Still time to hit 'em with one last Slashdotting, just for old time's sake.
Come on! Everybody click http://www.sco.com/ Hit Refresh a couple of times while you're there.
Re:Let me fix that for you...
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
I seriously doubt it would be Dell, or even HP. Both, (especially Dell) depend too much on selling desktop machines to risk incurring the wrath of Microsoft. If Novell gets bought out, my hunch leans toward IBM.
A local radio show was once interviewing an "expert" in getting out of traffic tickets. He had a suggestion for getting out of tickets from automated Red-light cameras, but it only works for married couples with two vehicles.
Each vehicle is registered in one spouse's name, and driven by the other. If the husband runs a red light, the ticket gets mailed to his wife. She contests the ticket, pointing out that the picture clearly shows a man as the driver. When asked to identify the driver, she responds, "That's protected by privilege," as you cannot be forced to testify against your spouse.
The "expert" said it may or may not work, depending on state and local laws, so YMMV.
I've got to second the praise for Lenovo's support. I've never had to wait longer than 2 business days for a part - usually have it the next business day. It's never taken more than 10 minutes to get to a tech on the phone. That's not on hold for 10 minutes, but including the voice response system. Actual hold time is always less than 5 minutes and very often no hold at all.
I've done some looking into this in the past. According to Microsoft, it's best to set your system up this way in the first place, but they make it difficult to even do that. You've got to specify an option in an unattend.txt file and perform an unattended install.
It is possible to move the "Documents and Settings" folder on an existing install, but the page detailing the method is full of "You'll probably screw up your computer trying this" warnings. Basically it involves copying the folder, then editing the myriad registry keys referencing the original location to reflect the new location. Here's the link to the MS Knowlegebase article:
I think that's actually a great idea. I had previously thought of some sort of Creative Commons registry that indie artists could register with to explicitly grant permission for webcasting, but eMusic makes perfect sense. They've already got distribution agreements with their artists. They could even provide a revenue source for those artists - just set rates at half what the old SoundExchange rates were.
Shooting won't do any good, unless you're using silver bullets. I believe the preferred method is a wooden stake through the heart, cutting off the head, singeing the whiskers, burning the entrails, then marinate whatever's left in Holy Water and garlic, garnish with a sprig of wolfsbane, encase in kryptonite, and finally bury at the crossroads.
Even then you've got a 25% chance they'll return to feed on the blood and currency of the living.
I'm hoping that whoever modded you Troll missed your point. The only people who think there's something wrong with being a home maker are "feminists". You know, the ones who are standing up for a woman's right to do whatever she wants, unless she happens to want to stay home and take care of children.
At least, that seems to me to be the most likely reason for the Troll mod. Hopefully they'll realize the mistake and post something to undo the mod.
I agree with that as well. I like my File Manager and Web Browser separate, whether in Windows or Linux. I've never understood why the two should be integrated - they are used in completely different ways and for different purposes. File Managers are for viewing and manipulating the contents of directories, regardless of what those directories contain. Web Browsers are for viewing content.
I can understand integrating File Manager and FTP - that makes perfect sense. But why the web browser should be a part of that, I don't understand. The other problem with the integrated web browser/file manager is that it encourages the use of "single click to open". I almost never swear, but GODDAMN I hate that behavior! Come on, KDE, even Microsoft figured out to do away with that!
Gold-PLATED? I hope you don't have the gall to actually call yourself an audiophile. No true audiophile would settle for anything less than solid gold connectors. Gold-plated? You might as well just use two cans and a string.
Considering that Windows Update bypasses the hosts file, I'd imagine that Windows Adware would too. As an above poster mentioned, you could block it by transparent proxy.
"Newman says the finished BioSuit may be a hybrid that incorporates some elements of the traditional suits, including a gas-pressured torso section and helmet."
Every time cellulosic ethanol comes up, I wonder about the feasibility of planting the crop in the median strips of interstate highways. Generally people are talking about something that grows like a weed, so instead of having median strips full of grass and weeds that the state crews mow every month, we'd have median strips of, say, switchgrass that crews would mow and bale. The only increased costs would be baling the stuff up and transporting it to the ethanol plant.
Of course, with cellulosic ethanol production you could process the clippings from the grass that's growing there now.
So to me it looks like the only alternative is for internet radio to become very similar to FM radio (lots of ads) and fees paid.
Not much chance of that happening. Webcasters would be thrilled if they were subject to the same fee structure as FM. That's the major problem - webcasters are being subjected to a fee structure that would bankrupt any broadcaster. I've been googling for the source and can't find it, but I remember seeing an article saying that if the new royalty structure was applied to terrestrial radio as well, ClearChannel's royalty bill would be more than their yearly revenue. Anyone out there got a link?
