Right. Just like breathing air is a privelage. What most people don't realize is that it was MADE a privelage to control the population. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, with so many people doing what they want it would be anarchy. Unfortunately i'm still looking for that private island where i can pee anywhere i want, chop any tree down and shoot as many animals as i please. Well so much for the freedom of existance.
With an attitude like that, no You won't. If every one thought they couldn't win, we would have never have had a revolution. It is a university after all and graduating from one I know how easy it is to organize a demostration or protest. If he trully feels that the University is in the wrong, then he should have no problem organizing a demonstratration on campus grounds. He just has to know what to say and pick the right time to say it. There are campus papers and he can create posters. He has the means to change what goes around him and he should take the oportunity to do so.
The frequency in the USA is also 60 Hz. The electricity in Japan is 100V A.C 50Hz in the east and 100V A.C 60Hz in the west portion of Japan.
I don't see how they could complain. Usually complaints happen when transitioning from a higher frequency to a lower one. That's not happening in either case here.
St. Patrick's Day?!?! Gee, imagine Lucky the Leprechaun as an SCO spokesman: "Always after me impending doom!" At least it gives us another occasion to toast with our pint o' Guinness, Harp, Murphy's or some beer with green food coloring in it (hopefully not Sudan-1.)
Oh that explains it. Darl saw the TV commercial and mistook the "bolw of Lucky Charms" for a "pot of gold." No wonder all his lawyers are green. Then he picked up the wrong bottle of food coloring, eneded up looking like the Leprechaun from the movie, not to mention his business tactics are reminiscent of the plot line of Leprechaun 2: back 2 da hood.
No, cheapskate, hire a lawyer to advise you on protecting any ideas of your own which you think may be of significant value.
Funny how we have to contribute to capitalism, to hire somebody who doesn't konw what they are talking about anyway, to protect something that is mine in the first place and still end up being called a cheapskate.
Great instead of Funny, i get modded 50% redundant, and 50% off-topic.
Whoever did that needs to get a PS3 and a couple of porn games and release some of that modding tension...
Great! Now to ask the important question...
on
More On PS3 and Xbox 2
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Yep, make a single EULA that is government regulated, and that all software falls under. No company can state how their code is to be used. I know, seems unfair, huh? All those poor companies having the rights of today's consumers.
A government regulated eula would prevent companies from creating this ridiculous BS that is spewed out of their legal departments, while still protecting their software, as well as the end consumer.
The cost of these items is always too high for the American market so Americans won't buy the stuff. Therefore, nobody bothers importing it anymore.
It's how they regulate everything is what does it for me. Why should i pay 400 bucks for something that i can't use however the hell i want to, cause i might get sued?
IF it cost 800 dolars, and i could copy, duplicate, burn, spit, trample, throw, submerge, fling, pound, kick, punch, karate chop, pee, crap or do whatever else i wanted to do with it, or the media i put on it (without the posibility of getting sued), i would buy it in a heartbeat.
That's why we have to buy crappy 100 dolar players, cause each damm cd costs 20-25 bucks, and all the songs blow but one. And god help you if you rip it and put it on the player.
It boils down to this: If i didn't have to spend hundreds of dolars on cd's (ie. music i wouldn't wipe my enemies a$$ with) i would spend it on the damm player.
I know there's more holes in this argument than swiss chesse, but humor me for a while.
Well, first off, non-commercial sites are just that - non-commercial. They themselves are not selling anything, so why are they trying to sell me something else (unrelated half the time)through advertisements?
Now i know what you mean when you give the GameFaq's example - i have used them myself, and i love the site, and don't even tell me about the hours of stress.
Now it doesn't seem like it is fair that i block them, but then they knew what they are doing when they went non-commercial. If i give stuff away, then nobody else should have to pay for it - It was my blunder that i gave it away in the first place.
I know we all love free stuff, but i also realize that the internet isn't free either...
It's a dillema that has two sides, but it's just like weighing everything else in life.
For me the reasoning is simple:
Is it good? Is it bad? ads - 95% of the time bad. Conclusion: ads must die.
I know it hurts some good guys, but in the end it solves more problems then it creates. Just look at the internet in 1994(almost no ads). It was great. Look at it in 2004(ads up the wazoo) It sucks. So yes, while ads help support business, in the end i question whether those businesses should be supported. The answer is no, and it's unfortunate if you hurt some that are good, but that's called life.
