The term "Organic" is regulated and must meet a certain criteria. So you can't just go sticking that on a label of a food product like you can the term "green"
Here is an exercise for you. Research Monsanto Roundup-Ready corn, and soy, Also look for Monsanto leaked documents and research that. Then research that lawsuits of Monsanto suing endless farmers for "patent infringement" because their GM crops cross-pollinate the defendant's non-GMO crops. I'ts not about GM products. It's about the company that dominates that industry and their practices and methods, the research they did and hid. And since their products dominate, and since there is no data showing the long-term consumption of GMO products are safe I would rather have the products labelled so I am aware of what I am purchasing. That's all.
The difference for me is that while I will gladly eat GM food I don't take the word of the GM food producers as gospel. If you had a clue how this industry operates you would know what goes on behind the scenes. Ever heard of a gene gun? Anyway, There is no long-term evidence that shows that GM crops are inherently safe and there is evidence that some of the methods used are not safe. So until I am sure that long term ingestion of GM products are safe I would like to know what food product is GM so I can avoid it until the long-term data is out. The cigarette companies told people for decades that their products were safe until the long-term data suggested otherwise. By this time they have made hundreds of billions of dollars. When the data came out that their products were not safe all they had to do was pay the fine and label their products. By this time many millions of people around the world died using their products with the confidence that their products were safe. The leaked documents from companies like Monsanto that are refusing to label their products are not very convincing either. Also note that Monsanto totally dominates this industry. And Monsanto round-up ready crops contaminate farms growing non-GM crops then Monsanto comes with an army of lawyers to sue sue sue the farmer whose crop just got contaminated for patent infringement. That is the industry practice and one I would like to avoid if possible until at least the long-term data is out.
It's not about Science its about the actions of corrupt companies that are pushing GM food. You have to look at the SOURCE of the science. You don't take the word of Monsanto scientists as truth about the safety of GM crops just like you don't take the word of oil company scientists as gospel.
BT *may* be safe however lots of stuff occurs naturally in the soil that is not safe. Anthrax comes to mind. I am not against Genetic engineering. I do however have a problem when companies like Monsanto hides internal research that shows negative results of GM crops. I think we need proper oversight in this area. I am also not for companies like Monsanto patenting strains of GM crops then suing people when their GM crops cross pollinate other crops. Also I recommend you watch the documentary The World According To Monsanto. I don't think these people should be the custodians of GM crops. When you go out of your way to hide what you are doing from consumers and lobbying so people don't know when a product they are purchasing is GM or not then you are corrupt and your products are more than likely unsafe and should be heavily scrutinized. You cannot trust Monsanto that their products are safe after the actions they have demonstrated in the marketplace.
Yeah I am going to have to throw them another $50 too. Every time I see EFF in the news I try to throw a few their way. Hope they keep it up and I'll keep sending some their way every time.
I like both Gnome3 and Unity. Sure they are both experiencing teething problems at the moment very similar to KDE4.0 but they will get better. Honestly I and tired of the old Windows95 interface and when I was using Gnome2 I did away with the bottom taskbar/panel in favor of AWN anyways. When I see so many people clinging to the 17year old Windows95 interface of Gnome2
Microsoft had been lobbying governments to investigate Google for over a year now. They have been accusing google of being anticompetitive. They even marshaled some of their partners to complain to to governments bout google. Microsoft is behind all of this.
no need to resort to lies to attack Sony. And merely stating the obvious is not an attack. Sony is the company the maliciously put rootkits on people's computers and had the arrogance to say that people don't even know what a rootkit is so why should they worry. That is Sony. That is what they do. They have behaved in some of the most fundamentally egregious ways one can imagine in the marketplace. These are the same scum that are pushing for SOPA and PROTECT-IP and other draconian laws. They are the same people who lobbied for the enactment of the oppressive DMCA laws. They are the company who want taxpayers to spend spend spend in order to protect their profits when they should be the ones footing the bill. Sony is the company that tries to monopolize the marketplace with proprietary technologies. Sony is the company that set precedent in demanding that anyone who visits a YouTube page can be at risk of infringement. And you come here claiming that people are attacking Sony with lies? Seriously what planet do you think you are on? Sony is an entity that embodies sleazyness, corruption, and gutter ethics in one neat package. Just look at how sleazy and corrupt they are. They are paying you to come on here and other sites to spread misinformation to the public.
