Seriously, if you believe that (and more people like you believe that) then we as a country are in really big trouble. There is a good quote, mis-attributed to Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Whether Franklin said this or not, this was made LONG before this "country was so fucked up." Another quote, this one actually by a founding father, Thomas Jefferson, "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
It seems to me the idea of liberty and freedom have existed in this country long before today. Our ancestors died defending our liberties in the American Revolution, we fought a Civil War that was largely based on states' rights, and people have fought in wars sense in order to "defend our freedom".
Because of politics and PC thoughts, we won't be able to do shit to stop what people trying to make a point have caused. You know something, it is already too late for that. We live in a "fear society". Our "enemy" appears to be always changing, we are policing our neighbors, people are being locked into "secret" (and not-so-secret) prisons and being denied rights afforded by both US and international laws. This has nothing to do with being PC, I am far from PC. I believe before you come back and start posting that everyone is acting "PC" or this is some sort of strictly political opinion that you really go grab a history book (or two) and read up on how America got to be where it is today.
Passports are the same throughout the states Yes, because those are issued by who? The correct answer is: The Federal Government. States are not footing that bill, nor have they ever footed that bill.
license plates are the same *BUZZ* Oh, sorry that answer is incorrect. Some states list counties on their plates, others require two plates, while some only one. Some states have specialty plates that others do not. The way the tags and registration are charged is different by state or municipality. About the only way they are similar is in the fact that the identify a state and have numbers (or letters or both) on them.
social security numbers are the same Please see my statements on the passport discussion above. You cannot compare federally issued identifications (which have their own myriad of uses) to the driver's license.
What's the big deal? Who is it hurting? Basically immigrants and those who don't want to be followed by "the man". This is a violation of civil liberties? It violates the 10th amendment, for which we already fought one civil war. (Trust me, the American Civil War was about more then just slaves.) It hurts all Americans. It has nothing to do with being monitored, but everything to do with privacy over security. It happens the two are really mutually exclusive and you cannot achieve both at the same time. I think you will find that we are creeping up to the line where people are not willing to cross.
Also, this is a lot more about money. States do not want to foot the bill for a government project. If the feds really wanted "National ID cards", then they should setup the infrastructure and absorb the costs to do it; unfortunately, they do not know how and it would be a disaster, just look at the time it takes to get a passport.
You saved me my C&P, and now to continue with responding to the 10.
1. I agree to some degree. Music isn't really "free", but then again, I do not know how much money PB is making off of advertisements, for all I know they are breaking even, which doesn't sound as bad as making huge loads of profit by flogging your artists to death and releasing "greatest hits" albums after you've released the band. (Look at Reel Big Fish as a recent example.)
2. Did anyone ever actually believe AllofMP3.com was 100% legal? As for the legal action, I believe that was the result of some level of pressure from the US, who seem pretty deep in the pockets of the RIAA.
3. Organized crime has made money off of liquor, tobacco, and illegal drugs to just name a few. In the end, they were usually reduced or stopped by de-criminalizing these items or making them sufficiently cheaper that the market would support them. As for terrorists, I do not buy it. I buy the "buying drugs" supports terrorism more, since I do know they grow poppy in a few countries where terrorism has been said to "breed".
4. Lie! Every indie CD I have wanted I have bought. Now that RBF is indie again and so is Bad Religion this means them. Indie labels == Purchase, RIAA Labels != Purchase (or purchased used). I refuse to believe I am the only person with this level of commitment.
5. Bullshit! You've been manufacturing bands since the 1950s. There have been a few "TV Bands" (the Monkees and the Partridge Family) before I was ever born! You guys have never played a huge role in "underground" artists. When you do, it is only for a short while when their music is popular. Look at the swing-revival and third-wave ska. You picked up these little bands, used them until their music was no longer "popular" and then dumped them.
6. If this were true, the RIAA would have sued the shit out of ISPs already. Or are the large telecoms and cable companies the only people the RIAA is afraid of? Of course, it is a big step up from picking on the handicapped, elderly, under-privileged, students, etc.
7. Like Ars said, this is a low blow that screams of name calling. Anti-copyright is not necessarily total abolishment, but it is about proper fair use protections and reasonable copyright periods. Not periods that mean items will be controlled for decades (or bordering on centuries). This short of closed system prevent items important for artistic or historical purposes from being released and viewed. (The issue with the presidential debates comes to mind.)
8. Yeah, well how many people in China who are in poverty can afford a computer? Why not quote a survey from the US or Europe? Or is it too convenient to pick one that will obviously agree with you. I think these numbers might be a bit different in these areas where I suspect computer proliferation through the classes is considerably greater.
9. Somehow I do not buy a survey from an anti-piracy group. Also, how many children were surveyed, since I bet they are some of the largest violators. I also think there is some degree of apathy when you consider even some of the richer pirates probably make nowhere near as much as the big RIAA studios or popular artists.
10. Do they have any stats to support this? How do you know person X didn't hear what was deemed "popular"? I hardly ever listen to any radio other then talk and sports radio.
Should I be surprised a music industry group took shots at "piracy"? No. Should I be shocked they are spreading their own level of FUD? No. Do they realize this sort of thing hurts them more then it helps? Obviously not. Congratulations for just not getting it, once more.