You may say that the terrestrial and extra-terrestrial radio don't have to pay these fees, but that is a different model and a much different market - and what SE and the law decide for these radios doesn't really matter to the topic at hand.
I'm very curious as to why you see terrestrial and satellite radio as different? Particularly satellite. Both provide service worldwide. Both provide "digital broadcast" - the justification originally given for charging performance royalties for internet radio when terrestrial radio doesn't pay them. Ease of copying doesn't fly with me - I think the average person would find it just as easy to run a cable from their sat. radio to the computer as setting up a stream ripper. Based on the quality of most net radio feeds, you'd probably get better sound with the cable, even with the analog conversion.
The only real differences I see between satellite radio and net radio is that sat radio is subscription based while most net radio stations aren't, and you can install sat radio in your car but not net radio. I don't see either of these differences as justifying higher rates for net radio.
Additionally, they see many of the internet radio stations making money off of their artist's work - with their content - and they want a piece of the action
And they've been getting it. Webcasters have been paying royalties for some time now. This isn't about whether webcasters should have to pay royalties. This is about an insane increase in royalties that requires webcasters to pay many times the fees of other formats. The old royalty schedule allowed for small webcasters to pay a percentage of revenue - a "piece of the action". The new schedule requires payment per-listener, per-song. Not in itself a bad thing, except that the rates are ridiculously high. If the new rates were applied to terrestrial radio, Clear Channel's royalties would be more than their entire operating budget.
Nobody's asking for internet radio to play for free. But I think it's reasonable for them to charge the same rates as satellite radio. That's what would result from the Internet Radio Equality Act (HR.2060 and S.1353) I've written my congressmen - two responded with form letters, but letters that at least indicate they are familiar with the issue. I haven't heard from the third, but as he is the co-sponsor of the Senate bill, I already know where he stands.
I could be wrong about this, but I believe there is a workaround. The way that the collection is supposed to work is that the RIAA, (or rather, SoundExchange,) collects royalties on behalf of artists, then artists sign up with SoundExchange to receive payments. The reasoning behind this is that broadcasters don't have to have agreements with the individual artists.
The workaround is for the broadcasters to work out agreements with the artists themselves, bypassing the RIAA. I'll freely admit that I don't know a whole lot about Creative Commons licensing, but CCL might serve as an agreement to permit broadcast. If not, there's nothing to stop indie artists from coming together to develop a blanket license to permit webcasting. This would allow webcasters to broadcast Open music, and when the RIAA comes knocking, they can point to the agreement directly with the artists and tell the RIAA to piss off.
Slashdot Mirror
Come on! Everybody click http://www.sco.com/ Hit Refresh a couple of times while you're there.
I seriously doubt it would be Dell, or even HP. Both, (especially Dell) depend too much on selling desktop machines to risk incurring the wrath of Microsoft. If Novell gets bought out, my hunch leans toward IBM.
No, he means it will "even out" your eye to match the vision in the other eye. You know, the one you used to look into the home-made laser.
Are you kidding? The internet is not a truck. It's a series of tubes.
Each vehicle is registered in one spouse's name, and driven by the other. If the husband runs a red light, the ticket gets mailed to his wife. She contests the ticket, pointing out that the picture clearly shows a man as the driver. When asked to identify the driver, she responds, "That's protected by privilege," as you cannot be forced to testify against your spouse.
The "expert" said it may or may not work, depending on state and local laws, so YMMV.
Well, actually we still need the firehoses, but not until afterward.
I've got to second the praise for Lenovo's support. I've never had to wait longer than 2 business days for a part - usually have it the next business day. It's never taken more than 10 minutes to get to a tech on the phone. That's not on hold for 10 minutes, but including the voice response system. Actual hold time is always less than 5 minutes and very often no hold at all.
It is possible to move the "Documents and Settings" folder on an existing install, but the page detailing the method is full of "You'll probably screw up your computer trying this" warnings. Basically it involves copying the folder, then editing the myriad registry keys referencing the original location to reflect the new location. Here's the link to the MS Knowlegebase article:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/236621
I think that's actually a great idea. I had previously thought of some sort of Creative Commons registry that indie artists could register with to explicitly grant permission for webcasting, but eMusic makes perfect sense. They've already got distribution agreements with their artists. They could even provide a revenue source for those artists - just set rates at half what the old SoundExchange rates were.
Shooting won't do any good, unless you're using silver bullets. I believe the preferred method is a wooden stake through the heart, cutting off the head, singeing the whiskers, burning the entrails, then marinate whatever's left in Holy Water and garlic, garnish with a sprig of wolfsbane, encase in kryptonite, and finally bury at the crossroads.
