His lawyer is fighting his extradition to the United States arguing, 'The US Government wants to extract some kind of species of administrative revenge because he exposed their security systems as weak and helpless as they were.
A transparently lame and misleading headline. Read the story. The story says the "republican controlled committee" defeated the proposed amendment. According to the story:
"By an 8-to-23 margin, the committee members rejected a Democratic-backed "Net neutrality" amendment to a current piece of telecommunications legislation.
The story does not mention which "subcommittee" of the House Energy and Commerce committee took the action, but the story does say several democrats voted against the measure:
The vote on the amendment itself did not occur strictly along party lines, with one Republican voting in favor and four Democrats voting against it.
Interestingly, the final measure, sans the amendment, was passed by an overwhelming 24-7 vote.
Now that Apple is a company that sells much more than computers, attempts to equate their computer market share with Apple's "lovability" are ridiculous.
I thought Apple actually acknowledged that a difficient material was utilized with some of the iPod Nano that were first released, and offered to replace them?
I read the Kos post, and your "talking point" accusation is misplaced. The talking point is from Kos himself. I quote him and summarized at the end of my post.
"He knew they probabaly weren't going to win?" Well, if you "don't win" enough times, it becomes a pattern that is easier to predict.
I'm on the Right side of the political fence, but I might consider buying the book if Kos et al actually contributed to any kind of political win. Alas, they have not, as most recently demonstrated here:
The bottom line: we helped a campaign that was the walking dead and gave it new life, pumped in resources, and made it competitive. We did much to even the playing field even if ultimately we came up tantalizingly short.
This is becoming the constant refrain of Kos: We came so close.
The cost of differentiating a product in this fashion are huge, both on the development side, and especially on the support side. I wonder if this isn't a bit of a mistake. I remember the situation Apple faced several years ago: A substantial number of product lines created huge costs. One of the first things that Jobs did was to slash the number of hardware products, thereby cutting out big chunks of fixed and support costs.
MS, however, does have some pretty good marketing folks, and software isn't hardware, so maybe they get economies of scale here in a way I can't think of at the moment (particularly as I'm sipping a martini at my desk).
Moreover, if you're a international terrorist undercover and operating in the United States (like, for example, Mohammed Atta), what prevents you from obtaining a land line or mobile phone number for use in planning a conspiracy? Nothing does.
Posession of United States-based phone number does not by itself establish that the person paying for the line is a citzen of the United States.
I think the NSA program is absolutely legal given the parameters we now know about, and I think it might also be entirely legal even if both parties were talking inside the United States.
Is it the copyright law as it now stands, or is it that the work of the Beatles specifically is in question? Does their work somehow present a "problem" because it is considered by the poster to be more important than someone else's work?
"Remember the long-running e-mail hoax that had Bill Gates testing an "e-mail tracing program" and offering to pay recipients big bucks if they passed his test e-mail along to all their friends? Well, the offer is true, sort of."
Which I read as "sort of false." What a lame attempt to compare a web promotion with a hoax. Please.
You have asked an interesting question. I was in my 30s before I realized that "falling in love" and being "in love" are two different things. Someone above wrote that love can be a willful act. I would start with reflecting on what you think love really is before concluding that it "just happens."
Wonderful post. I love the idea that "love is an act of the will." We mostly think that love is ultimately fulfilled only by the acts we undertake between the sheets. That love can be a deliberate act of the will is shocking to most of us "post moderns."
Back in my MBA days, I seem to recall that one of the ways you determine a fair stock price is by discounting the value of projected future growth. The market reaction to a miss on projected earnings is a big deal because the analysts use these projection to derive a fair market value in today's dollars.
When a company, particularly a fast-growing one like Google, misses a projected earnings target, the analysts make adjustments to their growth models and then discoverer that their discounted market value computation is lower than originally projected. Sell order invariably follow, because holders of the stock would logically want to take their gains when they realize the stock has reached or has exceeded the projected price based on previous growth assumptions.
Slashdot Mirror
...for this "progressive" voice to come around to nuclear power. Heck, if it's good enough for socialist France, why not here in the US?
No.
Now that Apple is a company that sells much more than computers, attempts to equate their computer market share with Apple's "lovability" are ridiculous.
I thought Apple actually acknowledged that a difficient material was utilized with some of the iPod Nano that were first released, and offered to replace them?
This certainly must be the bottom story of the day, just like "Fireplace Was Source of Blaze"--headline, Mobile (Ala.) Register, March 6.
I read the Kos post, and your "talking point" accusation is misplaced. The talking point is from Kos himself. I quote him and summarized at the end of my post.
"He knew they probabaly weren't going to win?" Well, if you "don't win" enough times, it becomes a pattern that is easier to predict.
Screw that. I want 25 blades on my razor, baby! I always want another blade, even "if it's mounted on the handle perpenticular to the others."
No.
The cost of differentiating a product in this fashion are huge, both on the development side, and especially on the support side. I wonder if this isn't a bit of a mistake. I remember the situation Apple faced several years ago: A substantial number of product lines created huge costs. One of the first things that Jobs did was to slash the number of hardware products, thereby cutting out big chunks of fixed and support costs.
MS, however, does have some pretty good marketing folks, and software isn't hardware, so maybe they get economies of scale here in a way I can't think of at the moment (particularly as I'm sipping a martini at my desk).
Moreover, if you're a international terrorist undercover and operating in the United States (like, for example, Mohammed Atta), what prevents you from obtaining a land line or mobile phone number for use in planning a conspiracy? Nothing does.
Posession of United States-based phone number does not by itself establish that the person paying for the line is a citzen of the United States.
I think the NSA program is absolutely legal given the parameters we now know about, and I think it might also be entirely legal even if both parties were talking inside the United States.
Is it the copyright law as it now stands, or is it that the work of the Beatles specifically is in question? Does their work somehow present a "problem" because it is considered by the poster to be more important than someone else's work?
...so what?
"Remember the long-running e-mail hoax that had Bill Gates testing an "e-mail tracing program" and offering to pay recipients big bucks if they passed his test e-mail along to all their friends? Well, the offer is true, sort of."
Which I read as "sort of false." What a lame attempt to compare a web promotion with a hoax. Please.
You have asked an interesting question. I was in my 30s before I realized that "falling in love" and being "in love" are two different things. Someone above wrote that love can be a willful act. I would start with reflecting on what you think love really is before concluding that it "just happens."
Peace and blessings to you.
Wonderful post. I love the idea that "love is an act of the will." We mostly think that love is ultimately fulfilled only by the acts we undertake between the sheets. That love can be a deliberate act of the will is shocking to most of us "post moderns."
Perhaps the most important and though-provolking poem I have ever read. :-)
I had Parsec and a speech synthesizer that I borrow from a friend and, alas, never returned. That game rocked.
The good ol' TI 99/4a to be precise. It has cartridge basis. Those were the days.
Again, how original. Ha ha. Zzzzz.
How original. Zzzzz.
No.
Back in my MBA days, I seem to recall that one of the ways you determine a fair stock price is by discounting the value of projected future growth. The market reaction to a miss on projected earnings is a big deal because the analysts use these projection to derive a fair market value in today's dollars.
When a company, particularly a fast-growing one like Google, misses a projected earnings target, the analysts make adjustments to their growth models and then discoverer that their discounted market value computation is lower than originally projected. Sell order invariably follow, because holders of the stock would logically want to take their gains when they realize the stock has reached or has exceeded the projected price based on previous growth assumptions.
...the bottom news story of the day. C'mon, Slashdot.