I have one, so let me give you an idea. First, it is about on par with most smartphones I have used. I am talking real ones that have full touchscreen and QWERTY keyboard. None of these lame ripoff phones like the Q (from Motorola) or Blackjack (from Samsung). Features wise it is pretty complete, except for 3G, but then again, T-Mobile doesn't have a 3G network yet, so you have to live with EDGE. But you can get T-mobile hotspot plans and it does have 802.11 support. The one problem I have is the program memory is bordering on insufficient. Unlike a normal PDA (and maybe some smartphones), I cannot find away to adjust more storage to program memory, since I can always gain more storage using the microSD.
If you want to know about large documents, you'll have to give me time to hunt one down to load onto here. I believe it handles it pretty well. Overall, the device is a pretty well built HTC device. I hardly consider the "blue" exterior something "hip". I actually prefer it to all the fake metal colored plastic. BTW, the slide mechanism on this is the smoothest I've ever had in a phone. The battery life is also rather impressive. I spent nearly two days without charging it. Two days that including heavy talk time (probably close to 2 hrs) and large amounts of data usage with both EDGE and 802.11. I would give it a pretty good ranking overall and have to say it is a good replacement for an MDA. The Sidekick is not in the same league, since the Sidekick was obviously made for texting, this is designed to be a heck of a lot more.
For a fair comparison of WM5 to WM6, I would really need to review both systems on the SAME device. It seems to me you would have a hard time comparing WM5 to WM6 in terms of performance across two different platforms.
The Cuban Missile Crisis is what that post was about, I assume. It is a stupid comparison to make since that was over 40yrs ago and during a period when we almost blew the shit out of each other and "ended the world." By the way, another BIG difference is that the Russians were doing this in "secret." They actually did a pretty good job of getting missiles in place and setup before the US even knew they were there. I think the GP should really read up on history before trying to compare anti-ballistic missiles and radar in Poland in 2007 to nuclear warheads in Cuba in 1962.
1) Exchange rates our notoriously bad at reflecting the actual MSRP. I wouldn't be surprised to see this closer to $249.99 US. That said, most places will probably sell it for less. I doubt TurboLinux will be as bitchy about MSRP as Apple is with the iPod.
2) A 4 GB iPod Nano has an MSRP of $199 with a slightly smaller (.3" diagonal less) LCD (instead of OLED) display. Also, the Wizpy (ugh, bad name) also has a full blown Linux distro, so it is probably similar to carrying around DSL (damn small linux, in case you didn't know) on a USB thumb drive.
3) Other non-iPod Nano features: FM radio, Voice Recorder and Video support (unless someone can tell me otherwise).
In the end, wait to see what this actually sells for in the US.
Seriously, you are not helping. First, do you really think you are proving anything with this "open letter." It is a slashdot post in which you placed "Dear so and so". It is hardly a letter and almost guaranteed not to be read, since I really doubt most lawyers at this firm are really sitting around slashdot in their free time. Second, your letters hardly do anything other then yell and curse at the individuals. I hope you would be a bit better prepared then this when talking in a courtroom.
If you really want to do something, post the letter in a forum where they might actually read it. Make the letter contain some actual substance, like an argument in defense of Linux and open source, then have the balls to print that letter, sign it, and mail it to the people you are addressing. Stop with the "I am the cock of the walk" show you are putting on here at slashdot and take action. There are actually a few rather legal ways I could determine to force Microsoft to show their hand. They are not necessarily the smartest ways, but it would be achievable.
Instead of telling everyone else to "put up or shut up", perhaps it is time for you to take your own advice.
1) As others mentioned, leave general chat. This should resolve close to 90% of the problems.
2) Find a game not filled with immature teenagers (or adults, trust me they can be just as dumb) or another server. I played WoW for a LONG time and never had much problem with the discussions on RP servers. I never did play on a straight PvP or general server. I have since moved to Ryzom, and the CSRs are quick to mute or kick off anyone doing this sort of stupidity.
3) For games with voice chat, turn it off. Seriously, I would not make people suffer through hearing my voice, even for helpful communication. Please do not torture us with yours. Of course, it is muted whenever I do play an online FPS, so I guess I am saving my own ears.
4) If people are being offensive, report it to the Moderators (or whatever your game calls them). I do not think an MMO exists where there are not moderators of some form. Most of them are willing to help and will resolve issues like this, if you present the issues in a calm and reasonable manner.
Now, you can almost forget everyone suddenly changing their ways, and unfortunately there isn't much you can do to force them to change. While people can be muted or temporarily banned, you will almost never get permanent removal unless you blatantly violent the EULA. Short of making threats or committing some sort of illegal act, they will probably return. The best you can do is limit exposure using the tools provided by the game. It is not the best solution, but if the people acting like total idiots find out they are without any friends and that no one wants to play with them, perhaps they will finally leave. (Though, that may also be wishful thinking.)
IBM announces to that they believe Microsoft is in violation of several thousand of their patents, and it is time for them [Microsoft] to pay up.
Listen, if MS wants to wind up in an eternal battle with the only company in the US that could probably sue their asses under the table, then by all means, please sue FOSS projects. People may not want to think IBM is some great savior of FOSS, but they are the closest thing to a large money source the movement is going to have. They also have a good deal to lose since they have sort of positioned themselves into this position. We have already seen that Novell doesn't want to have to defend FOSS. (Why do you think they signed that deal with MS?) Red Hat does not have the money to do it. HP has too much to lose since their business is still largely dependent on Windows based PCs. This really leaves you with one company, IBM.
I believe Microsoft has spread words like this before, and it seems to be a common thing whenever they feel they are losing some degree of steam. (After all, I think we are at the consensus that Vista is a flop, well until they officially force computer manufacturers to switch to Vista full-time, sometime around EOY.) The idea of the software industry and software patents has been the idea of a mutual peace. The industry will probably destroy itself if suits started flying. I also find this odd after the recent SCOTUS ruling in KSR v. Teleflex, which should make patents infinitely easier to overturn on obviousness issues, even some of those old flimsy software ones.