Lots of people on here are claiming prior art. The new patent law allow for public submissions of prior art. Please submit all prior art using the instructions linked in this post.
The instructions are here. The patent in question is here
I am not. I remember when the Taliban hacked into the Predator drones over Afghanistan and were receiving the video down-link due to the lack of encryption:(
It's not flamebait. It's based on a study by Flurry Analytics showing that Android developer share has declined by more than one-third in the last year. Apparently, refuting the Eric Schmidt with hard numbers is now "flamebait" because happens to be negative news about Android.
From the article you linked:-
"However, the largest single factor that appears to impact developer support for the platform is the consumer’s ability to pay. This comes down to Google Checkout penetration. Upon setting up an iOS device, a consumer must associate either a credit or gift card to her iTunes account. In theory, this means that 100% of all iOS device users are payment enabled. This has not been the case for Android, resulting in lower revenue generation possibilities on the platform. With the recent integration of Google Wallet and Google Checkout, as well as their current $0.10 Android app sale to spur new account sign-ups, Google appears to be taking steps to correct this
The point here is that the main issue at least in the case of flurry is the ability for customers to pay on the Android platform. Hence the reason why Eric Schmidt said the problem should be rectified in about 6 months. I don't see this a refuting what he said. IF the problem is customers ability to pay as the article you linked says then obviously Schmidt is aware of the issue and plan to fix it in 6 months. Nothing refuted. We'll see if they fix it.
** Troll alert ** When i see the phrase "Android was first conceived as a Blackberry competitor" I can almost guarantee that Bonch is the poster. The fact that all reasoning leads back to "Because Google is copying Apple blah blah" almost all the time dismisses your arguments to many reason minded individuals here.
The fact is Android was designed to run on multiple platforms. Some with visible keyboards, some with slide-out keyboards, and some with no keyboards. It was not designed for just one set of hardware. It needed to work on cheap phones without GPU acceleration to increase market penetration and to provide a solution to the low-end of the market as well as the high end.
As a former Sony junkie I used to buy nothing but Sony products now I avoid Sony products like the plague. Will not even consider any of their products after seeing their behavior over the years. I went from recommending and buying Sony only to the complete opposite. Now I am happy to recommend against their products to everyone I come in contact with every chance I get.
The side of the argument that I am on is common sense and no double standards. Saying something should not exist is not tantamount to "I am going destroy it" No matter how you try to spin it. Claiming that you know the intentions of the Iranian Government without providing solid proof does not make it so. I remember the often repeated mantra that "Iraq has stockpiles of WMD and we KNOW where they are." And "Iraq is a imminent threat" I am sure those intentions were very clear to you also. Even though it was clear to everyone who was engaged at the time that that was a load of crap.
Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'.
on
Was Russia Behind Stuxnet?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Your rant is pure demagoguery.
What you seem to disregard is that Iran is now ruled exclusively by a religious leader, and that his dog Ahmadinejad doesn't just not get along with Israel, but calls out for the destruction of Israel pretty much any time there's an open microphone nearby. He does so even though Israel has never done anything bad to Iran and the two countries even had strong military relations prior to 1979.
You also forget that Iran spends millions of oil dollars every year funding terrorist organizations whose sole purpose is to harm and kill American and Israeli civilians.
What your last paragraph is basically saying is that it's OK for Iran to destroy Israel (even if we assume that they could), because Christianity is false. Even if Christianity is false, nobody has the right to destroy another country the way Iran wants to destroy Israel.