The question is not "Is Firefox unethical?", but "Is their throwing ads in my face unethical?"
I see that most people here are trying to defend the practice of ads on web pages. To remind everyone, the net started out for a different purpose than selling stuff, and (to the complete shock of certain individuals) hasn't changed in that respect. Just because a bunch of people are trying to make some money does not give them the right to screw everything up along the way.
Actually it gives the people who keep this place together the right to kick those adverts in the arse.
My analogy: Imagine the people who built and maintain the internet as contractors. They built a house (the internet). Now a bunch of crack dealers (advertisers) barge in and start selling dope (advertisements). Is it unethical for the contractor to board up all the windows and lock all the doors (block ads and other junk)??? Or was it unethical for those crack dealers to come in and start selling smack in the first place.
Think about that when you say that advertisers keep the internet together. In reality the only thing they want to keep together is their bank account and profit.
Re:Gentoo zealouts out in full force today
on
Embedded Gentoo?
·
· Score: 1
Re:Gentoo zealouts out in full force today
...too bad he couldn't spell "zealots" correctly either.
No seriously my old C128, packed up and sitting in my closet kicks butt. I still have the add on tape player. hell i still have some games, no tapes tho. I would unpack it and play it a little, but im afraid of braking it.
your rights dont include taking another persons rights
Your right, of course, but after i sell my house, i can't come back half a year later and demand a "certificate" of proof of ownership, and then kick them out if they can't or won't (ie. refuse) provide it.
Lets not argue about whether it is stealing to download HL2 on the internet and not pay for it.
I'm not talking about stealing. I'm talking about buying it. Re-read my previous post and dont' skip half of it.
Second, don't be a sheep. We all need some kind of control to keep civilization going, but don't put blinders on. What do you think revolutions stem from? It's because people blindly accept what the government tells them, without thinking, while a select few can see through all the BS that the government uses to oppress people. That's why it's as bad as it is. People just blindly accept what they are told. I'm not bashing control. I'm saying there is a difference between control and oppression.
Thank you for proving my point.
As all can now see, the problem is not just with software, but all forms of enncroachment on private property. If i decide to plant a tree, i should not have to go and ask the city, if the tree is to be planted on my property. I can't go and tell them they can't change their gutters because they have not bought a bribe^H^H^H^H^H permit from me.
The point is that they can control what the population is doing, because we have a bunch of "just accept it" clowns running around. I hear "don't like it, don't buy it" phrases all the time - and I don't like it and i'm not buying it.
I don't accept the goverment control over where i can piss, and i fight back agians this kind of slavery.
It easy to have them back down too, just treat them like they treat you - Case in point:
I recieved a ticket for Street cleaning, and being a good little citizen i went to pay it the next day. Well after about a month i recieved a letter stating that i have a court hearing for an unpaid cleaning ticket. Well being prudent i imediately called and gave them the check number they cashed. Well they couldn't do anything and i just HAD to come in to court. I'm not having any of that.
I politely told them that my time is very valuable, (lets say at $40/hour) and loosing a whole day of work they would recieve a bill for 8 hours x 40/hour + 25% inconvenience fee. If not paid within 10 days (their due date on tickets) a 100 dolar late fee would be assesed, after 30 days the bill would be submitted to a collection agency. Upon hearing so, the manager came upon the phone and i was told that the matter is completely resolved and they will take care of the whole issue. No bill necessary. No court date necessary.
They
bought something but that doesn't mean that they own what they bought.
Definition of bought: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q= bought
Also if you dont understand that one, (definition of acquire, defines bought): http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q =acquire
The plot thickens, (definition of possession, defines acquire): http://dictionary.reference.com/search? q=possessio n
If you don't feel like clicking the links, let me summarize it for you:
to "buy", past tense "bought" is defined as "acquiring", but to "acquire" is to gain "possession", but "possession" is defined as "something owned."
Go ahead read it, it's right in the english dictionary.
So what you have just stated is an Oxymoron. What i have bought, is mine and i have the right to do what i want with it. Examples: House - i bought it - i own it. if i want to tear it down i can Car - i bought it - i own it. - if i want to junk it or tear it to pieces i can Underwear - i bought em- i own em. if i want to wear them on my head in private i can Video Game - i bought it - i own it if i want to play without a cd or online authorization, i can. and i will dammit. Cause valve is infinging on my right as owner of said property.