On which country on the earth these are totally free actions? That's not specific to China, they just want to control it, which is fine. A hell of a lot more then you know. No it is not fine; it is oppression.
Every country have their own regulations to protect their own sensitivity to a matter. Please enlighten us.
In US it's racism, in Europe it's mostly ethnical discrimation of genocide. Well, you failed to enlighten. There are no laws in the US that prevent you from saying racist things. Racism is taboo, but it sure as hell isn't illegal. Racist speech (and other "hate speech") is actually illegal throughout large portions of Europe. I would talk about your Europe example but that sentence doesn't even make sense.
In China their worries are different due to their history. There's no such a country which would let people to do some action to broke nations unity. Again, bullshit. Many countries have suffered political revolutions and civil wars and have the freedom to discuss this history and not just talk about it using the government spin. These things are also used as a means to prevent revolution, which is the real reason they want to keep people quiet; they fear that with truly free discourse their government wouldn't stand a chance.
Yes it's censorship. Yes it is annoying to some. But that's the price of living whealty. That's the price of surviving with limited resources. Censorship is not just annoying to some, it is a violation of human rights. Human rights violations are actually something China has had issues with for quite some time and is still criticized for. And which is it, wealthy or poor (limited resources?)?
If anyone thinking wars, which created those worries, are due to greed of people, then those are either fools or the ones behave like that. All wars are due to survival instincts of people. Where did you get that bullshit? The American Revolution was about survival? It was the people of the Colonies tired of the oppression they believed they were receiving from the British. The could've survived they decided to fight for their independence. The American Civil War was a battle of states rights, taxation, and slavery (to boil it down to the basics). The south has managed to survive post-Civil War and probably could've survived without it. Survival wasn't the reason. You would have to be pretty naive to think some wars were not out of greed (or some sort of manifest destiny). Read about the Mexican-American War sometime. Of course there are also people who think "The Iraq War" is based on greed (particularly oil). You will have a hard time proving that either of those wars were about "survival".
You might not have problems today, but you need to think your future as well, else our bodies won't store any energy, will it? Proving once again that your sentences are poor. WTF are you trying to say? This entire piece reads like some sort of Chinese propaganda. You start by saying, look everyone else does this too. Then you give some bad examples, hoping people will accept them. Then you attempt to defend it again by proclaiming it is related to history and national unity. You admit it is censorship then stumble through calling it simply annoying, but say it is the price you must pay for living rich (or is it living poor). You then toss war aside as a matter of survival only, ignoring the fact that war is not always about survival alone. Then you have some statement that doesn't make much sense at all, maybe it sounds sort of good in propaganda-speak.
Um, no. 35 USC 101. I cannot remember how many times they told me you had to have the actual invention. None of this theoretical BS goes. If so, people could get away with patenting their "theoretical" anti-gravity machines and perpetual motion machines. They can exist in theory but they do not really exist.
Or the "Get a bunch of specialists in a room and ask them 'How would you solve problem X' and then patent the solutions" approach to "innovation". I am assuming you are going for an obviousness angle on this, and this IS NOT HOW OBVIOUSNESS WORK! I cannot say that enough. Do you not think these companies had a room of specialists to solve a problem and then work to file a patent? More than one person or one group of people might have the same idea, but that does not make it obvious and it should not make it unpatentable. The only exceptions to this are pretty minimal and usually so absurd they are not work discussing.
Not to mention that the change from a "Prior-art has precedence" system to a "First to patent wins" one means the anybody that has loads of ideas but no money to patent them will loose against "Big corp with loadsa money for whom the costs of filling a patent are short change". Just don't buy it. I really do not see this as the problem people make it out to be. Can someone show me real stats to prove that there are even that many small inventors now?
The fact that BSA is for it (read: the big boys in the software world), should be ringing alarm bells in everybodies minds. Look who opposes it, big pharmaceuticals and you will see this is a great idea. Most software companies want to limit the number of patents, because much of what they hold are defensive patents. The big software companies want patents to be better defined and want to limit some of the junk patents that get issued. Look at the support big software gave in the Teleflex v. KSR case. Software patents are basically in a state where they would mutually destroy each other if lawsuits started flying over patents. The people with the most to lose from their patents are big pharmaceuticals who make a killing on those drugs our doctors give us.
Each of these companies is well-known for abusing Software patents; the first two in order to maintain their monopolies. Can you please tell me what monopoly IBM has? Are they a HUGE multi-national corporation? Yes, but a monopoly they hardly are. What share of the PC market do they own? Oh right, all that was sold off to Lenovo. What percent of the server market? Unix Market? Now, what percent of the OS market is Microsoft? Go re-read the definition of monopoly first. As for abusing patents, Microsoft and IBM have not sued anyone with their patents that I am aware of. In large part because the computer industry would be destroyed. There is sort of a *wink*wink* agreement within the computer industry as it relates to patents. I will give you that Amazon is basically abusing their really shitty patent for 1-click.
Usually "reform" by these folks means "give me a bigger piece of the pie in order to stifle innovation and keep the little guys out". Actually, some of the reform these guys have proposed and the briefs they have written for SCOTUS cases have been in favor of things that would REDUCE the number of patents. At least one item would probably destroy half of their patent portfolios. It is actually kind of funny, but the people who always seem to be on the opposite side of the technology companies in these sorts of reforms are the big pharmaceutical companies. Makes you wonder who is the bigger evil.