First of all there is a BIG difference between stating that "Israel should not exist" and "We are going to destroy Israel." You swallowing the Israeli propaganda talking points hook line as sinker and regurgitating them is not going to convince any reason minded individual here. And how many times has the US and Israel threatned to attack them? Double standards much? Secondly. What's the difference between terrorizing other countries with stuxnet, infiltration and bombing or killing scientists, by a country or supporting a third party (insert terrorist org here) to do you bidding. If I send a CIA agent to infiltrate and blow up an arms depot or if I pay someone else to do it for me? What's the difference? What about the iran contra? Wasn't that a terrorist organization? Did we not support that organization? Why such hypocrisy? Its OK for us to support terrorist organization but no one else should right? And then there is this
And use inferior technology that is a patent minefield? At least with H.264 I can be certain that my business isn't going to be taken to court one day and I lose it all. With H.264 I don't need to worry about such, and I get better technology (and hardware decoders on almost every kind of device on planet that can show video).
You are being sarcastic right? You do know that when you purchase equipment such as cameras and software that include a H.264 license it's for non-commercial uses only right?. Let say you purchase a shiny new Mac and you purchase Final Cut Pro. Note the "pro" in the name. And you decide to produce professional video and re-distribute it. You must get a license from MPEG-LA to do that. Read the fine print in the Final Cut Pro license.
Additional use licenses and fees are required for use of information encoded in compliance with the MPEG-4 Visual Standard other than the personal and non-commercial use of a consumer (i) in connection with information which has been encoded in compliance with the MPEG-4 Visual Standard by a consumer engaged in a personal and non-commercial activity, and/or (ii) in connection with MPEG-4 encoded video under license from a video provider. Additional information including that relating to promotional,internal and commercial uses and licensing may be obtained from MPEG LA, LLC. See http://www.mpegla.com./
You mentioned "At least with H.264 I can be certain that my business isn't going to be taken to court one day and I lose it all." So I am assuming you are using MPEG-4 for commercial uses and you have contacted MPEG LA for MPEG-4 licenses for each MPEG-4 work that you use commercially correct?
Slashdot Mirror
The term "Organic" is regulated and must meet a certain criteria. So you can't just go sticking that on a label of a food product like you can the term "green" Here is an exercise for you. Research Monsanto Roundup-Ready corn, and soy, Also look for Monsanto leaked documents and research that. Then research that lawsuits of Monsanto suing endless farmers for "patent infringement" because their GM crops cross-pollinate the defendant's non-GMO crops. I'ts not about GM products. It's about the company that dominates that industry and their practices and methods, the research they did and hid. And since their products dominate, and since there is no data showing the long-term consumption of GMO products are safe I would rather have the products labelled so I am aware of what I am purchasing. That's all.
The difference for me is that while I will gladly eat GM food I don't take the word of the GM food producers as gospel. If you had a clue how this industry operates you would know what goes on behind the scenes. Ever heard of a gene gun? Anyway, There is no long-term evidence that shows that GM crops are inherently safe and there is evidence that some of the methods used are not safe. So until I am sure that long term ingestion of GM products are safe I would like to know what food product is GM so I can avoid it until the long-term data is out. The cigarette companies told people for decades that their products were safe until the long-term data suggested otherwise. By this time they have made hundreds of billions of dollars. When the data came out that their products were not safe all they had to do was pay the fine and label their products. By this time many millions of people around the world died using their products with the confidence that their products were safe. The leaked documents from companies like Monsanto that are refusing to label their products are not very convincing either. Also note that Monsanto totally dominates this industry. And Monsanto round-up ready crops contaminate farms growing non-GM crops then Monsanto comes with an army of lawyers to sue sue sue the farmer whose crop just got contaminated for patent infringement. That is the industry practice and one I would like to avoid if possible until at least the long-term data is out.
It's not about Science its about the actions of corrupt companies that are pushing GM food. You have to look at the SOURCE of the science. You don't take the word of Monsanto scientists as truth about the safety of GM crops just like you don't take the word of oil company scientists as gospel.
