I agree. This parent is not a troll. I myself have a few Web sites I support just because I want to. There are no ads.. in fact I pay extra to keep ads off my message boards. Would someone please counter-mod the above.
Advertising on the Web is not targeted at people who read Slashdot. Us folks know how to block the ads--advertisers realize this. They also realize that probably 80% of the rest of the Web-going audience don't know how, so they will continue to look at their ad-full Web as though it were broadcast television. It gets to a point where you just get used to it and tune the ads out, even the more annoying ones.
The ads that I like are the intriguing ones, like the ones for SitePal. Here's an example. It's really cool the way the "pal's" head moves. (Mouse over it; you don't have to click it.) I've seen other ads that are visually interesting or funny.. some of them I've even tried (unsuccessfully) to save for my own entertainment.
Blinky seizure-inducing ads are not the answer. If more advertisers focused on good writing and compelling visuals, their ads would not only get looked at but they'd be enjoyed instead of hated and blocked.
If I buy a Walkman, and I want to listen to a TV show on it (for whatever reason), and I devise a way to record audio content from a television onto a cassette I can play in my Walkman, there isn't the first thing wrong with doing that. I'm using the product (the Walkman) for its intended purpose: the playback of cassettes. If I want to control WHAT the cassette plays, I should be able to. It's MY cassette player.
Apple's iPod is a device designed to play digital audio files. PERIOD. If someone figures out a way to better control what audio files their iPod can play, GOOD ON THEM. I don't remember ever reading where I must only play Apple's digital audio files on my iPod. And if they actually made that part of their EULA, that's just plain ridiculous and I've no intention of paying it any mind.
Sony never said, "You can only listen to SONY cassettes and SONY-controlled music on the Walkman," and then deliberately crippled it to make their assertion true. If they had, would their product have been as successful?
Unless it is a POSTAL money order, with a full description of its intended use. If you're then defrauded and have included ths with the MO, the federal government becomes involved and the MO does have teeth.
Or so I read. Personally I try to avoid high-dollar purchases on eBay, because when you're screwed, you're pretty much screwed. The runaround eBay gives you if you have a complaint is pretty useless.
My advice is never send out more money than you can afford to lose for an eBay purchase. And for god's sake if you need a laptop (or anything) for a business-related, on-deadline use, DON'T buy it on eBay, just go buy the thing.
Sounds like he's got a legal case to me. This guy may have had his hardware trashed but he's been handed a golden opportunity to sue the FBI and turn this into a bigtime legal precedent-setting trial, challenging the FBI's use of USAPATRIOT to pursue non-criminal crimes. If he chooses to [pur]sue, I want ringside seats at that circus.
It is true that Orrin Hatch is a Republican.. but conservatives like me are getting sick of his little pet projects like this. I would certainly take a long serious look at his opponents when he comes up for re-election.. the man needs to retire already.
I'd venture to say that a CD player is a modern music device. When I was growing up, we used cassette players.. we called them "Walkmans" back then.
And as for DRM, I've been using my iPod for about 6 months now and I have never had problems with using it as an MP3 player. I very rarely have issues with Apple's DRM, which only really applies to ITMS purchases. I don't use ITMS (much) so it doesn't get in my way of enjoying my music.
In radio interviews, he praised the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, saying America should be "wiped out," and described Jews as "thieving, lying bastards." His mother was Jewish.
"The conservative movement's stance on homosexuality is that it is generally against it."
Wrong. That's the Catholic Church's stance. Conservatives for the most part don't care whether you're a homosexual or not.. they care about whether you're parading it around like it's supposed to entitle you to favors and admiration. It doesn't. Be queer all you want, just shut up about it and nobody will care. That's what I'd say most conservatives believe.
That pretty much deflates the argument. Conservatives don't care if Hoover was really a homosexual or not.. that's nobody's business. Did he ever come out and say he was queer? Never. But liberals CALL him queer because they want to besmirch the man's reputation. But if a liberal comes out and says, "Hey guys! I'm queer!" then to liberals, that's a badge of honor commanding endless respect. And whoa, if they say, "Hey guys, I'm queer AND I have AIDS!" then liberals really shovel the admiration on.
But if you're a conservative, liberals equate "queer" with "pervert." This is hypocrasy. Understand the difference?
I'm sorry, exactly when did J. Edgar attack homosexuality? Please cite me a source.
And it is liberals who are hypocrites. "J. Edgar is a homosexual" is intended to smear him. "Ellen Degeneres is a homosexual" is intended to boast about her. THAT is hypocrasy.
No, this is why. Anybody who thinks that Bush is just over there in Afghanistan and Iraq for the sake of profits for Texas oil companies is just too blind with anti-Bush hatred to see straight. And thank god those are not the people in charge of running and defending this country.
So you're saying that if Bush did know about 9/11, and did nothing to prevent it, that would be what you'd prefer because the 3000 lives lost in the World Trade Center that day "died free."
