So, by your theory, the industry should be paid for their crappy stuff. Isn't this what they're fighting for, and what we're not doing? Because it's crappy?
Sorry, when you wrote "we'd pay to see stuff..." I assumed you meant "as opposed to pirating stuff" - considering this entire story is about piracy, I thought it was a reasonable assumption to make. But, if you were not commenting on piracy, well, I have no comment in response then.
You should read the wikipedia entry on them - they are neither poisonous nor aggressive. They do like the shade which has made for some unfortunate encounters, but that's about it.
And "Chinese Democracy" from GNR is due out on Sunday. It's like the final episode of a TV series where the writers are trying furiously to wrap up all the loose ends!
Haven't you heard? Obama wears a blue turban and his advisor's last name is Mabus. The end days are upon us!
But virtualisation takes the cake. I don't get a hit with AMD's CPUs, having Pacifica in all the chips.
Ain't no way I'm going to go dig up the links, but even with the latest virtualization support in Intel chips, the opterons are reportedly significantly faster changing from one VM to another. One hypothesis is that it is due to support for nested page tables on the AMD implementation, but I have yet to read anything more than empirical tests plus speculation.
I've been thinking about doing a cellphone game and what I thought regarding distribution is to both sell it over a channel (like the Google Android Market) and GPL it.
If you go this way, and don't include any significant extras for the paid version, then you should add a clause that restricts anyone else from selling it via the same channels you are
In Hawaii, only the tourists are scared of our big-as-your-palm cane spiders. Everyone else doesn't mind having them in the house because they eat all the other bugs.
We'd pay to see stuff at the cinema, and own it on DVD / Blu-Ray if they'd just stop suing everybody they can find and put the money into funding good script writers and directors.
So, by your theory, people only take stuff for free if it is crappy stuff?
When I needed AdAware to remove a nasty spybot, my bittorrent client was the only thing that worked (because the spybot was blocking browser downloads).
Note that I'm not saying it actually has been a success, I'm saying I see no example of it having failed and I don't see how some random arrest figure with no context whatsoever proves anything one way or they other.
Your premise is that the TSA's behavior analysis program has prevented terrorist attacks by "scaring off" the terrorists because they believe they will get caught. As terrorism is not a crime of opportunity, it is reasonable to expect that such terrorists who have been "scared off" would simply move on to other targets that are not so well protected. Since there have been no terrorist attacks of note on any targets in the USA, and the TSA has not caught any terrorists either, it seems obvious to me that TSA's program is not effective.
I'm NOT amazed. Congress collectively has an approval rating below ten percent leading up to the election and yet over 96 percent get re-elected. The American electorate definitely get what they deserve because they keep sending the same idiots back time and time again.
It's called gerrymandering and the congress, they doing it right.
When it comes to MS, anti-trust regulations have been toothless in the past; why would they have any more teeth in the future? Colleen Kollar-Kotelly was a *Clinton* appointment.
Well, for one thing, claiming that IE was mandatory to the operation of the OS was technical bullshit that only technical people could easily recognize as bullshit.
Denying their largest single customer OEM sales of windows will (a) hurt MS in the short term with 100% certainty and (b) be blatantly obvious as an anti-trust violation because it requires no technical acumen to understand.
While intel could flood the market with cheap "vista capable" 915 chipsets, HP could have turned around and advertised the fact that their Vista experience was much better.
Could they? Anybody with crappy ratings would just fail to publicize the fact. So, HP would be out there with a number and no one else would mention that number. It would be as useful as price-match guarantees on mattresses.
That could just come right back to bite them on the ass, because it might just piss off Microsoft, and the thing is, Microsoft holds all the cards.
Only because companies like HP voluntarily hand their cards over to MS.
Somebody has to take the lead, and while they may suffer for it in the short term, the long term looks a whole lot brighter without being beholden to one company that holds are the cards.
Most Linux users are happy to install it themselves, and most people who want a pre-built computer complete with OS and software want one that works just like their old one,
You are definitely describing yesterday's market. Nowadays many, many users are happy with a fully functional web browser. Not a majority, yet, but a significant minority. Look at just how well the linux-based netbooks have been selling as just one example.
Then you should have stuck for what you believe and refused to sell underpowered vista machines.
You don't seem to understand what HP "believes in" -- it is making a profit.
When all the other vendors are able to sell underpowered and consequently underpriced vista machines with the same labeling as yours, then hardly anyone is going to buy your comparatively overpriced system. The majority of consumers are not capable of distinguishing between the intel 915 and 935 motherboard chipsets at the retail level. But they are able to recognize a $50 price difference.