BT *may* be safe however lots of stuff occurs naturally in the soil that is not safe. Anthrax comes to mind. I am not against Genetic engineering. I do however have a problem when companies like Monsanto hides internal research that shows negative results of GM crops. I think we need proper oversight in this area. I am also not for companies like Monsanto patenting strains of GM crops then suing people when their GM crops cross pollinate other crops. Also I recommend you watch the documentary The World According To Monsanto. I don't think these people should be the custodians of GM crops. When you go out of your way to hide what you are doing from consumers and lobbying so people don't know when a product they are purchasing is GM or not then you are corrupt and your products are more than likely unsafe and should be heavily scrutinized. You cannot trust Monsanto that their products are safe after the actions they have demonstrated in the marketplace.
Yeah I am going to have to throw them another $50 too. Every time I see EFF in the news I try to throw a few their way. Hope they keep it up and I'll keep sending some their way every time.
I like Namecheap. Their they actually have good service
Namecheap for domains Bluehost for hosting. Never ever ever mix your registrar and hosting service.
Namecheap much better service and better price.
I would take that performance at 5040x1050 res What performance are you getting at that resolution?
I like both Gnome3 and Unity. Sure they are both experiencing teething problems at the moment very similar to KDE4.0 but they will get better. Honestly I and tired of the old Windows95 interface and when I was using Gnome2 I did away with the bottom taskbar/panel in favor of AWN anyways. When I see so many people clinging to the 17year old Windows95 interface of Gnome2
Microsoft had been lobbying governments to investigate Google for over a year now. They have been accusing google of being anticompetitive. They even marshaled some of their partners to complain to to governments bout google. Microsoft is behind all of this.
no need to resort to lies to attack Sony. And merely stating the obvious is not an attack. Sony is the company the maliciously put rootkits on people's computers and had the arrogance to say that people don't even know what a rootkit is so why should they worry. That is Sony. That is what they do. They have behaved in some of the most fundamentally egregious ways one can imagine in the marketplace. These are the same scum that are pushing for SOPA and PROTECT-IP and other draconian laws. They are the same people who lobbied for the enactment of the oppressive DMCA laws. They are the company who want taxpayers to spend spend spend in order to protect their profits when they should be the ones footing the bill. Sony is the company that tries to monopolize the marketplace with proprietary technologies. Sony is the company that set precedent in demanding that anyone who visits a YouTube page can be at risk of infringement. And you come here claiming that people are attacking Sony with lies? Seriously what planet do you think you are on? Sony is an entity that embodies sleazyness, corruption, and gutter ethics in one neat package. Just look at how sleazy and corrupt they are. They are paying you to come on here and other sites to spread misinformation to the public.
I read the patent. No method is elaborated.
Lots of people on here are claiming prior art. The new patent law allow for public submissions of prior art. Please submit all prior art using the instructions linked in this post. The instructions are here. The patent in question is here
I am not. I remember when the Taliban hacked into the Predator drones over Afghanistan and were receiving the video down-link due to the lack of encryption :(
It's not flamebait. It's based on a study by Flurry Analytics showing that Android developer share has declined by more than one-third in the last year. Apparently, refuting the Eric Schmidt with hard numbers is now "flamebait" because happens to be negative news about Android.
From the article you linked:-
"However, the largest single factor that appears to impact developer support for the platform is the consumer’s ability to pay. This comes down to Google Checkout penetration. Upon setting up an iOS device, a consumer must associate either a credit or gift card to her iTunes account. In theory, this means that 100% of all iOS device users are payment enabled. This has not been the case for Android, resulting in lower revenue generation possibilities on the platform. With the recent integration of Google Wallet and Google Checkout, as well as their current $0.10 Android app sale to spur new account sign-ups, Google appears to be taking steps to correct this
The point here is that the main issue at least in the case of flurry is the ability for customers to pay on the Android platform. Hence the reason why Eric Schmidt said the problem should be rectified in about 6 months. I don't see this a refuting what he said. IF the problem is customers ability to pay as the article you linked says then obviously Schmidt is aware of the issue and plan to fix it in 6 months. Nothing refuted. We'll see if they fix it.
** Troll alert ** When i see the phrase "Android was first conceived as a Blackberry competitor" I can almost guarantee that Bonch is the poster. The fact that all reasoning leads back to "Because Google is copying Apple blah blah" almost all the time dismisses your arguments to many reason minded individuals here.