Pardon my suspicions, but I doubt this so-called "reform" is here to help us. TFA isn't clear on this, but it sounds like this is just to establish the first-to-file basis of patents, rather thna first-to-invent. First-to-invent is advantagous for the little guy, so it's no wonder the big companies are behind this dubious "reform". This is not good legislation. First to invent is a mess. Speaking as a former patent examiner, it is not pretty and creates about as many issues as it would ever solve. It is out-of-line with the entire world, which allows for other countries to issue the exact same patent to another company than who it was issued to in the US. It also allows companies to come back to back-date their date-of-invention to circumvent prior art, something they would no longer be able to do with the current system. It would also get rid of interferences, for the most part, something that takes up the BPAI time instead of working on appeals, which is far more important to the overall process.
If they really wanted to reform the system, it would be better to either toss out Software Patents (and harmonize our system with much of the rest of the world) or at least require a working prototype before a Software Patent is granted. Um, working prototype is currently a requirement FOR ALL PATENTS. You do not patent an idea, you patent an invention, the actual item. It is actually within the right of the USPTO to ask for a working prototype if the functionality or existence of an item comes into question. This is very rare, but it can be done. So, for a Software patent to be issued, it would actually have to be in some form of use. Removal of Software patents and more importantly business-method patents is important. It would truly create harmonization with the rest of the world, since the US has failed multiple times to convince other nations to allow patentability of software.
We're all human and even patent examiners make mistakes!
Well I don't buy it! I think the USPTO is broken in a few ways.
First, you'd better buy it. People make mistakes. The fact is it happens. Broken system or not. I do have to agree the system is pretty broken.
First off, the examiners are likely working to some sort of quota: Gotta process 10 claims a week or whatever. They can spend a reasonable amount of time investigating the application, or they can process it quickly. If they find some prior art, they send it back to the applicant who will send in a more supporting paperwork resulting in more work for the examiner to clear the patent application. The shortest route to clearing the patent is to just grant it. Come Friday and you're a few behind for the week, well they get slipped through double-quick.
First, they are on a quota system. It varies by grade-level and by what sort of material you are reviewing (referred to as an art). Usually the patents that require extensive research get it, because for each one that takes forever to do, there is usually one that takes no time at all. There are so many patents that come through that are rejected on their face value alone, this is really a non-issue.
Secondly Uncle Sam makes a bundle out of the USPTO. Each examiner can crank out a few grand's worth of work a day. Make it harder to get patents and less people will apply (and the processing costs would increase). It is easier to just make patents as easy to get as one of those credit card college degrees.
The problem with part of this is that increasing costs could push out small inventors, though they have a separate fee than people with company assignees. For the large corporations, there isn't much of a way to make patent cost prohibitive. The large companies are loaded with cash and the potential to be made from a patent is so large that these fees could be pretty astronomical. Receiving a patent is not as easy as it looks to everyone on the outside. You see these "bad" patents and instantly think, oh god, they will give you a patent for anything; however, for each bad patent there are those that have gone through the system for years, with various continuing applications filed, which never see the light of day. Some patents get so neutered by the system they are practically worthless by the time the USPTO is done with them.
Thirdly, the USPTO is not held accountable to any quality measures. USPTO does not wear the costs of bad patents. Heads don't roll if patents get overturned. The lawyers love it. All the patent applications bring in money. Bad patents == more work. Nobody is motivated to improve patent quality.
You know why? Because a patent might not get overturned for YEARS. Also, putting this short of extra pressure on your examiners defeats the purpose and actually would probably result in worse examinations in the long run. The real problem is the redistribution of money. Congress re-appropriates a large amount of the USPTO fees to other agencies, money that could hire more examiner, which in turn would give examiners more time to examine patents. The count-system (quote system) needs to be adjusted to also include providing counts for actions that currently do not provide counts, but that do require a large amount of time to prepare for.
Basically everything is stacked to delivering poor patents. I have a few patents, more than half of which I think are crap. I recently searched one of my patents and was suprised to see that other patents were granted for the same idea, even though the application quoted my patent. This really sucks. A patent is supposed to be property, but here the USPTO have clearly sold the same property many times over.
Are you sure your patents are the exact same as another one that has it quoted? Provide me an example, and I guarantee you I can tell you why the patent is different. Remember there are some patents that are alm
A patent examiner is GS-5 $38K job to start Actually, starting examiners are typically taken at GS-7, with a starting pay around $56,000. I should know, I was one before I left that nut house. You would have no way to pull people into the NoVA/Maryland/DC area with $38k, which would be like taking an engineering job in the midwest at about $25k. Trust me, the salaries are relatively comparitive to starting salaries for engineers coming out of college.
Key requirements (redux):
- US Citizenship
- Ability to travel
- BA or BS from a community college accredited by ABET _or_ 2nd year coursework in 5 of 7 areas: physics, chemistry, architecture, computer science, mathematics, hydrology, or geology
- Registered as a professional engineer by a state, DC, Guam, or Puerto Rico
- Pass a written test for "Engineer In Training" or professional registration test
- 60 semester hours of courses in basic sciences/physics/math/engineering I do not know which section you took this from, but for EE or CIS, the requirements are basically a degree. Nothing more to it. The minimal requirement at the USPTO in most areas is a BS in an appropriate area of study.