I'll repeat myself. I said I would cooperate if they come looking for me. Why? because a) I've nothing to hide, and b) they're not doing it because they just want to fuck with me for their own edification. They're doing it because something tipped them off, incorrectly or not, that I should be looked at for whatever reason. They're following up. If it inconveniences me, well, too bad for me, but as long as my legal record is not damaged--and there would be no reason for it to be--I've no real reason to be concerned.
I'm a tard? What, you don't put your carry-on luggage through the x-ray machine because you feel you're exempt from unnecessary searches? You don't fork over your driver's licence and registration when the cop pulls you over even if you think you've done nothing wrong? You're an idiot. The cop may be wrong but he is DOING HIS JOB.
The accusations against J. Edgar talking about homosexuality and cross dressing were also never substantiated and therefore have no business being attached to his name, but liberals have no problems making ridiculous accusations with no evidence. Anything to smear someone's name who they don't like.
Notice that when a conservative is labeled a homosexual (by liberals) it's to attack and smear him.. when a liberal is called a homosexual, and especially when they come out themselves with it, he is a hero.
My question to liberals: How many [al Queda] terrorist attacks have been successfully carried out on US soil since 9/11? Pardon, say that again? "None," that's right. Now, why do you suppose that is? Because maybe Bush and Ashcroft are doing something about protecting this country from it? No no, that couldn't be. They're Republican bastards, they're only interested in their own power.
It's liberals who want it both ways. They demanded "What did Bush know and when did he know it", as though if Bush DID know, he could have prevented it. Now that Bush is actively stopping these attacks--not just preventing, STOPPING them in the act--people, er, I mean liberals, are up in arms about their civil liberties being "violated". I guess they would rather be dead then be looked at in a funny way by the government.
I would rather have my civil liberties encroached on for the sake of my continued existence than be murdered by terrorist savages. Ashcroft wants to look at my reading habits, my Web surfing, my credit card reports? If it will help him stop a terrorist from lighting up my city with a dirty bomb, he can be my guest.
You mean distribute BILLIONS of dollars worth of food and aid to the rest of the world for free? Sacrifice hundreds of thousands of our own soldiers fighting mass murders like Saddam, Milosevic, Hitler, Stalin, the Taliban, etc...
Yep, those damn American bastards.. wish they'd all just go away..
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. This parent is not a troll. I myself have a few Web sites I support just because I want to. There are no ads .. in fact I pay extra to keep ads off my message boards. Would someone please counter-mod the above.
Advertising on the Web is not targeted at people who read Slashdot. Us folks know how to block the ads--advertisers realize this. They also realize that probably 80% of the rest of the Web-going audience don't know how, so they will continue to look at their ad-full Web as though it were broadcast television. It gets to a point where you just get used to it and tune the ads out, even the more annoying ones.
The ads that I like are the intriguing ones, like the ones for SitePal. Here's an example. It's really cool the way the "pal's" head moves. (Mouse over it; you don't have to click it.) I've seen other ads that are visually interesting or funny .. some of them I've even tried (unsuccessfully) to save for my own entertainment.
Blinky seizure-inducing ads are not the answer. If more advertisers focused on good writing and compelling visuals, their ads would not only get looked at but they'd be enjoyed instead of hated and blocked.
Well said brother.
This post isn't informative (I have given up trying to apply logic to moderators' actions) but I certainly agree with it.
There should be mod points for +5 Fuckin' A.
If I buy a Walkman, and I want to listen to a TV show on it (for whatever reason), and I devise a way to record audio content from a television onto a cassette I can play in my Walkman, there isn't the first thing wrong with doing that. I'm using the product (the Walkman) for its intended purpose: the playback of cassettes. If I want to control WHAT the cassette plays, I should be able to. It's MY cassette player. Apple's iPod is a device designed to play digital audio files. PERIOD. If someone figures out a way to better control what audio files their iPod can play, GOOD ON THEM. I don't remember ever reading where I must only play Apple's digital audio files on my iPod. And if they actually made that part of their EULA, that's just plain ridiculous and I've no intention of paying it any mind. Sony never said, "You can only listen to SONY cassettes and SONY-controlled music on the Walkman," and then deliberately crippled it to make their assertion true. If they had, would their product have been as successful?
Unless it is a POSTAL money order, with a full description of its intended use. If you're then defrauded and have included ths with the MO, the federal government becomes involved and the MO does have teeth.
Or so I read. Personally I try to avoid high-dollar purchases on eBay, because when you're screwed, you're pretty much screwed. The runaround eBay gives you if you have a complaint is pretty useless.
My advice is never send out more money than you can afford to lose for an eBay purchase. And for god's sake if you need a laptop (or anything) for a business-related, on-deadline use, DON'T buy it on eBay, just go buy the thing.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Slashdot survived several threatening letters from the Powers That Be?
Sounds like he's got a legal case to me. This guy may have had his hardware trashed but he's been handed a golden opportunity to sue the FBI and turn this into a bigtime legal precedent-setting trial, challenging the FBI's use of USAPATRIOT to pursue non-criminal crimes. If he chooses to [pur]sue, I want ringside seats at that circus.
"Mod me up?" Why, so you can be a more prestigious Anonymous Coward?
There's never a need to be such a prick. But on /. it seems like that's just the way you all communicate here.
