time for him to do what he gets paid to do: be a Senator.
The POTUS does not make laws, that's what Congress is for. This is simply propaganda. Like blaming a sitting president for deficit spending when the Congress is the one with the power to spend.
Isn't it time that media start to put up opposition to services that compromise privacy in fundamental ways?
Yes, as long as they are commenting on the right services. For example, WHY are these machines setup in such a way as to allow this private information to be stored in the first place?
It could have been written by Dr. Suess, that's not my point. The point is that MSN is predicting the death of an audio format that is WMA's rival.
No, MSN is not predicting anything. You fail to grasp that their entire Tech News site is nothing more than a rebranded listing of all the ZDNet/News.com tech articles.
Yes, that is true, DIVX was built on DVD technology. But if the players and discs are incompatible, and some studios support one and not the other, the effect on the market would be the same as if HD-DVD and Blu-Ray both became "popular" for movies. The studios and the standards bodies need to get together with the technology folks and settle on one standard.
It was the studios that ultimately forced the compromises that led to a single SD-DVD format, and I think the same will happen with Blu-Ray.
Well, sort of. The studios backed DVD, and then some of the studios branched off and were trying to support DIVX (the throw-away, incompatible DVD rival). Then the consumers proceeded to hit those studios and everyone associated with DIVX with a clue-by-four, and now we have a single DVD standard./my clue-by-four is at the ready...
If you say no, you keep whats on the iPod, but can't add anything new.
False. You select the option to update the iPod manually, and copy as much shit as you want to the iPod.
Not to mention you can't copy music back from the iPod to the machine.
True. In order to do this, I believe you must open it up in a file manager, copy all of the music onto your hard drive, then go into iTunes and import that folder. Assuming the music files contained ID3 or are AAC files, they should have all their info show up in iTunes even though it may have renamed the files when it put them on the ipod...
It means the internet, our internet, can go back to what it was before the companies started fucking it up; a medium for free information exchange.
Back when it was "our internet" (as you put it), there was nowhere near the amount of free information exchange as there is today, in large part DUE to contributions by companies across the world.
Companies haven't fucked up the internet, they've given us more things we can do over the internet. The things that actually trash the internet are: script kiddies, virus writers, spammers, and evil countries.
They respond to "buzz." We need more "buzz" to get people to try Firefox, because once they do, it is very likely they won't go back.
Yes, we need a two-pronged attack: (a) power users spreading the mojo, and (b) buzz-building in average users, who can download it once their curiousity is piqued.
Slashdot Mirror
I certainly hate censorship, but considering what's on Stern's show, I don't think the fines are outrageous.
You just contradicted yourself in the SAME SENTENCE.
The government should not dictate what can be said over ANY MEDIUM. As George Carlin once said, there are two knobs on your radio: one changes the station, and the other one turns it off. Pick one! Don't let the government make that decision for you or your family.
1.1.1.1
But, the point is that the Allerca site was trying to position their pricing as in line with normal cat pricing
No, quite clearly they were trying to position their pricing as being close to pricing for certain pure breeds.
They're watered down pop music.
If you listen to only whatever the radio stations spin, sure, I'll give you that. But wtf do you expect from mainstream radio stations?
U2 aren't relevant anymore, really.
"Relevance" is just a way for musical elitists to try and put down a band that is popular but not up to their "high standards." If you think this definition is wrong, please define relevance for me.
If you don't like U2, that's fine. Don't hide behind stupid malapropisms.
You're both confusing popularity with relevance and quality.
No, I'm not. U2 has been "relevant" for 25 years. The reason they are getting an iPod is because they are both relevant AND popular, across the World.
What a warped world we live in where people feel campaigning is counterproductive to being a senator. Any serious presidential candidate (not just Kerry) raises awareness of issues and influences other senators far beyond what he could by simply speaking on the Senate floor. The people of Massachusetts are getting their money's worth, as are we all.
Are you fucking kidding me?
How are we getting our money's worth as politicians:
- Glad-hand to raise money, promising favors or "face-time" if/when they are [re-]elected.
- Say anything and everything, whether it is really true or not, to please as many people as possible, with the hopes of being [re-]elected.
I can count on one hand the actual true, un-spinned statements I've ever heard a candidate say while campaigning that might actually "raise awareness of issues."
I know you'd like to put a political slant on this, but I only singled Kerry out because the person I was responding to was talking about him. I feel it is a waste for any elected official to spend time raising money and campaigning for re-election.
I wouldn't be betting 3500$ on this at the moment.