Restriction of Harzardous Substances directive. It was a directive issued by the EU meant to reduce lead, cadmium, PBDEs, and two or three other substances from electronic materials. It caused a huge stir because anyone who knows about soldering knows good solder currently uses lead, where as without the lead you can get tin whiskers that can create shorting issues.
I believe that companies are already doing this with RoHS compliant materials. Which if I recall, is a requirement for the EU. So I don't think it would be a big issue, but most items sold in the US are hardly RoHS compliant.
What I do care about is how well it integrates with Exchange Server, and whether its notifications for meetings and such are compatible with the business standard Exchange+Outlook combination. However, the word "Exchange" does not appear anywhere on the product home page; nor does "Outlook". Since when has Exchange+Outlook been the business standard? It isn't a standard of anything, not even a de facto one. As much as it hurts to say, both Novell Groupwise and IBM Lotus Notes are far superior groupware applications. They are more easy to integrate into mixed environments as well, something Exchange is not as easy to deal with. You want real standards, I recommend looking at iCalendar for calendar usage and IMAP for mail serving. Of course, these are both easily supported by Thunderbird and can be used in a similar fashion to Outlook, without the need to be tied into a single, proprietary software program.
(does anyone reading this actually use Thunderbird with any extensions, never mind the natural way they are routinely used by Firefox users?) I use at least two. I would have to look when I got home if there were more. First, I use Lightning. It is an extension that adds calendar capabilities to Thunderbird and guess what, it is linked to my Google Calendar, fairly easily. Second, I use the GPG extension, so I can encrypt/decrypt e-mail messages in the client. The plugin to do this for Outlook is notoriously buggy, and we have had a few problems with encrypted messages not leaving encrypted here at the office.
I believe there are some spam filters and some other rather useful tools available, but I have not really taken the time to get and install them. Granted, it doesn't look small compared to the 5 or 6 extensions I have installed for FF, but there are so many extra things to get.
Sorry to be so negative. I'm grateful to those who spend their time writing Thunderbird and giving it away to others, I really am. But it's starting to suffer from the two major diseases of the OSS world: a mistaken belief that users care more about philosophy than functionality, and a mistaken belief that OSS is somehow immune to the normal problems with software development just because some of its popular applications haven't (yet) been compromised as badly as the mainstream commercial players. I like the product, but until its marketing stops talking crap, I'm going to criticise the marketing. Um, you know why Firefox and Thunderbird are extremely more secure then their MS counterparts? For Firefox, it is a lack of ActiveX, which is nothing but trouble, and the fact that FF isn't as tied to the OS as IE is. Outlook suffers part of the trouble that IE does because they use common DLLs and libraries. It also suffers from the fact that the security of it is dependent on support from MS. You might not buy the "many eyes myth", but it is not too hard to see. You cannot hide a bug as easily when the code is available for all, you also do not have to rely solely on the vendor when code is available. OSS has many advantages, but I will admit it isn't going to solve all software woes.
I've been running the 64-bit version of Vista since it was released and it hasn't crashed on me once. This guy couldn't figure out which driver/piece of hardware was causing this instability in a MONTH?
Of course, everyone's mileage may vary. Also, I do not think a driver or hardware issue is unreasonable to extend into a month or more, especially if you consider end-users who have next to no technical skills. I refused to upgrade with my free upgrade from Dell after I read they refused to guarantee my hardware or software would work in the new OS. Why would I want to upgrade if the programs I paid for (including AV) don't work! Same for my hardware. I do not want to spend hours debugging some damn driver issue.
Btw, chances are it was a sound card driver - this is a moderately common problem, but it sure isn't the end of the world.
I find your statement here a bit funny for two reasons. 1) You say this is a moderately common problem, yet you think he is crazy for taking a month to fix it and 2) it shoots your next point right in the foot.
This isn't 1994 anymore. The arguments against MS for making unstable operating systems ended when NT was released. Since Windows 2000, MS has made stable operating systems that really are usable by the average joe without difficulty.
This comment is wrong for a few reasons. First, see the previous point. Two, NT wasn't usable for home use until Windows 2000, which was released in, guess what, 2000. Even then 2K was still not great for home users, especially those wanting games. Finally, the statement is blatantly wrong because the worst OS released by MS to date, Windows ME, came out after 1994. Of course, problems like this might have Vista challenging ME for "Worst MS OS ever".
Actually, it is pretty widespread in the US and hardly limited to the "Bible Belt". I also wouldn't call many of the states where the DP is no longer practiced "progressive". And if you check out the map here you might find that there are a few more countries still holding on to the death penalty then you originally thought. It isn't just something used by those oppressive regimes.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems to me the idea of liberty and freedom have existed in this country long before today. Our ancestors died defending our liberties in the American Revolution, we fought a Civil War that was largely based on states' rights, and people have fought in wars sense in order to "defend our freedom". Because of politics and PC thoughts, we won't be able to do shit to stop what people trying to make a point have caused. You know something, it is already too late for that. We live in a "fear society". Our "enemy" appears to be always changing, we are policing our neighbors, people are being locked into "secret" (and not-so-secret) prisons and being denied rights afforded by both US and international laws. This has nothing to do with being PC, I am far from PC. I believe before you come back and start posting that everyone is acting "PC" or this is some sort of strictly political opinion that you really go grab a history book (or two) and read up on how America got to be where it is today.
Also, this is a lot more about money. States do not want to foot the bill for a government project. If the feds really wanted "National ID cards", then they should setup the infrastructure and absorb the costs to do it; unfortunately, they do not know how and it would be a disaster, just look at the time it takes to get a passport.
