Because "HD Radio" is a trade name and therefore a proper noun "Standard English" rules do not apply as you imply. (ex Toronto Maple "Leafs" is not a grammatical error.)
This makes me scratch my head. Why is the Bush admin against this? With a.xxx TLD it seems as if filtering software could hopefully at least get a little bit better, herd all the smut into one fenced in area. Seems like something porn peddlers as well as parents that want to protect would agree on.
It seems to me that the Bush administrations concerns are more with just porn in general, which is neither here nor there in this debate, internet porn is here to stay, why not go along with the.xxx domain to at least get some semblance and better blocking for software?
1. A grant made by a government that confers upon the creator of an invention the sole right to make, use, and sell that invention for a set period of time.
2. Letters patent.
3. An invention protected by such a grant.
We can quibble about the US Patent system and how they grant patents to non-original inventions all day, and we can quibble about how this may be one of those cases, but linguistically spealing, yes, patenting should and is an invention.
Critics of gaming do not just have the facts against them; they have history against them, too."
I might agree if I knew what history they are talking about. That the moral corrupting specter of two lines hiting a dot of Pong fame didn't destroy the social fabric of the 70s?
But isn't there some sort of sticking point price for games? It seemed like it was $49.99, throw down a hundred and you get two, ya know? But $60? That seems way out of the realm. But thats just me.
Either Microsoft doesn't realize that people will always spend within their means (ie if you have $500 in disposable income a year to spend on games, youre going to spend it if they are $50 or $60) or Microsoft is throwing in the towel and fixing a high price for games because they figure that gamers just won't buy a high number of their games and that there just won't be a large number of games to buy (which was a critique of the original Xbox, not enough games).
Considering how Google has a volume of 7.3 million shares and Microsoft 138 million shares, I would say you are comparing apples and oranges by strictly looking at stock price.
Pssh, Google and their *earth centric* attitude. What, we people from other planets are just supposed to ASSUME that the word "moon" is automatically referencing the EARTH'S MOON?
Of course, by those standards, most Americans must be addicted to work, sex, and TV as well."
To nitpick for a second, arent the first two well...essential to life? Wouldn't necessarily call that an addiction....
And whats with the 'Americans' snark? Last time I checked the rest of the world works and has sex too, hell Americans rank lower in industrialized nationals among sexual activity!
This article got me thinking right away and I was trying to come up with a snarkish analogy to the car, that there is no 'safe' car (people still die, a lot) but that does not mean that there have not been vast improvements since the conception nor does it mean that a car cannot be safe when used properly under certain conditions.
But then that got me to thinking even more, there really isnt a 'safe' anything is there? So whats the point of pointing such things out?
Well, I see a lot of replies to my post, and the crux of them hinge on comparing LSD/opiates to alcohol which is indeed what I was looking for.
However, it also got me to thinking, and it seems that a lot of drug-legalization types (the types that replied here) always go to the alcohol argument, that in my judgement, seems like their goal is to convince the public that drugs are below alcohol or at least equal on the morality/saftey scale of alcohol, and therefore they should be made legal. As far as I can tell however though, is that they basically make the argument on why alcohol should be illegal, not drugs. or at the very least, pro-prohibition(of alcohol) people could use their same "drugs are less harmful than alcohol but theyre illegal" proposition to argue that alcohol should be illegal.
This isnt a troll, this isnt baiting you, I am just seriously wondering and want to be educated, although I agree with the marijunna part, how do you figure that LSD and opiates are less harmful than alcohol?
Aww come on man, the person already has a virus, dont make them use paypal! I wonder which is worse.
Most typical line ever
on
Layoffs at OSDL
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The cuts come as the organisation re-structures.
This has to be the most used line ever when talking about layoffs. One day I want to see a press release about layoffs from some company "Eh...we laidoff people just for the hell of it...we're perfectly structured we just wanted to shake things up a bit. To keep our employees on their toes."
cells in animals before they can try the therapy in humans.
I know it is a personal pet peeve of mine but it just makes my skin crawl when people separate humans and animals. Humans ARE animals!
