Re:Explain the fricken 12,000 bucks for this...
on
WinXP on a Mac, Hoax?
·
· Score: 1
What you said would only matter if (a) people rarely got to try out the "other" OS
Well, that's kind of Apple's whole game. Sell pretty computers, that are considered hip in certain circles. You get two types of users - OSX power users, and standard family home users.
For the power user like you and me, well, we have more than one computer. I have three desktops and two laptops, and run (on different machines) Windows XP, 2003, Ubuntu, and OSX.
But for the standard family user and the niche "cool" user, who won't have more than one computer, buying Apple is a guarentee that you continue to buy Apple when it comes to software and services. If I can boot Windows XP, then I might start buying more Microsoft products, thus removing the cost barrier for Windows involvement introduced to those who spend their last dime forking over $2500 for a PowerBook.
I just think that Apple sees choice (see France and iTunes) as a threat to their bottom line. But it's just a thought, and you make a good point.
everybody yells 'OMG those communist bastards are 3v1l!!!'.
With all due respect, communism is not high on the chart of things that get the benefit of the doubt. Even if the government did not shut down this particular blog, we know from hard evidence that Yahoo! has participated in identifying online dissidents as have other for-profit companies. We know from hard facts that the Chineese government does censor its web content, searches, and traffic, and we do know from hard evidence that they have shut down blogs and sites in the past.
So while I'll give you that news agencies should really do some fact checking before picking up the latest blog chatter and reporting it as real news... It's not that far fetched that the Chinese government would be up to some of their pretty old, tried, and true techniques of squelching any information not explicitly approved for public consumption.
Re:Explain the fricken 12,000 bucks for this...
on
WinXP on a Mac, Hoax?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Name one reason why Apple would not want WinXP booting on a Mac?
Because WinXP boots just as nicely on a Walmart laptop. If people who own Mac hardware find themselves booting to Windows as often or more often than OSX, their next purchase may rationalize that the premium is just not worth it to run OSX.
The debate goes two ways - way one, I get to run both OSes, how wonderful is that? Way two, I run XP more and more, why buy Mac hardware?
It's only time that will tell us which is which...
This is pretty advanced. So why did Jordy have to wear that stupid visor?
And why, oh why, was he able to see xrays, false color, extended light spectrums, heat and infared sensing, etc., but was unable to see a standard, color picture??
That always drove me nuts... If you can project a picture in to the dood's brain, can't it be, say, ANY picture?
Me too! It's this system, see, that manages large amounts of content in an online fashion that allows the seperation of the system admin and programmer from the "content contributor". But that's just a tease. You'll have to wait for my disruptive "Content Management Solution" - coming sooooooooon!!
etter treat their crops, fisherman to locate large quantities of fish in mid-sea
... for governments to more quickly locate possible civic unrest before it happens, for Israel to better monitor the activities of the Gaza strip, for France to better be able to figure out where car burning is concentrated...
Where do we draw the line at what is considered "neglect" by a parent?
Yeah, good luck with that one.
I can't tell you how many times I've read some/. comment that says "noone can tell me how to raise my kids!" and "keep the government out of my way as a parent!" etc. But any "line" and any "neglect" is really just your individual understanding of morality.
For instance, a hundred years back, it wasn't uncommon for a child of 10, 11 to labor in the fields of his/her parents farm for 8-12 hours a day, weekends too. Now that would be considered abuse.
Some parents also believe in corporal punishment, to varying degrees. I guarentee you that some of the commentors who insist that only a child's parent best knows how to raise said child are also the first to decry anyone that might strike a child in any fashion.
Add to that that the world is riddled with unfit parents who neglect the health and well-being of their children, but put off any attempt to correct them in their actions.
So the line is so broadly spread based on who you talk to, it's most certainly difficult to pin down. However, we do have to have SOME established line, even if some people don't agree with it. It's probably legal for me to teach my son about the mature female anatomy and sex by showing him pornographic pictures, but hardly legal for me to encourage that he explore the mature female anatomy himself.
So best of luck. Honestly, the thing that sucks is that some of these anti-game crusaders do it for political gain (Clinton) but others truely believe in their cause, so it's harder to fault them for standing up for what they truely believe, especially when it revolves around the welfare of children.
Sorry for the run-on thought pattern here, but you ask an almost impossible question.