If you're pissed at Microsoft, a letter won't do anything. You're still preinstalling Vista on every computer.
I totally agree. HP sells more Windows boxes than any other single vendor, and MS still fucked them they like they do all of their business partners. HP was neutered by Carly, they need to grow a pair back start getting self-sufficient again. They've clearly been fooled (at least) once now, will they let themselves be fooled twice?
you clearly don't, but then clearly you don't give a fuck about other people. yay for you.
Clearly? The only thing that's clear is you have a reading comprehension problem. Go back and read what I wrote. I've already discussed ways for people to get paid for their work that do not rely on something so pathetic as the kindness of strangers.
So while, I'm talking about workable solutions, you have just been whining. To my eyes its the self-centered whiner who doesn't "give a fuck about other people" and is completely typical of someone too incompetent to get past the emotional response of self-entitlement and get on to the business of making money in the real world.
But this is like going through the trash. It's clearly an end-run against privacy laws, but I don't see where the deviousness is. If you carry a cellphone around that emits radio waves, you probably don't have a great expectation of privacy if you leave it on all the time.
If it is illegal to receive broadcast signals like satellite television, then logically this sort of interception should be illegal too.
And it's not like the triggerfish are recording the conversation.
No, they are going one step further. Recording the conversation would be simply passive - in this case they are gaining unauthorized access to a computer (the one in the phone).
A similar goose and gander comparison comes to mind - if it is illegal for joe blow to gain unauthorized access to a computer, then it should be illegal for the government to gain unauthorized access to a computer.
Regardless, if marxists and liberals are in opposition to the nazis, it should be clear that the nazis were really not anything even remotely "socialist" as OeLeWaPpErKe claimed.
Slashdot Mirror
So, by your theory, the industry should be paid for their crappy stuff.
Isn't this what they're fighting for, and what we're not doing?
Because it's crappy?
Sorry, when you wrote "we'd pay to see stuff..." I assumed you meant "as opposed to pirating stuff" - considering this entire story is about piracy, I thought it was a reasonable assumption to make. But, if you were not commenting on piracy, well, I have no comment in response then.
You should read the wikipedia entry on them - they are neither poisonous nor aggressive. They do like the shade which has made for some unfortunate encounters, but that's about it.
George Bush getting elected twice.
No, but it does explain why he got the PATRIOT act and PATRIOT II acts passed by congress.
And "Chinese Democracy" from GNR is due out on Sunday. It's like the final episode of a TV series where the writers are trying furiously to wrap up all the loose ends!
Haven't you heard? Obama wears a blue turban and his advisor's last name is Mabus. The end days are upon us!
But virtualisation takes the cake. I don't get a hit with AMD's CPUs, having Pacifica in all the chips.
Ain't no way I'm going to go dig up the links, but even with the latest virtualization support in Intel chips, the opterons are reportedly significantly faster changing from one VM to another. One hypothesis is that it is due to support for nested page tables on the AMD implementation, but I have yet to read anything more than empirical tests plus speculation.
Well it doesn't help that their response to being is to jump straight up, often right onto the person who frightened them.
Cane spiders do not jump.
I've been thinking about doing a cellphone game and what I thought regarding distribution is to both sell it over a channel (like the Google Android Market) and GPL it.
If you go this way, and don't include any significant extras for the paid version, then you should add a clause that restricts anyone else from selling it via the same channels you are
In Hawaii, only the tourists are scared of our big-as-your-palm cane spiders. Everyone else doesn't mind having them in the house because they eat all the other bugs.
Gerrymandering is impossible in Senate elections as long as state borders remain fixed.
While Ted Stevens is in the Senate, MilleniumMan was speaking about the entire Congress's approval rating, not just the senate.
We'd pay to see stuff at the cinema, and own it on DVD / Blu-Ray if they'd just stop suing everybody they can find and put the money into funding good script writers and directors.
So, by your theory, people only take stuff for free if it is crappy stuff?
It's called harmonization and it is generally profit-driven.
When I needed AdAware to remove a nasty spybot, my bittorrent client was the only thing that worked (because the spybot was blocking browser downloads).
How did you download the torrent file?
Note that I'm not saying it actually has been a success, I'm saying I see no example of it having failed and I don't see how some random arrest figure with no context whatsoever proves anything one way or they other.