On a slightly more ontopic note: This is the breaking point for future scientific study specifically biomedic/stemcell research in the United States. There are two bills in the house about to be voted on - The Cord Blood Stem Cell Act 2005 HR 596 and Stem Cell Research Act 2005 HR 810 in the house, which surprisingly has *bipartisan support* which even more surprisingly is more than likely to pass and most surprisingly (well...not so much for some of us) is very likely to be vetoed (first time ever for GWB) by the President. Unbelievable.
It seems to me that the there is really only room for one DVD rental-by-mail service. It is one of those commodity items that becomes cheaper to run on a per-customer basis the more customers you have. Netflix got rid of a potential competitor and gained an influential ally in the process. Now, they have to deal with Blockbuster.
*bangs head against his Capitalism Fundamentals 101 book*
Excuse me?! I really really hope you didnt mean to imply that your perceived one-player-DVD rental system is a *good* thing but good gosh man, it certainly certainly will not be cheaper!
Too often people such as the parent here get tangled up in a business idea that seems simple to reproduce or that there are many players (businesses) that are identical and then cast that area of business as needing only one of said businesses to exist. To that I say no! No no no no. Look at Coke and Pepsi. Virtually the same damn thing and both do very well! And we as consumers benefit. Microsoft has a 90% stranglehold on marketshare, would you say that we benefit in quality, cost and inovation in their one-player-sytem?
'That doesnt compute' isnt a fair attack. He is trying to argue that a current norm(RIAA suing downloaders for lots of $$$) isnt fair and you merely site a somewhat parallel norm. This does nothing for the RIAA v Downloaders argument, all it does is highlight that there is another similar situation outside of the argument of this one.
You cite your example as if it is the de facto standard that everyone agrees someone that steals a t-shirt deserves to be punished more-over the price of the shirt, while I would say some disagree with even that.
Maybe its the snarkish nature of me, but minus the Internet part....doesnt this seem like a court case that should have been decided in the...oh say, 1800s?
Slashdot Mirror
Because "HD Radio" is a trade name and therefore a proper noun "Standard English" rules do not apply as you imply. (ex Toronto Maple "Leafs" is not a grammatical error.)
This makes me scratch my head. Why is the Bush admin against this? With a .xxx TLD it seems as if filtering software could hopefully at least get a little bit better, herd all the smut into one fenced in area. Seems like something porn peddlers as well as parents that want to protect would agree on.
.xxx domain to at least get some semblance and better blocking for software?
It seems to me that the Bush administrations concerns are more with just porn in general, which is neither here nor there in this debate, internet porn is here to stay, why not go along with the
Well, the dictionary disagrees with you:
patent
Pronunciation Key (ptnt)
n.
1.
1. A grant made by a government that confers upon the creator of an invention the sole right to make, use, and sell that invention for a set period of time.
2. Letters patent.
3. An invention protected by such a grant.
We can quibble about the US Patent system and how they grant patents to non-original inventions all day, and we can quibble about how this may be one of those cases, but linguistically spealing, yes, patenting should and is an invention.
Critics of gaming do not just have the facts against them; they have history against them, too."
I might agree if I knew what history they are talking about.
That the moral corrupting specter of two lines hiting a dot of Pong fame didn't destroy the social fabric of the 70s?
But isn't there some sort of sticking point price for games? It seemed like it was $49.99, throw down a hundred and you get two, ya know? But $60? That seems way out of the realm. But thats just me.
Either Microsoft doesn't realize that people will always spend within their means (ie if you have $500 in disposable income a year to spend on games, youre going to spend it if they are $50 or $60) or Microsoft is throwing in the towel and fixing a high price for games because they figure that gamers just won't buy a high number of their games and that there just won't be a large number of games to buy (which was a critique of the original Xbox, not enough games).
Considering how Google has a volume of 7.3 million shares and Microsoft 138 million shares, I would say you are comparing apples and oranges by strictly looking at stock price.
Pssh, Google and their *earth centric* attitude. What, we people from other planets are just supposed to ASSUME that the word "moon" is automatically referencing the EARTH'S MOON?
Obligatory Simpsons quote:
"Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. 14% of people know that."
In Apple's defense...even though they lost the court battle their defense was well designed, and their lawyers were pretty slick looking.
Of course, by those standards, most Americans must be addicted to work, sex, and TV as well."
To nitpick for a second, arent the first two well...essential to life? Wouldn't necessarily call that an addiction....
And whats with the 'Americans' snark? Last time I checked the rest of the world works and has sex too, hell Americans rank lower in industrialized nationals among sexual activity!