You dont have to show anyone the deed to the house every time you step through the front door, do you? I don't have to fax over a copy of the car title to the DMV every time i want to start a car do i? I don't have to call Hanes every time i want to put on clean underwear now do i? So why should i have to do those things with Valve's software, or any software for that matter.
On the other hand , i completely and wholehartedly agree with the rest of your comment.
Slashdot Mirror
Driving is NOT a right, but a PRIVILEGE.
Right. Just like breathing air is a privelage. What most people don't realize is that it was MADE a privelage to control the population. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, with so many people doing what they want it would be anarchy. Unfortunately i'm still looking for that private island where i can pee anywhere i want, chop any tree down and shoot as many animals as i please. Well so much for the freedom of existance.
I thought it was a joke when i recieved mod points on April Fools.... Then came the Paris Hilton article.
With an attitude like that, no You won't. If every one thought they couldn't win, we would have never have had a revolution. It is a university after all and graduating from one I know how easy it is to organize a demostration or protest. If he trully feels that the University is in the wrong, then he should have no problem organizing a demonstratration on campus grounds. He just has to know what to say and pick the right time to say it. There are campus papers and he can create posters. He has the means to change what goes around him and he should take the oportunity to do so.
I just read slashdot posts modded +5, insightful for my daily laughs.
Picture Here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4379577. stm
The frequency in the USA is also 60 Hz. The electricity in Japan is 100V A.C 50Hz in the east and 100V A.C 60Hz in the west portion of Japan.
I don't see how they could complain. Usually complaints happen when transitioning from a higher frequency to a lower one. That's not happening in either case here.
If you think that i became a PhD astrophysicist to work for 52500 a year....
Oh that explains it. Darl saw the TV commercial and mistook the "bolw of Lucky Charms" for a "pot of gold." No wonder all his lawyers are green. Then he picked up the wrong bottle of food coloring, eneded up looking like the Leprechaun from the movie, not to mention his business tactics are reminiscent of the plot line of Leprechaun 2: back 2 da hood.
Funny how we have to contribute to capitalism, to hire somebody who doesn't konw what they are talking about anyway, to protect something that is mine in the first place and still end up being called a cheapskate.
Hey.... Your right.....
Great instead of Funny, i get modded 50% redundant, and 50% off-topic. Whoever did that needs to get a PS3 and a couple of porn games and release some of that modding tension...
...will anybody make porn games for it???
Who's the bigger fool - the fools calling them names or the fools standing in the background scared?
there is something good coming out of poland.
Being polish myself, i know that's hard to do.
Next week: After geting hammered on Vodka, the Polish government bans alcohol.
Yep, make a single EULA that is government regulated, and that all software falls under. No company can state how their code is to be used.
I know, seems unfair, huh? All those poor companies having the rights of today's consumers.
A government regulated eula would prevent companies from creating this ridiculous BS that is spewed out of their legal departments, while still protecting their software, as well as the end consumer.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/arc hive/2004/12/09/gadgetgap.DTL
Quote from article:
Next: GigaPixel cell phones .Personally i'm holding out for Terabit. Nothin like a picture the size of a city block.
It's how they regulate everything is what does it for me. Why should i pay 400 bucks for something that i can't use however the hell i want to, cause i might get sued?
IF it cost 800 dolars, and i could copy, duplicate, burn, spit, trample, throw, submerge, fling, pound, kick, punch, karate chop, pee, crap or do whatever else i wanted to do with it, or the media i put on it (without the posibility of getting sued), i would buy it in a heartbeat.
That's why we have to buy crappy 100 dolar players, cause each damm cd costs 20-25 bucks, and all the songs blow but one. And god help you if you rip it and put it on the player.
It boils down to this: If i didn't have to spend hundreds of dolars on cd's (ie. music i wouldn't wipe my enemies a$$ with) i would spend it on the damm player.
I know there's more holes in this argument than swiss chesse, but humor me for a while.
Now i know what you mean when you give the GameFaq's example - i have used them myself, and i love the site, and don't even tell me about the hours of stress.
Now it doesn't seem like it is fair that i block them, but then they knew what they are doing when they went non-commercial. If i give stuff away, then nobody else should have to pay for it - It was my blunder that i gave it away in the first place.
I know we all love free stuff, but i also realize that the internet isn't free either...
It's a dillema that has two sides, but it's just like weighing everything else in life.
For me the reasoning is simple: Is it good? Is it bad? ads - 95% of the time bad. Conclusion: ads must die.