The fact is Android was designed to run on multiple platforms. Some with visible keyboards, some with slide-out keyboards, and some with no keyboards. It was not designed for just one set of hardware. It needed to work on cheap phones without GPU acceleration to increase market penetration and to provide a solution to the low-end of the market as well as the high end.
Install Cyanogen Mod.
Fuck Paul Allen.
Screw him and his 'all you code are belong to us' brigade
As a former Sony junkie I used to buy nothing but Sony products now I avoid Sony products like the plague. Will not even consider any of their products after seeing their behavior over the years. I went from recommending and buying Sony only to the complete opposite. Now I am happy to recommend against their products to everyone I come in contact with every chance I get.
The side of the argument that I am on is common sense and no double standards. Saying something should not exist is not tantamount to "I am going destroy it" No matter how you try to spin it. Claiming that you know the intentions of the Iranian Government without providing solid proof does not make it so. I remember the often repeated mantra that "Iraq has stockpiles of WMD and we KNOW where they are." And "Iraq is a imminent threat" I am sure those intentions were very clear to you also. Even though it was clear to everyone who was engaged at the time that that was a load of crap.
Your rant is pure demagoguery.
What you seem to disregard is that Iran is now ruled exclusively by a religious leader, and that his dog Ahmadinejad doesn't just not get along with Israel, but calls out for the destruction of Israel pretty much any time there's an open microphone nearby. He does so even though Israel has never done anything bad to Iran and the two countries even had strong military relations prior to 1979.
You also forget that Iran spends millions of oil dollars every year funding terrorist organizations whose sole purpose is to harm and kill American and Israeli civilians.
What your last paragraph is basically saying is that it's OK for Iran to destroy Israel (even if we assume that they could), because Christianity is false. Even if Christianity is false, nobody has the right to destroy another country the way Iran wants to destroy Israel.
First of all there is a BIG difference between stating that "Israel should not exist" and "We are going to destroy Israel." You swallowing the Israeli propaganda talking points hook line as sinker and regurgitating them is not going to convince any reason minded individual here. And how many times has the US and Israel threatned to attack them? Double standards much? Secondly. What's the difference between terrorizing other countries with stuxnet, infiltration and bombing or killing scientists, by a country or supporting a third party (insert terrorist org here) to do you bidding. If I send a CIA agent to infiltrate and blow up an arms depot or if I pay someone else to do it for me? What's the difference? What about the iran contra? Wasn't that a terrorist organization? Did we not support that organization? Why such hypocrisy? Its OK for us to support terrorist organization but no one else should right? And then there is this
And use inferior technology that is a patent minefield? At least with H.264 I can be certain that my business isn't going to be taken to court one day and I lose it all. With H.264 I don't need to worry about such, and I get better technology (and hardware decoders on almost every kind of device on planet that can show video).
You are being sarcastic right? You do know that when you purchase equipment such as cameras and software that include a H.264 license it's for non-commercial uses only right?. Let say you purchase a shiny new Mac and you purchase Final Cut Pro. Note the "pro" in the name. And you decide to produce professional video and re-distribute it. You must get a license from MPEG-LA to do that. Read the fine print in the Final Cut Pro license.
Additional use licenses and fees are required for use of information encoded in compliance with the MPEG-4 Visual Standard other than the personal and non-commercial use of a consumer (i) in connection with information which has been encoded in compliance with the MPEG-4 Visual Standard by a consumer engaged in a personal and non-commercial activity, and/or (ii) in connection with MPEG-4 encoded video under license from a video provider. Additional information including that relating to promotional,internal and commercial uses and licensing may be obtained from MPEG LA, LLC. See http://www.mpegla.com./
You mentioned "At least with H.264 I can be certain that my business isn't going to be taken to court one day and I lose it all." So I am assuming you are using MPEG-4 for commercial uses and you have contacted MPEG LA for MPEG-4 licenses for each MPEG-4 work that you use commercially correct?
The problem with your argument is that belief in evolution does not take faith. It takes evidence, peer reviewed evidence not faith.
That would be the AT&T version of the iPhone not the Verizon version apparently according to Verizon.