As a Google user that is beyond you're planet, I take offense to the fact that Google *only* included EARTH in there initial release!
Isnt that what TFA is about? That the new version needs a "bit" more work so they developed a new system?
This article got me thinking right away and I was trying to come up with a snarkish analogy to the car, that there is no 'safe' car (people still die, a lot) but that does not mean that there have not been vast improvements since the conception nor does it mean that a car cannot be safe when used properly under certain conditions.
But then that got me to thinking even more, there really isnt a 'safe' anything is there? So whats the point of pointing such things out?
Well, I see a lot of replies to my post, and the crux of them hinge on comparing LSD/opiates to alcohol which is indeed what I was looking for.
However, it also got me to thinking, and it seems that a lot of drug-legalization types (the types that replied here) always go to the alcohol argument, that in my judgement, seems like their goal is to convince the public that drugs are below alcohol or at least equal on the morality/saftey scale of alcohol, and therefore they should be made legal. As far as I can tell however though, is that they basically make the argument on why alcohol should be illegal, not drugs. or at the very least, pro-prohibition(of alcohol) people could use their same "drugs are less harmful than alcohol but theyre illegal" proposition to argue that alcohol should be illegal.
This isnt a troll, this isnt baiting you, I am just seriously wondering and want to be educated, although I agree with the marijunna part, how do you figure that LSD and opiates are less harmful than alcohol?
I also agree with the AC, starting with the first line:
It isn't censorship per se.
I'm sorry but, a company voluntarily not releasing old cartoons is censorship how exactly?
Do they accept PayPal?
Aww come on man, the person already has a virus, dont make them use paypal! I wonder which is worse.
The cuts come as the organisation re-structures.
This has to be the most used line ever when talking about layoffs. One day I want to see a press release about layoffs from some company "Eh...we laidoff people just for the hell of it...we're perfectly structured we just wanted to shake things up a bit. To keep our employees on their toes."
cells in animals before they can try the therapy in humans.
I know it is a personal pet peeve of mine but it just makes my skin crawl when people separate humans and animals. Humans ARE animals!
On a slightly more ontopic note: This is the breaking point for future scientific study specifically biomedic/stemcell research in the United States. There are two bills in the house about to be voted on - The Cord Blood Stem Cell Act 2005 HR 596 and Stem Cell Research Act 2005 HR 810 in the house, which surprisingly has *bipartisan support* which even more surprisingly is more than likely to pass and most surprisingly (well...not so much for some of us) is very likely to be vetoed (first time ever for GWB) by the President. Unbelievable.
It seems to me that the there is really only room for one DVD rental-by-mail service. It is one of those commodity items that becomes cheaper to run on a per-customer basis the more customers you have. Netflix got rid of a potential competitor and gained an influential ally in the process. Now, they have to deal with Blockbuster.
*bangs head against his Capitalism Fundamentals 101 book*
Excuse me?! I really really hope you didnt mean to imply that your perceived one-player-DVD rental system is a *good* thing but good gosh man, it certainly certainly will not be cheaper!
Too often people such as the parent here get tangled up in a business idea that seems simple to reproduce or that there are many players (businesses) that are identical and then cast that area of business as needing only one of said businesses to exist. To that I say no! No no no no. Look at Coke and Pepsi. Virtually the same damn thing and both do very well! And we as consumers benefit. Microsoft has a 90% stranglehold on marketshare, would you say that we benefit in quality, cost and inovation in their one-player-sytem?
How ironic that www.boingboint.net linked to an article How to fake a fingerprint just yesterday ;)
'That doesnt compute' isnt a fair attack. He is trying to argue that a current norm(RIAA suing downloaders for lots of $$$) isnt fair and you merely site a somewhat parallel norm. This does nothing for the RIAA v Downloaders argument, all it does is highlight that there is another similar situation outside of the argument of this one.
You cite your example as if it is the de facto standard that everyone agrees someone that steals a t-shirt deserves to be punished more-over the price of the shirt, while I would say some disagree with even that.
Is it just me or did both PS3 and Xbox360 designers try really hard to make a console in the vain light of iPod popularity?
Maybe its the snarkish nature of me, but minus the Internet part....doesnt this seem like a court case that should have been decided in the...oh say, 1800s?