Me neither. But if I could afford $3500 for a cat, I might be willingly to bet the amount they are actually requesting for a deposit ($250):
"Please note that reservations require a deposit of $250 that will apply to the purchase price. On completion of your online reservation, we will provide you with an attractive personalized ALLERCA Reservation Certificate."
How the fuck is the parent "insightful"?
This cat is quite clearly not aimed at regular situations, but for those folks who want to own a cat, but cannot due to an allergy in the household.
Yep. It's expensive. I bet the technology to do this is quite expensive also. If you don't want to buy one, no one is forcing you to.
Where does this end?
It ends when there is no market for such a beast.
There are plenty of cat-lovers with lots of money and cat allergy problems.
So you think U2 hasn't been relevant enough since the EIGHTIES to warrant an iPod, even though they've had countless hits and grammies, right up into the 2000's (Beautiful Day).
Yet you think Little Feat and Stax are relevant enough for an iPod.
This is why you are commenting on slashdot, and a marketing genious is putting the finishing touches on the U2 iPod.
U2 has an enormous fan base, huge staying power, and still puts on wildly popular concerts wherever they go. They are popular in the US and overseas. They have a huge stockpile of music. Their music is also pretty timeless. One of the few bands whose music from the 80's I can listen to and not have that 80's feel.
I believe if you are elected to public office, you should not spend any work time (or money) campaigning for any other job -- including re-election. I feel every person should get ONE TERM. We need fewer lifetime politicians.
It tells me that he's busy on the campaign trail and not wasting his time trying to write bills he knows wouldn't pass given the current Senate configuration.
What a warped world we live in where people feel Kerry's job is to campaign, while it is a waste of time for him to do what he gets paid to do: be a Senator.
The POTUS does not make laws, that's what Congress is for. This is simply propaganda. Like blaming a sitting president for deficit spending when the Congress is the one with the power to spend.
Yeah, the same man who said 640K would be enough for everybody.
He didn't say that.
Isn't it time that media start to put up opposition to services that compromise privacy in fundamental ways?
Yes, as long as they are commenting on the right services. For example, WHY are these machines setup in such a way as to allow this private information to be stored in the first place?
Google Desktop is the messenger.
It could have been written by Dr. Suess, that's not my point. The point is that MSN is predicting the death of an audio format that is WMA's rival.
No, MSN is not predicting anything. You fail to grasp that their entire Tech News site is nothing more than a rebranded listing of all the ZDNet/News.com tech articles.
See for yourself:
MSN Tech
News
Now click on "More News" on that page, and you will notice it takes you to an MSN branded version of News.com.
The medium sometimes is the message.
Of course. Just not in this case.
For those of us who don't have BiasGoggles on and can actually read bylines, we see the article was written by CNET News.com.
Yes, that is true, DIVX was built on DVD technology. But if the players and discs are incompatible, and some studios support one and not the other, the effect on the market would be the same as if HD-DVD and Blu-Ray both became "popular" for movies. The studios and the standards bodies need to get together with the technology folks and settle on one standard.
It was the studios that ultimately forced the compromises that led to a single SD-DVD format, and I think the same will happen with Blu-Ray.
/my clue-by-four is at the ready...
Well, sort of. The studios backed DVD, and then some of the studios branched off and were trying to support DIVX (the throw-away, incompatible DVD rival). Then the consumers proceeded to hit those studios and everyone associated with DIVX with a clue-by-four, and now we have a single DVD standard.
If you say no, you keep whats on the iPod, but can't add anything new.
False. You select the option to update the iPod manually, and copy as much shit as you want to the iPod.
Not to mention you can't copy music back from the iPod to the machine.
True. In order to do this, I believe you must open it up in a file manager, copy all of the music onto your hard drive, then go into iTunes and import that folder. Assuming the music files contained ID3 or are AAC files, they should have all their info show up in iTunes even though it may have renamed the files when it put them on the ipod...
For once, an error message that was on-topic.
That isn't true. I've seen your same exact joke recycled countless times here.
It means the internet, our internet, can go back to what it was before the companies started fucking it up; a medium for free information exchange.
Back when it was "our internet" (as you put it), there was nowhere near the amount of free information exchange as there is today, in large part DUE to contributions by companies across the world.
Companies haven't fucked up the internet, they've given us more things we can do over the internet. The things that actually trash the internet are: script kiddies, virus writers, spammers, and evil countries.
You don't understand average people.
They respond to "buzz." We need more "buzz" to get people to try Firefox, because once they do, it is very likely they won't go back.
Yes, we need a two-pronged attack: (a) power users spreading the mojo, and (b) buzz-building in average users, who can download it once their curiousity is piqued.
I'm in that 5% that's of above-average intelligence. Right?
You answered your own question. And that answer is, NO.