You saved me my C&P, and now to continue with responding to the 10.
1. I agree to some degree. Music isn't really "free", but then again, I do not know how much money PB is making off of advertisements, for all I know they are breaking even, which doesn't sound as bad as making huge loads of profit by flogging your artists to death and releasing "greatest hits" albums after you've released the band. (Look at Reel Big Fish as a recent example.)
2. Did anyone ever actually believe AllofMP3.com was 100% legal? As for the legal action, I believe that was the result of some level of pressure from the US, who seem pretty deep in the pockets of the RIAA.
3. Organized crime has made money off of liquor, tobacco, and illegal drugs to just name a few. In the end, they were usually reduced or stopped by de-criminalizing these items or making them sufficiently cheaper that the market would support them. As for terrorists, I do not buy it. I buy the "buying drugs" supports terrorism more, since I do know they grow poppy in a few countries where terrorism has been said to "breed".
4. Lie! Every indie CD I have wanted I have bought. Now that RBF is indie again and so is Bad Religion this means them. Indie labels == Purchase, RIAA Labels != Purchase (or purchased used). I refuse to believe I am the only person with this level of commitment.
5. Bullshit! You've been manufacturing bands since the 1950s. There have been a few "TV Bands" (the Monkees and the Partridge Family) before I was ever born! You guys have never played a huge role in "underground" artists. When you do, it is only for a short while when their music is popular. Look at the swing-revival and third-wave ska. You picked up these little bands, used them until their music was no longer "popular" and then dumped them.
6. If this were true, the RIAA would have sued the shit out of ISPs already. Or are the large telecoms and cable companies the only people the RIAA is afraid of? Of course, it is a big step up from picking on the handicapped, elderly, under-privileged, students, etc.
7. Like Ars said, this is a low blow that screams of name calling. Anti-copyright is not necessarily total abolishment, but it is about proper fair use protections and reasonable copyright periods. Not periods that mean items will be controlled for decades (or bordering on centuries). This short of closed system prevent items important for artistic or historical purposes from being released and viewed. (The issue with the presidential debates comes to mind.)
8. Yeah, well how many people in China who are in poverty can afford a computer? Why not quote a survey from the US or Europe? Or is it too convenient to pick one that will obviously agree with you. I think these numbers might be a bit different in these areas where I suspect computer proliferation through the classes is considerably greater.
9. Somehow I do not buy a survey from an anti-piracy group. Also, how many children were surveyed, since I bet they are some of the largest violators. I also think there is some degree of apathy when you consider even some of the richer pirates probably make nowhere near as much as the big RIAA studios or popular artists.
10. Do they have any stats to support this? How do you know person X didn't hear what was deemed "popular"? I hardly ever listen to any radio other then talk and sports radio.
Should I be surprised a music industry group took shots at "piracy"? No. Should I be shocked they are spreading their own level of FUD? No. Do they realize this sort of thing hurts them more then it helps? Obviously not. Congratulations for just not getting it, once more.
I have one, so let me give you an idea. First, it is about on par with most smartphones I have used. I am talking real ones that have full touchscreen and QWERTY keyboard. None of these lame ripoff phones like the Q (from Motorola) or Blackjack (from Samsung). Features wise it is pretty complete, except for 3G, but then again, T-Mobile doesn't have a 3G network yet, so you have to live with EDGE. But you can get T-mobile hotspot plans and it does have 802.11 support. The one problem I have is the program memory is bordering on insufficient. Unlike a normal PDA (and maybe some smartphones), I cannot find away to adjust more storage to program memory, since I can always gain more storage using the microSD.
If you want to know about large documents, you'll have to give me time to hunt one down to load onto here. I believe it handles it pretty well. Overall, the device is a pretty well built HTC device. I hardly consider the "blue" exterior something "hip". I actually prefer it to all the fake metal colored plastic. BTW, the slide mechanism on this is the smoothest I've ever had in a phone. The battery life is also rather impressive. I spent nearly two days without charging it. Two days that including heavy talk time (probably close to 2 hrs) and large amounts of data usage with both EDGE and 802.11. I would give it a pretty good ranking overall and have to say it is a good replacement for an MDA. The Sidekick is not in the same league, since the Sidekick was obviously made for texting, this is designed to be a heck of a lot more.
For a fair comparison of WM5 to WM6, I would really need to review both systems on the SAME device. It seems to me you would have a hard time comparing WM5 to WM6 in terms of performance across two different platforms.
The Cuban Missile Crisis is what that post was about, I assume. It is a stupid comparison to make since that was over 40yrs ago and during a period when we almost blew the shit out of each other and "ended the world." By the way, another BIG difference is that the Russians were doing this in "secret." They actually did a pretty good job of getting missiles in place and setup before the US even knew they were there. I think the GP should really read up on history before trying to compare anti-ballistic missiles and radar in Poland in 2007 to nuclear warheads in Cuba in 1962.
1) Exchange rates our notoriously bad at reflecting the actual MSRP. I wouldn't be surprised to see this closer to $249.99 US. That said, most places will probably sell it for less. I doubt TurboLinux will be as bitchy about MSRP as Apple is with the iPod.
2) A 4 GB iPod Nano has an MSRP of $199 with a slightly smaller (.3" diagonal less) LCD (instead of OLED) display. Also, the Wizpy (ugh, bad name) also has a full blown Linux distro, so it is probably similar to carrying around DSL (damn small linux, in case you didn't know) on a USB thumb drive.
3) Other non-iPod Nano features: FM radio, Voice Recorder and Video support (unless someone can tell me otherwise).