I find it hard to believe that one can look at something from the 8th century and assume that the events happened as reported. While DNA can certainly be proven to exist in something, that doesn't mean it used to be bread. And I'm (kinda ex) Catholic.
Unfortunately, the Catholic church hitched its ride to a saying by Alfred Einstien, trying to explain this phenomenon of Transubstantiation:
"But if every gram of material contains this tremendous energy, why did it go so long unnoticed? The answer is simple enough: so long as none of the energy is given off externally, it cannot be observed. It is as though a man who is fabulously rich should never spend or give away a cent; no one could tell how rich he was."
--Albert Einstein, "E=MC2",
Out of My Later Years
Einstein was basically saying that matter could exist in two states - the state that it appears to be, and the underlying actual state that it is. This idea is widely critisized, and I believe that Einstien himself even laughed it off in later years.
However, it is an interesting theory to re-open, now that we have things like molecule-sized silicon-based "quantum dots" which can be manipulated to appear to have the properties of certain types of matter by manipulating electron fields around the quantum dot. Remember that the physical state of matter is represented mostly by the orbiting electrons, including mass and appearance. (Interesting read: Hacking Matter.)
So if we, as humans, can manipulate quantum dots to take on all of the physical characteristics of a different state of matter, even though it is itself silicon dots surrounded by orbiting electrons, perhaps matter itself is capable of disguising itself.
It's an interesting place to be, to deny that matter can appear to be something different than it is, and at the same time, be able to manipulate matter to appear to be something different than it is...
I find Rhapsody's DRM more of a hassle than Apple's, and I don't like wasting a CD to burn unprotected copies from in Rhapsody if I only want to buy one or two tracks. But I find Rhapsody infinitely better for just browsing and sampling stuff I might be interested in. I think my music experience would be the poorer without both.
Wow. Ok, so, you, the consumer, are forced to consume two different, separate, DRM laden services, just to get a worse experience than if you just hopped on P2P and pirated music, or even bought from a service like AllOfMp3.
And the music business is confused as to why piracy is still an issue. Go figure.
But - and here's the kicker - does it work with CableCard or HD? Not over the air HD, but cable based HD. Because I had Tivo back when I first got digital cable from Comcast, and had the Tivo control the cable box. But once I got HD, I was left with only one single option for a DVR, and that's the Comcast supplied HD box.
You've gotta love it though - Comcast will charge you $120+ for cable and internet, more with HBO. On top of that, $5 for the cable modem, $10/month for DVR, and $10/month for the HD service. Now what is going to make me want to pay a Tivo monthly fee on top of all that, especially when it is ad and commercial ridden?
Free alternatives are nice, but until they can play in the HD arena, I'm SOL.
Seriously. I submitted this story over a month ago when it first crossed my email via the American Institute of Physics Physics News Update email list.
I think the current US Administration has pretty much used up its entire allowance of "innocent until proven guilty", no?
Never. What you're referring to is the immediacy with which the guilt of the administration is often proven - as in confessions, massive amounts of evidence against them, etc.
"Um... yeah... I guess we were violating FISA - but we're not violating FISA, the President has the right to do what he wants!
I read the article about spying, but the administration's confession and the evidence against them proved them guilty within minutes of the story breaking.
So can I. The #Region " Windows Form Designer generated code " seems to be a bit of a giveaway, no?
No... right clicking and selecting "New Form" is a nicety, and far from making someone a non-programmer. Eclipse and other IDEs have wizards as well - a developer using and IDE does not a non-developer make.
Does Slashdot, as a news source, really have to spread this sort of unconfirmed information?
Yes, since it wasn't proported as true, but as a call for confirmation on a rumor. This will help confirm or deny, thus ending the rumor mill that could have worse ramifications.
That actually means "We're going to draft every last one of them into the army and send them to die stealing oil for us, unless their parents are rich and white."
Actually, it has nothing to do with that. What it DOES do is set quotas for schools in terms of special education, leaving several children in need of special help without said help. It requires special programs, testing, and adherance to laws by schools without coming close to providing the funding to the schools promised in the act.
Take for instance my mom's school, where black children go without the extra help they need because "there are too many minorities in special education programs" which is an affont fo the act because regulators see that as too many minorities not being properly educated. Therefore, kids with need go without help, yet are forced ahead in grade level.