It is true that Orrin Hatch is a Republican .. but conservatives like me are getting sick of his little pet projects like this. I would certainly take a long serious look at his opponents when he comes up for re-election .. the man needs to retire already.
I'd venture to say that a CD player is a modern music device. When I was growing up, we used cassette players .. we called them "Walkmans" back then.
And as for DRM, I've been using my iPod for about 6 months now and I have never had problems with using it as an MP3 player. I very rarely have issues with Apple's DRM, which only really applies to ITMS purchases. I don't use ITMS (much) so it doesn't get in my way of enjoying my music.
Yeah, THAT sure was +3 Funny in my book.
Who's tossing out mod points around here, anyway?
The Three Laws:
In radio interviews, he praised the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, saying America should be "wiped out," and described Jews as "thieving, lying bastards." His mother was Jewish.
Gosh, I feel so sorry for the poor guy.
Yeah, that'd be a good use of our money. I'd be proud to be part of the most astronomically knowledgable culture ever conquered.
"The conservative movement's stance on homosexuality is that it is generally against it."
Wrong. That's the Catholic Church's stance. Conservatives for the most part don't care whether you're a homosexual or not .. they care about whether you're parading it around like it's supposed to entitle you to favors and admiration. It doesn't. Be queer all you want, just shut up about it and nobody will care. That's what I'd say most conservatives believe.
That pretty much deflates the argument. Conservatives don't care if Hoover was really a homosexual or not .. that's nobody's business. Did he ever come out and say he was queer? Never. But liberals CALL him queer because they want to besmirch the man's reputation. But if a liberal comes out and says, "Hey guys! I'm queer!" then to liberals, that's a badge of honor commanding endless respect. And whoa, if they say, "Hey guys, I'm queer AND I have AIDS!" then liberals really shovel the admiration on.
But if you're a conservative, liberals equate "queer" with "pervert." This is hypocrasy. Understand the difference?
Oooh, you're pretty tough for an Anonymous Coward.
You're not making any sensible argument. You're just calling me a tard. Ooh, sorry, a "big tard". I'm so .. so hurt...
Make an argument or just shut up.
I'm sorry, exactly when did J. Edgar attack homosexuality? Please cite me a source.
And it is liberals who are hypocrites. "J. Edgar is a homosexual" is intended to smear him. "Ellen Degeneres is a homosexual" is intended to boast about her. THAT is hypocrasy.
No, this is why. Anybody who thinks that Bush is just over there in Afghanistan and Iraq for the sake of profits for Texas oil companies is just too blind with anti-Bush hatred to see straight. And thank god those are not the people in charge of running and defending this country.
So you're saying that if Bush did know about 9/11, and did nothing to prevent it, that would be what you'd prefer because the 3000 lives lost in the World Trade Center that day "died free."
And they call Republicans "jingoistic."
I'll repeat myself. I said I would cooperate if they come looking for me. Why? because a) I've nothing to hide, and b) they're not doing it because they just want to fuck with me for their own edification. They're doing it because something tipped them off, incorrectly or not, that I should be looked at for whatever reason. They're following up. If it inconveniences me, well, too bad for me, but as long as my legal record is not damaged--and there would be no reason for it to be--I've no real reason to be concerned.
I'm a tard? What, you don't put your carry-on luggage through the x-ray machine because you feel you're exempt from unnecessary searches? You don't fork over your driver's licence and registration when the cop pulls you over even if you think you've done nothing wrong? You're an idiot. The cop may be wrong but he is DOING HIS JOB.
The accusations against J. Edgar talking about homosexuality and cross dressing were also never substantiated and therefore have no business being attached to his name, but liberals have no problems making ridiculous accusations with no evidence. Anything to smear someone's name who they don't like.
Notice that when a conservative is labeled a homosexual (by liberals) it's to attack and smear him .. when a liberal is called a homosexual, and especially when they come out themselves with it, he is a hero.
And you know this how?
My question to liberals: How many [al Queda] terrorist attacks have been successfully carried out on US soil since 9/11? Pardon, say that again? "None," that's right. Now, why do you suppose that is? Because maybe Bush and Ashcroft are doing something about protecting this country from it? No no, that couldn't be. They're Republican bastards, they're only interested in their own power.
It's liberals who want it both ways. They demanded "What did Bush know and when did he know it", as though if Bush DID know, he could have prevented it. Now that Bush is actively stopping these attacks--not just preventing, STOPPING them in the act--people, er, I mean liberals, are up in arms about their civil liberties being "violated". I guess they would rather be dead then be looked at in a funny way by the government.
I would rather have my civil liberties encroached on for the sake of my continued existence than be murdered by terrorist savages. Ashcroft wants to look at my reading habits, my Web surfing, my credit card reports? If it will help him stop a terrorist from lighting up my city with a dirty bomb, he can be my guest.
You mean distribute BILLIONS of dollars worth of food and aid to the rest of the world for free? Sacrifice hundreds of thousands of our own soldiers fighting mass murders like Saddam, Milosevic, Hitler, Stalin, the Taliban, etc. ..
Yep, those damn American bastards .. wish they'd all just go away ..