In the end, wait to see what this actually sells for in the US.
Seriously, you are not helping. First, do you really think you are proving anything with this "open letter." It is a slashdot post in which you placed "Dear so and so". It is hardly a letter and almost guaranteed not to be read, since I really doubt most lawyers at this firm are really sitting around slashdot in their free time. Second, your letters hardly do anything other then yell and curse at the individuals. I hope you would be a bit better prepared then this when talking in a courtroom.
If you really want to do something, post the letter in a forum where they might actually read it. Make the letter contain some actual substance, like an argument in defense of Linux and open source, then have the balls to print that letter, sign it, and mail it to the people you are addressing. Stop with the "I am the cock of the walk" show you are putting on here at slashdot and take action. There are actually a few rather legal ways I could determine to force Microsoft to show their hand. They are not necessarily the smartest ways, but it would be achievable.
Instead of telling everyone else to "put up or shut up", perhaps it is time for you to take your own advice.
1) As others mentioned, leave general chat. This should resolve close to 90% of the problems.
2) Find a game not filled with immature teenagers (or adults, trust me they can be just as dumb) or another server. I played WoW for a LONG time and never had much problem with the discussions on RP servers. I never did play on a straight PvP or general server. I have since moved to Ryzom, and the CSRs are quick to mute or kick off anyone doing this sort of stupidity.
3) For games with voice chat, turn it off. Seriously, I would not make people suffer through hearing my voice, even for helpful communication. Please do not torture us with yours. Of course, it is muted whenever I do play an online FPS, so I guess I am saving my own ears.
4) If people are being offensive, report it to the Moderators (or whatever your game calls them). I do not think an MMO exists where there are not moderators of some form. Most of them are willing to help and will resolve issues like this, if you present the issues in a calm and reasonable manner.
Now, you can almost forget everyone suddenly changing their ways, and unfortunately there isn't much you can do to force them to change. While people can be muted or temporarily banned, you will almost never get permanent removal unless you blatantly violent the EULA. Short of making threats or committing some sort of illegal act, they will probably return. The best you can do is limit exposure using the tools provided by the game. It is not the best solution, but if the people acting like total idiots find out they are without any friends and that no one wants to play with them, perhaps they will finally leave. (Though, that may also be wishful thinking.)
The horrible law lets them. Check out 17 USC 504(c)(2). I would like to know who thought $150,000 per infringement was "a good idea".
IBM announces to that they believe Microsoft is in violation of several thousand of their patents, and it is time for them [Microsoft] to pay up.
Listen, if MS wants to wind up in an eternal battle with the only company in the US that could probably sue their asses under the table, then by all means, please sue FOSS projects. People may not want to think IBM is some great savior of FOSS, but they are the closest thing to a large money source the movement is going to have. They also have a good deal to lose since they have sort of positioned themselves into this position. We have already seen that Novell doesn't want to have to defend FOSS. (Why do you think they signed that deal with MS?) Red Hat does not have the money to do it. HP has too much to lose since their business is still largely dependent on Windows based PCs. This really leaves you with one company, IBM.
I believe Microsoft has spread words like this before, and it seems to be a common thing whenever they feel they are losing some degree of steam. (After all, I think we are at the consensus that Vista is a flop, well until they officially force computer manufacturers to switch to Vista full-time, sometime around EOY.) The idea of the software industry and software patents has been the idea of a mutual peace. The industry will probably destroy itself if suits started flying. I also find this odd after the recent SCOTUS ruling in KSR v. Teleflex, which should make patents infinitely easier to overturn on obviousness issues, even some of those old flimsy software ones.
You need all that ice to create a breathable atmosphere on Mars!
And again I repeat, in the current world, not the world of almost 20-30 years ago, what monopoly does IBM have?
Um, no. 35 USC 101. I cannot remember how many times they told me you had to have the actual invention. None of this theoretical BS goes. If so, people could get away with patenting their "theoretical" anti-gravity machines and perpetual motion machines. They can exist in theory but they do not really exist.
We're all human and even patent examiners make mistakes!
Well I don't buy it! I think the USPTO is broken in a few ways.
First, you'd better buy it. People make mistakes. The fact is it happens. Broken system or not. I do have to agree the system is pretty broken.
First off, the examiners are likely working to some sort of quota: Gotta process 10 claims a week or whatever. They can spend a reasonable amount of time investigating the application, or they can process it quickly. If they find some prior art, they send it back to the applicant who will send in a more supporting paperwork resulting in more work for the examiner to clear the patent application. The shortest route to clearing the patent is to just grant it. Come Friday and you're a few behind for the week, well they get slipped through double-quick.
First, they are on a quota system. It varies by grade-level and by what sort of material you are reviewing (referred to as an art). Usually the patents that require extensive research get it, because for each one that takes forever to do, there is usually one that takes no time at all. There are so many patents that come through that are rejected on their face value alone, this is really a non-issue.
Secondly Uncle Sam makes a bundle out of the USPTO. Each examiner can crank out a few grand's worth of work a day. Make it harder to get patents and less people will apply (and the processing costs would increase). It is easier to just make patents as easy to get as one of those credit card college degrees.
The problem with part of this is that increasing costs could push out small inventors, though they have a separate fee than people with company assignees. For the large corporations, there isn't much of a way to make patent cost prohibitive. The large companies are loaded with cash and the potential to be made from a patent is so large that these fees could be pretty astronomical. Receiving a patent is not as easy as it looks to everyone on the outside. You see these "bad" patents and instantly think, oh god, they will give you a patent for anything; however, for each bad patent there are those that have gone through the system for years, with various continuing applications filed, which never see the light of day. Some patents get so neutered by the system they are practically worthless by the time the USPTO is done with them.