It has nothing to do with recriuting, but it does have everything to do with bad policy for education. It also has to do with nationalizing education, by they way, which has been shown to be oh so very backwards.
Again, I'm not disagreeing with the fact that the DMCA is a bad law. I am however pointing out the flaw in your argument -- that while you can do whatever you want with the media itself, you are not allowed to do whatever you want with the content
I think perhaps the problem is we're talking about two different things. Put media aside for a second, and focus on the XBOX argument. There are restrictions on the hardware part, and I'm relatively sure that I'm purchasing the XBOX, not licensing it. Being restricted in what I can do with said hardware is a restriction on what I own.
I don't disagree with you about copyright, it's dispicable, but there is a difference between ownership and copyright. Consider the right of first sale. Am I selling the license, or the music? I disagree I'm selling the license. Copyright says I can't illegally distribute copies of the music, but nowhere does it say that content owners may dictate the fashion in which I use said music personally once I have purchased it.
Just because the EULA that come with CDs now say something doesn't mean that they will hold up in court. The right of first sale has been upheld, as has (in the past) my fair use rights. Recording iTunes songs to a CD and then ripping that CD to MP3 is perfectly legal, and bypasses DRM. I can do it because I OWN that music.
I'm relatively sure that an iTunes purchase is a purchase, not a lease.
And know what? It's working in the states that this has been done.
These laws are a good thing.
Chopping off the hands of petty theifs might slow robbery crimes. Shooting suspected criminals in the head without a trial may slow crime. Does this make these tactics a good thing? Lowering crime by supression of and monitoring of the masses is not now, nor ever will be, a good thing.
You own the media, but not the content contained on that media. So yes, the property owner is exercising their right to control what is done with their property
Perhaps this is where we disagree - because that which is contained on the disk is not their property. Further, my last example didn't have much to do with CDs - the DMCA stops you from doing what you want with hardware such as the XBOX or iPod. Sure, there are "Linux on n" projects out there, but circumventing the anti-piracy technology on that hardware is illegal, as is the dissemination of the information on how to do so. Therefore, this physical item - not "content" - is legally protected from you're doing what you want to with it - yours or not.
This is not a philosophy or an opinion - this is a fact. The DMCA (in addition to other laws, I'm sure) blocks people from the right to do with what they own, unquestionably.
If google shuts down, can you sue them??? No, but if they delist your site (Exactly same effect on you) you can? Well, of course you can always sue someone and you might just win--there is a lot of ignorance out there (and in here)--but that has nothing to do with the law..
The fact is that it is legal to control access to your own private property.
Again, perhaps you're new here. In fact, we're in a constant battle to protect those rights to do with our property as we please. In Senate hearings, the RIAA has expressly said that copying a CD is not your right. They have said that backing up your media is not your right.
Further, the DMCA prohibits you from reverse engineering anything you buy (XBox, etc.) that may have anti-circumvention built in to it, unquestionably blocking your "right" to do whatever you want with your own property.
Thinking that ownership is the end all and be all shows a lack of education. As fundamental as it may seem to you, the DMCA by itself denys you many rights you once had to do with your property as you please, as has DRM and other "piracy protection" mechanisms.
There may be more I'm forgetting, but right now I'm just laughing at your statement. Whether it SHOULD be true has nothing to do with the reality of the current situation.
That's like saying that just because a person hasn't done anything illegal you are required to let them walk though your house.
Damn there are a lot of strange opinions stated as fact on/.
Actually, what is strange is the close-mindedness of people like you on Slashdot. Nowhere in my statement did I mention that it was RIGHT, or the lawsuit may actually win. But let's look at an extreme example - I own an ISP that is blocked by Google. All of my users want access to Google, users leave, I am caused financial hardships.
Or another example. The fight over QOS requirements by the backbones and making players pay for better service - people on Slashdot violently react, but last I checked, these wires were not considered common-carrier like phone lines, and are the private property of the owners who want the QOS tiered pricing and access. What right does anyone have to dictate what a backbone provider charges??
These are just examples, but to assume that someone wouldn't file a lawsuit is naieve (sp?), and even if it is wrong or baseless, defending yourself can still be costly.
If they blow me off, I'm likely to blacklist the ISP entirely.
