You're only a geek if you are geeky (e.g. exhibiting those characteristics of geeks, and/or nerds) and don't have sex. If you're a geeky girl and don't have sex, that's easily rectified.. what's your phone number?
> Just when you think the RIAA can't possibly piss you off any more...
Should have been the headline to this story. These people are out of control. I guess it's a good thing, because they're making it known each time they do stuff like this that they are nothing but money-grubbing bottom-feeders who have no interest in advancing their industry or even the well-being of their artists or their artists' work. They just want ALL the money, ALL the control, ALL the power, screw the artists, screw innovation and especially screw the public.
MOST - INSIGHTFUL - POST on this topic I have seen to date. I shall be reprinting it in its entirety, with due credit, on my blog, because I could not have written it better myself.
Unless, of course, that would be an infringement on your rights.;)
Exactly why the hell is the flamebait? It's a damn appropriate criticism. Look, I think the device is sexy as hell too, but I have to be practical when I'm shelling out hundreds of dollars for something that I expect to be functional. Four GB for $249? My ego can't afford that and my self-esteem is not based on how many trendy (would "hip" be too gross a pun?) Apple gadgets I carry around. My 3G 40GB iPod still serves me just fine and I could only see replacing it with one of greater capacity, not less.
Is Apple gonna make money hand over fist at this price point? You bet your ass they will. That doesn't make the price point reasonable. The fact that people shelled out hundreds of dollars for the iPod mini is proof only of the power of the spending potential of teenage girls, not the cumulative wisdom of the marketplace.
I don't think you understand. It was tax season and I had to have *immediate* access to my business' data so my accountant could begin working on my taxes. I understand what you're saying but with an IRS deadline looming, I didn't have time to fight this.
Here's an example, not MS-based, but a true story and one that illustrates (I think) the GP's point.
One closed format is the QuickBooks one. Last year, as I went to start preparing my taxes, I opened up my business' QuickBooks file so I could generate reports for my accountant. Now, so there's no misunderstanding, I *puchased* this software about two years previous and was using it on my Mac G4 computer all that time. When I upgraded my OS several months prior, I backed up everything to another drive, performed the OS upgrade, and copied everything back. So when I went to open QuickBooks it acted like it had just been installed and asked for my serial number. No problem, I found it and entered it.
Then QuickBooks goes to match that against some nebulous database elsewhere on the net, and returns an error message: this serial number cannot be authenticated. Oh really? It was just fine when I entered it the first time. I tried again and again, always to get the same response. So I called Intuit to get a working serial number.. know what they told me? They don't support my version of QuickBooks anymore. If I wanted a new serial number that worked, I would have to buy the new version. The upgrade would cost me $200+shipping.
That's extortion. Maybe unintentional extortion, but extortion. If I wanted access to MY data using MY software on MY computer, I was going to have to pay them AGAIN. This was not an arragement I agreed to when I bought the software. Having no choice, I did, but it taught me an important lesson about software "ownership" and the rights and expectations of those who do business with companies like Intuit, like Microsoft, and others who, in the name of "security" and "copy-protection" are stripping away basic rights of legitimate users to use their legally purchased software and hardware.
If I had had an alternative to accessing my QuickBooks software file, especially an open source one, you bet your ass I would have used it.
So you're basically saying this object would be used like the balloon on the Russian spacecraft Leonov during its low pass over Jupiter in the movie 2010, as a buffer to take the force of the reentry punishment, insulating the ship.
So you're saying you'd carry this deadweight "anchor" into orbit with you? That makes your craft a lot harder to push on the way up. You'd thus need more fuel, bigger tanks, stronger engines, etc.. I guess an alternative would be to just launch a bunch of those things and "park" them in orbit, so that when you're ready for reentry you grab one and attach it to your ship before you take the plunge.
I had to laugh out loud at that analogy. Can you imagine people going to jail for the acts of their virtual avatars in games? My god, you could put me away for life just for playing Vampire: Bloodlines. And that's not even including all the people playing Grand Theft Auto (even the TITLE of the game is a felony!)
If you ask me, the mistake is not in allowing people to be mugged in-game, it is when the game developer allows virtual items to be bought and sold for REAL MONEY.. that's when you give hackers incentive to wreak havoc and when the game quickly becomes less about fun and more about money.
You do realize that convenience is always part of the the cost equation. Why do you think milk (and, well, everything) costs more at a convenience store than it does at the grocery store?
Honesty has nothing to do with it. You're either willing to pay more for the convenience, or you'd rather put yourself through the inconvenience (and expense) of going and getting it somewhere cheaper.
Slashdot Mirror
Find me one person who an "ethical psychologist" would not see as someone who could benefit from psychological evaluation and treatment.
That person is abnormal.
Everyone else is normal.
She's just teasing, guys. She's married.
> why people wait at all costs and discomfort to get home and take a dump
And here I thought I was weird for doing that.
> Yeah, but gravity is only a theory. It isn't a fact
> Just like gravity is a fact but the Theory of Gravity is not.
> Pissing off the religious right at every opportunity and proud of it
You mean pissing off people who realize they've wasted their time trying to make sense of your posts.
You're only a geek if you are geeky (e.g. exhibiting those characteristics of geeks, and/or nerds) and don't have sex. If you're a geeky girl and don't have sex, that's easily rectified .. what's your phone number?
No, you're a girl .. girls are exempt from the "geek" pejorative.
A better indicator would be, did you start having more sex as a result of getting married? If so, then who cares?
> Just when you think the RIAA can't possibly piss you off any more...