Even then you've got a 25% chance they'll return to feed on the blood and currency of the living.
I'm hoping that whoever modded you Troll missed your point. The only people who think there's something wrong with being a home maker are "feminists". You know, the ones who are standing up for a woman's right to do whatever she wants, unless she happens to want to stay home and take care of children.
At least, that seems to me to be the most likely reason for the Troll mod. Hopefully they'll realize the mistake and post something to undo the mod.
I agree with that as well. I like my File Manager and Web Browser separate, whether in Windows or Linux. I've never understood why the two should be integrated - they are used in completely different ways and for different purposes. File Managers are for viewing and manipulating the contents of directories, regardless of what those directories contain. Web Browsers are for viewing content.
I can understand integrating File Manager and FTP - that makes perfect sense. But why the web browser should be a part of that, I don't understand. The other problem with the integrated web browser/file manager is that it encourages the use of "single click to open". I almost never swear, but GODDAMN I hate that behavior! Come on, KDE, even Microsoft figured out to do away with that!
My first thought was that Microsoft was selling Works for what it's really worth... Frustration, Pain, and Misery.
Think of the mess! There'd be beard EVERYWHERE!
You're talking about reading text within the PDF. Most PDF spam has the actual message as an image rather than text.
Gold-PLATED? I hope you don't have the gall to actually call yourself an audiophile. No true audiophile would settle for anything less than solid gold connectors. Gold-plated? You might as well just use two cans and a string.
Individual morons will run out of spare cash, but the universe will never run out of spare morons.
Considering that Windows Update bypasses the hosts file, I'd imagine that Windows Adware would too. As an above poster mentioned, you could block it by transparent proxy.
From TFA:
"Newman says the finished BioSuit may be a hybrid that incorporates some elements of the traditional suits, including a gas-pressured torso section and helmet."
Of course, with cellulosic ethanol production you could process the clippings from the grass that's growing there now.
Not much chance of that happening. Webcasters would be thrilled if they were subject to the same fee structure as FM. That's the major problem - webcasters are being subjected to a fee structure that would bankrupt any broadcaster. I've been googling for the source and can't find it, but I remember seeing an article saying that if the new royalty structure was applied to terrestrial radio as well, ClearChannel's royalty bill would be more than their yearly revenue. Anyone out there got a link?
I'm very curious as to why you see terrestrial and satellite radio as different? Particularly satellite. Both provide service worldwide. Both provide "digital broadcast" - the justification originally given for charging performance royalties for internet radio when terrestrial radio doesn't pay them. Ease of copying doesn't fly with me - I think the average person would find it just as easy to run a cable from their sat. radio to the computer as setting up a stream ripper. Based on the quality of most net radio feeds, you'd probably get better sound with the cable, even with the analog conversion.
The only real differences I see between satellite radio and net radio is that sat radio is subscription based while most net radio stations aren't, and you can install sat radio in your car but not net radio. I don't see either of these differences as justifying higher rates for net radio.
Additionally, they see many of the internet radio stations making money off of their artist's work - with their content - and they want a piece of the action
And they've been getting it. Webcasters have been paying royalties for some time now. This isn't about whether webcasters should have to pay royalties. This is about an insane increase in royalties that requires webcasters to pay many times the fees of other formats. The old royalty schedule allowed for small webcasters to pay a percentage of revenue - a "piece of the action". The new schedule requires payment per-listener, per-song. Not in itself a bad thing, except that the rates are ridiculously high. If the new rates were applied to terrestrial radio, Clear Channel's royalties would be more than their entire operating budget.
Nobody's asking for internet radio to play for free. But I think it's reasonable for them to charge the same rates as satellite radio. That's what would result from the Internet Radio Equality Act (HR.2060 and S.1353) I've written my congressmen - two responded with form letters, but letters that at least indicate they are familiar with the issue. I haven't heard from the third, but as he is the co-sponsor of the Senate bill, I already know where he stands.
The workaround is for the broadcasters to work out agreements with the artists themselves, bypassing the RIAA. I'll freely admit that I don't know a whole lot about Creative Commons licensing, but CCL might serve as an agreement to permit broadcast. If not, there's nothing to stop indie artists from coming together to develop a blanket license to permit webcasting. This would allow webcasters to broadcast Open music, and when the RIAA comes knocking, they can point to the agreement directly with the artists and tell the RIAA to piss off.
Didn't you know that IKEA has trademarked hex bolts? Your coffee table movie is infringing on their intellectual property!
Maybe the Sony execs have really short legs.