I know it hurts some good guys, but in the end it solves more problems then it creates. Just look at the internet in 1994(almost no ads). It was great. Look at it in 2004(ads up the wazoo) It sucks. So yes, while ads help support business, in the end i question whether those businesses should be supported. The answer is no, and it's unfortunate if you hurt some that are good, but that's called life.
The question is not "Is Firefox unethical?", but "Is their throwing ads in my face unethical?"
I see that most people here are trying to defend the practice of ads on web pages. To remind everyone, the net started out for a different purpose than selling stuff, and (to the complete shock of certain individuals) hasn't changed in that respect. Just because a bunch of people are trying to make some money does not give them the right to screw everything up along the way.
Actually it gives the people who keep this place together the right to kick those adverts in the arse.
My analogy:
Imagine the people who built and maintain the internet as contractors. They built a house (the internet).
Now a bunch of crack dealers (advertisers) barge in and start selling dope (advertisements).
Is it unethical for the contractor to board up all the windows and lock all the doors (block ads and other junk)??? Or was it unethical for those crack dealers to come in and start selling smack in the first place.
Think about that when you say that advertisers keep the internet together. In reality the only thing they want to keep together is their bank account and profit.
No seriously my old C128, packed up and sitting in my closet kicks butt. I still have the add on tape player. hell i still have some games, no tapes tho. I would unpack it and play it a little, but im afraid of braking it.
Second, don't be a sheep. We all need some kind of control to keep civilization going, but don't put blinders on. What do you think revolutions stem from? It's because people blindly accept what the government tells them, without thinking, while a select few can see through all the BS that the government uses to oppress people. That's why it's as bad as it is. People just blindly accept what they are told. I'm not bashing control. I'm saying there is a difference between control and oppression.
As all can now see, the problem is not just with software, but all forms of enncroachment on private property. If i decide to plant a tree, i should not have to go and ask the city, if the tree is to be planted on my property. I can't go and tell them they can't change their gutters because they have not bought a bribe^H^H^H^H^H permit from me.
The point is that they can control what the population is doing, because we have a bunch of "just accept it" clowns running around. I hear "don't like it, don't buy it" phrases all the time - and I don't like it and i'm not buying it.
I don't accept the goverment control over where i can piss, and i fight back agians this kind of slavery.
It easy to have them back down too, just treat them like they treat you - Case in point:
I recieved a ticket for Street cleaning, and being a good little citizen i went to pay it the next day. Well after about a month i recieved a letter stating that i have a court hearing for an unpaid cleaning ticket. Well being prudent i imediately called and gave them the check number they cashed. Well they couldn't do anything and i just HAD to come in to court. I'm not having any of that.
I politely told them that my time is very valuable, (lets say at $40/hour) and loosing a whole day of work they would recieve a bill for 8 hours x 40/hour + 25% inconvenience fee. If not paid within 10 days (their due date on tickets) a 100 dolar late fee would be assesed, after 30 days the bill would be submitted to a collection agency. Upon hearing so, the manager came upon the phone and i was told that the matter is completely resolved and they will take care of the whole issue. No bill necessary. No court date necessary.
Definition of bought:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q
Also if you dont understand that one,
(definition of acquire, defines bought):
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?
The plot thickens,
(definition of possession, defines acquire):
http://dictionary.reference.com/search
If you don't feel like clicking the links, let me summarize it for you:
to "buy", past tense "bought" is defined as "acquiring", but to "acquire" is to gain "possession", but "possession" is defined as "something owned."
Go ahead read it, it's right in the english dictionary.
So what you have just stated is an Oxymoron. What i have bought, is mine and i have the right to do what i want with it.
Examples:
House - i bought it - i own it. if i want to tear it down i can
Car - i bought it - i own it. - if i want to junk it or tear it to pieces i can
Underwear - i bought em- i own em. if i want to wear them on my head in private i can
Video Game - i bought it - i own it if i want to play without a cd or online authorization, i can. and i will dammit. Cause valve is infinging on my right as owner of said property.
You dont have to show anyone the deed to the house every time you step through the front door, do you?
I don't have to fax over a copy of the car title to the DMV every time i want to start a car do i?
I don't have to call Hanes every time i want to put on clean underwear now do i?
So why should i have to do those things with Valve's software, or any software for that matter.
On the other hand , i completely and wholehartedly agree with the rest of your comment.
I'm in the hole all the time so i'm allowed, besides my name is not sir. Signed, Karma Whoring Clod.