Which, depending on the size and importance of your network, sets you up for a lawsuit. Assuming a free and unfettered internet, if you block an entire ISP from your network for what amounts to zero illegal activity, I would put it out there that a lawsuit would result in a court order to unblock said ISP.
Now, it's true, this doesn't take in to account things like private vs public networks or the actual network that you handle, but punishing for non-illegal activities is questionable at best.
according to Jesse, not meant to be an acronym." (emphasis in the article).
It's nice if, in retrospect, you don't want a word to be an acronym, but as popular as certain words get, they are and will still be acronyms, like RADAR, which is often represented as "Radar" or "radar" in terms of capitalization in print media.
The fact is that AJAX (or Ajax) is in fact a direct derivation of the first letters of the words it represents, and thusly is, like it or not, an acronym. Further, I would think it improper to allow developers to use AJAX without understanding the actual underlying meaning. Many assume AJAX is just fun with DHTML, but it's not, and the fact that it is not is right in the acronym.
I guess since Jesse actually coined the term, he can turn around and say "nah, forget the acronym and just use the word" but it's a derivitive of the first letters of a phrase, and I'm pretty sure that's the basic definition of an acronym.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that's kind of Apple's whole game. Sell pretty computers, that are considered hip in certain circles. You get two types of users - OSX power users, and standard family home users.
For the power user like you and me, well, we have more than one computer. I have three desktops and two laptops, and run (on different machines) Windows XP, 2003, Ubuntu, and OSX.
But for the standard family user and the niche "cool" user, who won't have more than one computer, buying Apple is a guarentee that you continue to buy Apple when it comes to software and services. If I can boot Windows XP, then I might start buying more Microsoft products, thus removing the cost barrier for Windows involvement introduced to those who spend their last dime forking over $2500 for a PowerBook.
I just think that Apple sees choice (see France and iTunes) as a threat to their bottom line. But it's just a thought, and you make a good point.
With all due respect, communism is not high on the chart of things that get the benefit of the doubt. Even if the government did not shut down this particular blog, we know from hard evidence that Yahoo! has participated in identifying online dissidents as have other for-profit companies. We know from hard facts that the Chineese government does censor its web content, searches, and traffic, and we do know from hard evidence that they have shut down blogs and sites in the past.
So while I'll give you that news agencies should really do some fact checking before picking up the latest blog chatter and reporting it as real news... It's not that far fetched that the Chinese government would be up to some of their pretty old, tried, and true techniques of squelching any information not explicitly approved for public consumption.
Because WinXP boots just as nicely on a Walmart laptop. If people who own Mac hardware find themselves booting to Windows as often or more often than OSX, their next purchase may rationalize that the premium is just not worth it to run OSX.
The debate goes two ways - way one, I get to run both OSes, how wonderful is that? Way two, I run XP more and more, why buy Mac hardware?
It's only time that will tell us which is which...
And why, oh why, was he able to see xrays, false color, extended light spectrums, heat and infared sensing, etc., but was unable to see a standard, color picture??
That always drove me nuts... If you can project a picture in to the dood's brain, can't it be, say, ANY picture?
Me too! It's this system, see, that manages large amounts of content in an online fashion that allows the seperation of the system admin and programmer from the "content contributor". But that's just a tease. You'll have to wait for my disruptive "Content Management Solution" - coming sooooooooon!!
Yeah, good luck with that one.
I can't tell you how many times I've read some /. comment that says "noone can tell me how to raise my kids!" and "keep the government out of my way as a parent!" etc. But any "line" and any "neglect" is really just your individual understanding of morality.
For instance, a hundred years back, it wasn't uncommon for a child of 10, 11 to labor in the fields of his/her parents farm for 8-12 hours a day, weekends too. Now that would be considered abuse.
Some parents also believe in corporal punishment, to varying degrees. I guarentee you that some of the commentors who insist that only a child's parent best knows how to raise said child are also the first to decry anyone that might strike a child in any fashion.
Add to that that the world is riddled with unfit parents who neglect the health and well-being of their children, but put off any attempt to correct them in their actions.
So the line is so broadly spread based on who you talk to, it's most certainly difficult to pin down. However, we do have to have SOME established line, even if some people don't agree with it. It's probably legal for me to teach my son about the mature female anatomy and sex by showing him pornographic pictures, but hardly legal for me to encourage that he explore the mature female anatomy himself.