Your premise is that the TSA's behavior analysis program has prevented terrorist attacks by "scaring off" the terrorists because they believe they will get caught. As terrorism is not a crime of opportunity, it is reasonable to expect that such terrorists who have been "scared off" would simply move on to other targets that are not so well protected. Since there have been no terrorist attacks of note on any targets in the USA, and the TSA has not caught any terrorists either, it seems obvious to me that TSA's program is not effective.
I'm NOT amazed. Congress collectively has an approval rating below ten percent leading up to the election and yet over 96 percent get re-elected. The American electorate definitely get what they deserve because they keep sending the same idiots back time and time again.
It's called gerrymandering and the congress, they doing it right.
An idiotic statement, expecting them to drop Microsoft.
An idiotic poster, reading things that I did not write and then writing things that I wrote and claiming them for his own.
When it comes to MS, anti-trust regulations have been toothless in the past; why would they have any more teeth in the future? Colleen Kollar-Kotelly was a *Clinton* appointment.
Well, for one thing, claiming that IE was mandatory to the operation of the OS was technical bullshit that only technical people could easily recognize as bullshit.
Denying their largest single customer OEM sales of windows will (a) hurt MS in the short term with 100% certainty and (b) be blatantly obvious as an anti-trust violation because it requires no technical acumen to understand.
"In terms of sheep numbers, Linux supports more hardware than any one Windows version."
This metric is new to me.
It refers to the number of units you can count before falling asleep.
While intel could flood the market with cheap "vista capable" 915 chipsets, HP could have turned around and advertised the fact that their Vista experience was much better.
Could they? Anybody with crappy ratings would just fail to publicize the fact. So, HP would be out there with a number and no one else would mention that number. It would be as useful as price-match guarantees on mattresses.
That could just come right back to bite them on the ass, because it might just piss off Microsoft, and the thing is, Microsoft holds all the cards.
Only because companies like HP voluntarily hand their cards over to MS.
Somebody has to take the lead, and while they may suffer for it in the short term, the long term looks a whole lot brighter without being beholden to one company that holds are the cards.
Most Linux users are happy to install it themselves, and most people who want a pre-built computer complete with OS and software want one that works just like their old one,
You are definitely describing yesterday's market. Nowadays many, many users are happy with a fully functional web browser. Not a majority, yet, but a significant minority. Look at just how well the linux-based netbooks have been selling as just one example.
Then you should have stuck for what you believe and refused to sell underpowered vista machines.
You don't seem to understand what HP "believes in" -- it is making a profit.
When all the other vendors are able to sell underpowered and consequently underpriced vista machines with the same labeling as yours, then hardly anyone is going to buy your comparatively overpriced system. The majority of consumers are not capable of distinguishing between the intel 915 and 935 motherboard chipsets at the retail level. But they are able to recognize a $50 price difference.
If you're pissed at Microsoft, a letter won't do anything. You're still preinstalling Vista on every computer.
I totally agree. HP sells more Windows boxes than any other single vendor, and MS still fucked them they like they do all of their business partners. HP was neutered by Carly, they need to grow a pair back start getting self-sufficient again. They've clearly been fooled (at least) once now, will they let themselves be fooled twice?
you clearly don't, but then clearly you don't give a fuck about other people. yay for you.
Clearly? The only thing that's clear is you have a reading comprehension problem. Go back and read what I wrote. I've already discussed ways for people to get paid for their work that do not rely on something so pathetic as the kindness of strangers.
So while, I'm talking about workable solutions, you have just been whining. To my eyes its the self-centered whiner who doesn't "give a fuck about other people" and is completely typical of someone too incompetent to get past the emotional response of self-entitlement and get on to the business of making money in the real world.
But this is like going through the trash. It's clearly an end-run against privacy laws, but I don't see where the deviousness is. If you carry a cellphone around that emits radio waves, you probably don't have a great expectation of privacy if you leave it on all the time.
If it is illegal to receive broadcast signals like satellite television, then logically this sort of interception should be illegal too.
And it's not like the triggerfish are recording the conversation.
No, they are going one step further. Recording the conversation would be simply passive - in this case they are gaining unauthorized access to a computer (the one in the phone).
A similar goose and gander comparison comes to mind - if it is illegal for joe blow to gain unauthorized access to a computer, then it should be illegal for the government to gain unauthorized access to a computer.
Regardless, if marxists and liberals are in opposition to the nazis, it should be clear that the nazis were really not anything even remotely "socialist" as OeLeWaPpErKe claimed.
"What's this? Where are the photos you took?" "You uploaded them to a website?"
Gee, maybe if you leave the original of the photos on your phone, they'll be happy to delete them none the wiser that you copied them to the web.