Thirdly, the USPTO is not held accountable to any quality measures. USPTO does not wear the costs of bad patents. Heads don't roll if patents get overturned. The lawyers love it. All the patent applications bring in money. Bad patents == more work. Nobody is motivated to improve patent quality.
You know why? Because a patent might not get overturned for YEARS. Also, putting this short of extra pressure on your examiners defeats the purpose and actually would probably result in worse examinations in the long run. The real problem is the redistribution of money. Congress re-appropriates a large amount of the USPTO fees to other agencies, money that could hire more examiner, which in turn would give examiners more time to examine patents. The count-system (quote system) needs to be adjusted to also include providing counts for actions that currently do not provide counts, but that do require a large amount of time to prepare for.
Basically everything is stacked to delivering poor patents. I have a few patents, more than half of which I think are crap. I recently searched one of my patents and was suprised to see that other patents were granted for the same idea, even though the application quoted my patent. This really sucks. A patent is supposed to be property, but here the USPTO have clearly sold the same property many times over.
Are you sure your patents are the exact same as another one that has it quoted? Provide me an example, and I guarantee you I can tell you why the patent is different. Remember there are some patents that are alm
- US Citizenship
- Ability to travel
- BA or BS from a community college accredited by ABET _or_ 2nd year coursework in 5 of 7 areas: physics, chemistry, architecture, computer science, mathematics, hydrology, or geology
- Registered as a professional engineer by a state, DC, Guam, or Puerto Rico
- Pass a written test for "Engineer In Training" or professional registration test
- 60 semester hours of courses in basic sciences/physics/math/engineering I do not know which section you took this from, but for EE or CIS, the requirements are basically a degree. Nothing more to it. The minimal requirement at the USPTO in most areas is a BS in an appropriate area of study.
Restriction of Harzardous Substances directive. It was a directive issued by the EU meant to reduce lead, cadmium, PBDEs, and two or three other substances from electronic materials. It caused a huge stir because anyone who knows about soldering knows good solder currently uses lead, where as without the lead you can get tin whiskers that can create shorting issues.
I believe that companies are already doing this with RoHS compliant materials. Which if I recall, is a requirement for the EU. So I don't think it would be a big issue, but most items sold in the US are hardly RoHS compliant.
HAL: It can only be attributable to human error.
I believe there are some spam filters and some other rather useful tools available, but I have not really taken the time to get and install them. Granted, it doesn't look small compared to the 5 or 6 extensions I have installed for FF, but there are so many extra things to get.
Sorry to be so negative. I'm grateful to those who spend their time writing Thunderbird and giving it away to others, I really am. But it's starting to suffer from the two major diseases of the OSS world: a mistaken belief that users care more about philosophy than functionality, and a mistaken belief that OSS is somehow immune to the normal problems with software development just because some of its popular applications haven't (yet) been compromised as badly as the mainstream commercial players. I like the product, but until its marketing stops talking crap, I'm going to criticise the marketing. Um, you know why Firefox and Thunderbird are extremely more secure then their MS counterparts? For Firefox, it is a lack of ActiveX, which is nothing but trouble, and the fact that FF isn't as tied to the OS as IE is. Outlook suffers part of the trouble that IE does because they use common DLLs and libraries. It also suffers from the fact that the security of it is dependent on support from MS. You might not buy the "many eyes myth", but it is not too hard to see. You cannot hide a bug as easily when the code is available for all, you also do not have to rely solely on the vendor when code is available. OSS has many advantages, but I will admit it isn't going to solve all software woes.
For fun, SCOX v. IBM (Log Scale) and SCOX v. IBM (Linear Scale).
I've been running the 64-bit version of Vista since it was released and it hasn't crashed on me once. This guy couldn't figure out which driver/piece of hardware was causing this instability in a MONTH?
Of course, everyone's mileage may vary. Also, I do not think a driver or hardware issue is unreasonable to extend into a month or more, especially if you consider end-users who have next to no technical skills. I refused to upgrade with my free upgrade from Dell after I read they refused to guarantee my hardware or software would work in the new OS. Why would I want to upgrade if the programs I paid for (including AV) don't work! Same for my hardware. I do not want to spend hours debugging some damn driver issue.
Btw, chances are it was a sound card driver - this is a moderately common problem, but it sure isn't the end of the world.
I find your statement here a bit funny for two reasons. 1) You say this is a moderately common problem, yet you think he is crazy for taking a month to fix it and 2) it shoots your next point right in the foot.
This isn't 1994 anymore. The arguments against MS for making unstable operating systems ended when NT was released. Since Windows 2000, MS has made stable operating systems that really are usable by the average joe without difficulty.
This comment is wrong for a few reasons. First, see the previous point. Two, NT wasn't usable for home use until Windows 2000, which was released in, guess what, 2000. Even then 2K was still not great for home users, especially those wanting games. Finally, the statement is blatantly wrong because the worst OS released by MS to date, Windows ME, came out after 1994. Of course, problems like this might have Vista challenging ME for "Worst MS OS ever".
Actually, it is pretty widespread in the US and hardly limited to the "Bible Belt". I also wouldn't call many of the states where the DP is no longer practiced "progressive". And if you check out the map here you might find that there are a few more countries still holding on to the death penalty then you originally thought. It isn't just something used by those oppressive regimes.