So best of luck. Honestly, the thing that sucks is that some of these anti-game crusaders do it for political gain (Clinton) but others truely believe in their cause, so it's harder to fault them for standing up for what they truely believe, especially when it revolves around the welfare of children.
Sorry for the run-on thought pattern here, but you ask an almost impossible question.
I find it hard to believe that one can look at something from the 8th century and assume that the events happened as reported. While DNA can certainly be proven to exist in something, that doesn't mean it used to be bread. And I'm (kinda ex) Catholic.
Unfortunately, the Catholic church hitched its ride to a saying by Alfred Einstien, trying to explain this phenomenon of Transubstantiation:
Einstein was basically saying that matter could exist in two states - the state that it appears to be, and the underlying actual state that it is. This idea is widely critisized, and I believe that Einstien himself even laughed it off in later years.
However, it is an interesting theory to re-open, now that we have things like molecule-sized silicon-based "quantum dots" which can be manipulated to appear to have the properties of certain types of matter by manipulating electron fields around the quantum dot. Remember that the physical state of matter is represented mostly by the orbiting electrons, including mass and appearance. (Interesting read: Hacking Matter.)
So if we, as humans, can manipulate quantum dots to take on all of the physical characteristics of a different state of matter, even though it is itself silicon dots surrounded by orbiting electrons, perhaps matter itself is capable of disguising itself.
It's an interesting place to be, to deny that matter can appear to be something different than it is, and at the same time, be able to manipulate matter to appear to be something different than it is...
Wow. Ok, so, you, the consumer, are forced to consume two different, separate, DRM laden services, just to get a worse experience than if you just hopped on P2P and pirated music, or even bought from a service like AllOfMp3.
And the music business is confused as to why piracy is still an issue. Go figure.
But - and here's the kicker - does it work with CableCard or HD? Not over the air HD, but cable based HD. Because I had Tivo back when I first got digital cable from Comcast, and had the Tivo control the cable box. But once I got HD, I was left with only one single option for a DVR, and that's the Comcast supplied HD box.
You've gotta love it though - Comcast will charge you $120+ for cable and internet, more with HBO. On top of that, $5 for the cable modem, $10/month for DVR, and $10/month for the HD service. Now what is going to make me want to pay a Tivo monthly fee on top of all that, especially when it is ad and commercial ridden?
Free alternatives are nice, but until they can play in the HD arena, I'm SOL.
Very cool list, worth signing up for.
Never. What you're referring to is the immediacy with which the guilt of the administration is often proven - as in confessions, massive amounts of evidence against them, etc.
"Um... yeah... I guess we were violating FISA - but we're not violating FISA, the President has the right to do what he wants!
I read the article about spying, but the administration's confession and the evidence against them proved them guilty within minutes of the story breaking.
No... right clicking and selecting "New Form" is a nicety, and far from making someone a non-programmer. Eclipse and other IDEs have wizards as well - a developer using and IDE does not a non-developer make.
Yes, since it wasn't proported as true, but as a call for confirmation on a rumor. This will help confirm or deny, thus ending the rumor mill that could have worse ramifications.
This is a joke, right? Mod funny? Because there are no end to iPod speaker accessories. None.
Actually, it has nothing to do with that. What it DOES do is set quotas for schools in terms of special education, leaving several children in need of special help without said help. It requires special programs, testing, and adherance to laws by schools without coming close to providing the funding to the schools promised in the act.
Take for instance my mom's school, where black children go without the extra help they need because "there are too many minorities in special education programs" which is an affont fo the act because regulators see that as too many minorities not being properly educated. Therefore, kids with need go without help, yet are forced ahead in grade level.
It has nothing to do with recriuting, but it does have everything to do with bad policy for education. It also has to do with nationalizing education, by they way, which has been shown to be oh so very backwards.
I think perhaps the problem is we're talking about two different things. Put media aside for a second, and focus on the XBOX argument. There are restrictions on the hardware part, and I'm relatively sure that I'm purchasing the XBOX, not licensing it. Being restricted in what I can do with said hardware is a restriction on what I own.