Should have been the headline to this story. These people are out of control. I guess it's a good thing, because they're making it known each time they do stuff like this that they are nothing but money-grubbing bottom-feeders who have no interest in advancing their industry or even the well-being of their artists or their artists' work. They just want ALL the money, ALL the control, ALL the power, screw the artists, screw innovation and especially screw the public.
MOST - INSIGHTFUL - POST on this topic I have seen to date. I shall be reprinting it in its entirety, with due credit, on my blog, because I could not have written it better myself.
Unless, of course, that would be an infringement on your rights. ;)
Wow. I am ashamed! That may have been the first time I have publicly confused Apple with Microsoft.
"Bought off the Bush DoJ?" You're insane .. Jobs is a huge Democrat. He is a personal friend of Bill Clinton and was an advisor to the Kerry campaign. I seriously doubt he has any grease in the Bush administration whatsoever.
LOL .. wish I had mod points today. Ah well. I offer a hearty "NO SHIT!" in agreement, for whatever that's worth.
Exactly why the hell is the flamebait? It's a damn appropriate criticism. Look, I think the device is sexy as hell too, but I have to be practical when I'm shelling out hundreds of dollars for something that I expect to be functional. Four GB for $249? My ego can't afford that and my self-esteem is not based on how many trendy (would "hip" be too gross a pun?) Apple gadgets I carry around. My 3G 40GB iPod still serves me just fine and I could only see replacing it with one of greater capacity, not less.
Is Apple gonna make money hand over fist at this price point? You bet your ass they will. That doesn't make the price point reasonable. The fact that people shelled out hundreds of dollars for the iPod mini is proof only of the power of the spending potential of teenage girls, not the cumulative wisdom of the marketplace.
I don't think you understand. It was tax season and I had to have *immediate* access to my business' data so my accountant could begin working on my taxes. I understand what you're saying but with an IRS deadline looming, I didn't have time to fight this.
Here's an example, not MS-based, but a true story and one that illustrates (I think) the GP's point.
One closed format is the QuickBooks one. Last year, as I went to start preparing my taxes, I opened up my business' QuickBooks file so I could generate reports for my accountant. Now, so there's no misunderstanding, I *puchased* this software about two years previous and was using it on my Mac G4 computer all that time. When I upgraded my OS several months prior, I backed up everything to another drive, performed the OS upgrade, and copied everything back. So when I went to open QuickBooks it acted like it had just been installed and asked for my serial number. No problem, I found it and entered it.
Then QuickBooks goes to match that against some nebulous database elsewhere on the net, and returns an error message: this serial number cannot be authenticated. Oh really? It was just fine when I entered it the first time. I tried again and again, always to get the same response. So I called Intuit to get a working serial number .. know what they told me? They don't support my version of QuickBooks anymore. If I wanted a new serial number that worked, I would have to buy the new version. The upgrade would cost me $200+shipping.
That's extortion. Maybe unintentional extortion, but extortion. If I wanted access to MY data using MY software on MY computer, I was going to have to pay them AGAIN. This was not an arragement I agreed to when I bought the software. Having no choice, I did, but it taught me an important lesson about software "ownership" and the rights and expectations of those who do business with companies like Intuit, like Microsoft, and others who, in the name of "security" and "copy-protection" are stripping away basic rights of legitimate users to use their legally purchased software and hardware.
If I had had an alternative to accessing my QuickBooks software file, especially an open source one, you bet your ass I would have used it.
This post is "informative"? I guess I thought everybody knew that. Sad.
You haven't seen 2010? What kind of Slashdot geek are you?
Love your sig btw.
So you're basically saying this object would be used like the balloon on the Russian spacecraft Leonov during its low pass over Jupiter in the movie 2010, as a buffer to take the force of the reentry punishment, insulating the ship.
So you're saying you'd carry this deadweight "anchor" into orbit with you? That makes your craft a lot harder to push on the way up. You'd thus need more fuel, bigger tanks, stronger engines, etc.. I guess an alternative would be to just launch a bunch of those things and "park" them in orbit, so that when you're ready for reentry you grab one and attach it to your ship before you take the plunge.
Dude. +1 for slipping in a Max Headroom reference there.
How difficult would it be to hack the playback?
I'm not sure I'd want large naked breasts swinging over my grave site for years and ... er .. hmm. Now that I think about it, maybe I would want that.
I had to laugh out loud at that analogy. Can you imagine people going to jail for the acts of their virtual avatars in games? My god, you could put me away for life just for playing Vampire: Bloodlines. And that's not even including all the people playing Grand Theft Auto (even the TITLE of the game is a felony!)
If you ask me, the mistake is not in allowing people to be mugged in-game, it is when the game developer allows virtual items to be bought and sold for REAL MONEY .. that's when you give hackers incentive to wreak havoc and when the game quickly becomes less about fun and more about money.
When you click "I agree" it's effectively the same thing.
You do realize that convenience is always part of the the cost equation. Why do you think milk (and, well, everything) costs more at a convenience store than it does at the grocery store?
Honesty has nothing to do with it. You're either willing to pay more for the convenience, or you'd rather put yourself through the inconvenience (and expense) of going and getting it somewhere cheaper.
Oh quit needling him about his spelling. No need for such knit-picking.
> Want your music to be free (speech)? Great! Then don't sign a contract with a major label! It's that simple!
Want your computer to be free? Great! Then don't use any software whatsoever that comes with a EULA! It's that simple.
And good luck with that .. your "free" computer makes a good doorstop/conversation piece.