I don't disagree with you about copyright, it's dispicable, but there is a difference between ownership and copyright. Consider the right of first sale. Am I selling the license, or the music? I disagree I'm selling the license. Copyright says I can't illegally distribute copies of the music, but nowhere does it say that content owners may dictate the fashion in which I use said music personally once I have purchased it.
Just because the EULA that come with CDs now say something doesn't mean that they will hold up in court. The right of first sale has been upheld, as has (in the past) my fair use rights. Recording iTunes songs to a CD and then ripping that CD to MP3 is perfectly legal, and bypasses DRM. I can do it because I OWN that music.
I'm relatively sure that an iTunes purchase is a purchase, not a lease.
Chopping off the hands of petty theifs might slow robbery crimes. Shooting suspected criminals in the head without a trial may slow crime. Does this make these tactics a good thing? Lowering crime by supression of and monitoring of the masses is not now, nor ever will be, a good thing.
Hello Pot, I'm Kettle.
You own the media, but not the content contained on that media. So yes, the property owner is exercising their right to control what is done with their propertyPerhaps this is where we disagree - because that which is contained on the disk is not their property. Further, my last example didn't have much to do with CDs - the DMCA stops you from doing what you want with hardware such as the XBOX or iPod. Sure, there are "Linux on n" projects out there, but circumventing the anti-piracy technology on that hardware is illegal, as is the dissemination of the information on how to do so. Therefore, this physical item - not "content" - is legally protected from you're doing what you want to with it - yours or not.
This is not a philosophy or an opinion - this is a fact. The DMCA (in addition to other laws, I'm sure) blocks people from the right to do with what they own, unquestionably.
See Bill! That's all I was talking about :)
Again, perhaps you're new here. In fact, we're in a constant battle to protect those rights to do with our property as we please. In Senate hearings, the RIAA has expressly said that copying a CD is not your right. They have said that backing up your media is not your right.
Further, the DMCA prohibits you from reverse engineering anything you buy (XBox, etc.) that may have anti-circumvention built in to it, unquestionably blocking your "right" to do whatever you want with your own property.
Thinking that ownership is the end all and be all shows a lack of education. As fundamental as it may seem to you, the DMCA by itself denys you many rights you once had to do with your property as you please, as has DRM and other "piracy protection" mechanisms.
LMAO!
Perhaps you're new here, but I suggest you use the box at the bottom to search for the following terms:
- DRM
- RIAA
- Tiered Internet
- Copyright Infringement
- EFF
There may be more I'm forgetting, but right now I'm just laughing at your statement. Whether it SHOULD be true has nothing to do with the reality of the current situation.
Actually, what is strange is the close-mindedness of people like you on Slashdot. Nowhere in my statement did I mention that it was RIGHT, or the lawsuit may actually win. But let's look at an extreme example - I own an ISP that is blocked by Google. All of my users want access to Google, users leave, I am caused financial hardships.
Or another example. The fight over QOS requirements by the backbones and making players pay for better service - people on Slashdot violently react, but last I checked, these wires were not considered common-carrier like phone lines, and are the private property of the owners who want the QOS tiered pricing and access. What right does anyone have to dictate what a backbone provider charges??
These are just examples, but to assume that someone wouldn't file a lawsuit is naieve (sp?), and even if it is wrong or baseless, defending yourself can still be costly.
Which, depending on the size and importance of your network, sets you up for a lawsuit. Assuming a free and unfettered internet, if you block an entire ISP from your network for what amounts to zero illegal activity, I would put it out there that a lawsuit would result in a court order to unblock said ISP.
Now, it's true, this doesn't take in to account things like private vs public networks or the actual network that you handle, but punishing for non-illegal activities is questionable at best.
It's nice if, in retrospect, you don't want a word to be an acronym, but as popular as certain words get, they are and will still be acronyms, like RADAR, which is often represented as "Radar" or "radar" in terms of capitalization in print media.
The fact is that AJAX (or Ajax) is in fact a direct derivation of the first letters of the words it represents, and thusly is, like it or not, an acronym. Further, I would think it improper to allow developers to use AJAX without understanding the actual underlying meaning. Many assume AJAX is just fun with DHTML, but it's not, and the fact that it is not is right in the acronym.
I guess since Jesse actually coined the term, he can turn around and say "nah, forget the acronym and just use the word" but it's a derivitive of the first letters of a phrase, and I'm pretty sure that's the basic definition of an acronym.