A minarchist style of government in a laissez faire economic climate requires no welfare, no IRS, no FBI, and no spying, and therefore no spy satellites.
Also, I wasn't suggesting the need for a civilian oversight committee, as these are still people selected to work within the same system that appropriates this money (the federal government). I was reffering to UNIVERSAL civillian oversight, i.e. anyone who wants to can access all government accounting records. That is what is meant in the constitution when it says the government's accounting records should be published. It doesn't say they should be published and then made available only to an appointed committee.
i don't know how a car works yet i still use it on a daily basis.
Maybe, but could you identify if a part for your car was legit or from a chopshop? Being able to click an icon and check your email is "using" a computer, but it doesn't really qualify you for a position in computer forensics.
The problem is, DVD+R is the only format that supports dual layer, currently. I was really looking forward to the price of the discs falling, but this will raise the price, according to the article. Guess this means we'll have to start stockpiling DVD+R9 as soon as it is cheap enough, before these new discs flood the market.
The big issue here is that this guy has been charged under provisions of the USA PATRIOT act, which means he IS being charged under anti-terrorism (and anti-freedom) laws, so he is being regarded legally as a terrorist, even though there is no reason to suspect he was endevouring to bring down the plane. He was apparently a moronic smartass, but that doesn't qualify him as a terrorist (it would qualify him for a run at the White House, though).
I would disagree. The whole reason this clasue was placed in the constiution was quite simple: how can you trust an organization to be in charge of oversight for its own activities and remain honest? The idea is that citizens have the right to scrutinize the actions of their elected and appointed officials to ensure they are not succumbing to corruption. Without getting into the fact that most everything the government now does is corrupt and unconstitutional (show me where the constitution mandates the FCC, welfare, social security, or, in this case, international and domestic espionage), how do you know "$10 billion for HUD" is being spent as intended, and not stolen or funneled into illicit projects? Without citizen oversight from DETAILED ledgers, you can't.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the constituttion mandate that congress make publicly available a DETAILED ledger of expenses? Oh well, it's not like the US government cares about little things like their founding charter any more. After all, who needs a pretense of legitimacy?
So, you somehow still feel restricted by the inclusion of IE in Windows? As stated, if you don't like it, don't use it. Use your browser of choice, use your OS of choice, and if you believe your current choice restricts you too greatly, change it. Get a new browser. Get a new OS. Get a new computer (not a Dell, for christ sake). Just take responsibility for your own choices, your own actions. Quit blaming MS and seek an alternative, if you don't like IE. Don't tell me about all the "poor souls" out there who don't know about firefox. Even if they don't know about firefox, is that MS's problem? No, of course not. It's their own problem. If people believe their browser is too lacking in security to be used effectively, then they switch. Let's all try a fresh dose of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. It might really change the way you see the world, if you have to view your life as your own responsibility...
Again, you're saying that MS should be punished for the ignorance of their consumer base. Can a consumer who has bought only GM certified parts for the life of their vehicle sue GM because they were suddenly told that generic parts would work too? Can I sue a drug manufacturer for duping me because I didn't know I could buy generics? Of course not. I am responsible for my own lot in life. If I am unhappy with my situation, I work to recify it. It is not the responsibility of anyone other than me. Just as every man's fate is the responsibility of no one but himself. Just because they lack the technical knowledge to build their own browser, or the logical skills to assume that someone else has created a product superior to on they know to be defective, does not make someone else (MS, in this case) responsible for their failings. To each his own fate...
How about this: the US government stops instituting "regime change" all over the world. The US put Saddam in power. The US put Noriega in power. The US is responsible for putting into power the most brutal and violent regimes in most of history. And now, when they say they are trying to put down a brutal dictatorship, which they themselves instigated, all the saps in the country rally behind them and wave their little American flags. The reason we had dictators like Saddam in power in the first place is a direct result of America's interference with the internal affairs of foreign nations. A policy of extremely limited (think near-common-law anarchy) central government, combined with a policy of political (not economic) isolationism would ensure that terrorists had no interrest in America. Of course, if you're one of those imbeciles that believe in a strong central police state (such as we currently have in the US), then you'll surely rally against my comments, in defense of the police state that currently exists in America, ensuring that it no longer represents anything worth defending.
No, this isn't at all the problem. The problem is, America has become a police state. A pathetic victim of democracy (for all you stupid shits that think this is a nation of democracy, I urge you to consult both the dictionary and the constitution to correct your errors), not the great republic that could have been. The government has no right to tag you, as it has no right to tax you, as it has no right to invade your home. Very few left in America seem to realize that the reason their forefarthers created a system of limited central government is for the simple reason that Lord Akton was right: power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. All the imbeciles in America are blathering about how we need to sacrifice this, that, and the other for the sake of "security". Did any of you stupid pieces of shit realize that you can't sacrifice freedom for security? Do any of you realize that by attempting this, you are merely sacrificing freedom, security, AND morality? Do any of you stupid shits realize that the checks and ballances in the constitution were meant to guard the people against the GOVERNMENT, not vice versa? A strong central government is paramount to weak individual freedoms. You pathetic fools would protect America at the expense of everything that makes it worth protecting. Welcome to 1984, you stupid fucks. I hope you enjoy everything you begged for all these years. Let them tag you, let them tax you, let them own you. If you take it, you deserve what you get. May you be damned for it. Call me a troll, call me flaimbait. This is what I believe. You have castrated personal freedom to create an absolute state. You have killed liberty. Now you complain about the police state you have created. Don't you like what you've been begging for all these years? Doesn't it suit your taste to be a number in a government database? Fight this, fight the central government, it will consume and destroy you. Fight for your rights, not as an American, not as a man or woman, black or white, but as a human. Your government would destroy you. Will you allow it? You've already been tagged, you've already been classified. Now break the mold they have created for you.
Each man and woman is responsible for their own lot in life. If you command fools to represent you, you will see war in your lifetime. If you live by enlightened self-interrest, you will see your progeny prosper as you never dreamed possible.
Flame all you want. I don't really care. I will awake one day, a free man. Enjoy your serfdom.
So you would break up Microsoft because of the willful ignorance of its user base? I dislike their crap software as much as the next guy, but I realize that if I have a problem with it, it is MY responsiblity to find an alternative, or create one if it does not exist. I thought that was the whole philosophy behind OSS: making a better alternative. Just because most users are too oblivious to look for alternatives is no reason to punish MS. If you run to the government to "solve" all your problems, you take no responsibility for your own condition, and thus take no measures to improve it yourself.
Absolutely! This is why I am opposed to the entire concept of "public property". If it's publicly owned, then anyone can use it, right? Nope, only those the government (that great protector of whatever it deems to be "public interest") decides is worthy may access the land. Some profit at the expense of others. Such is the perversion called democracy...
I don't believe congress has yet legislated laser ownership, nor has the ATF decided to unconstitutionally grant itself the right to regulate lasers, but I'm sure it's coming. Whatever they decide, you can be sure of one thing: it will be arbitrary and patently unconstitutional.
So it could be used as a weapon. So what? Does the constitution not enumerate the right to keep and bear arms? Sure, we've trampled the bill of rights into the ground, but it's still technically there. Besides, a gun is a much more dangerous weapon than this laser.
Thank you! Outsourcing can't be sucessfully eliminated by government regulation, because the problem is caused, in large part, by government regulation. What most people fail to realize is that wage rates in a free market are governed by the same forces that govern the pricing of consumer goods - Smith's "Invisible Hand". A seller wants to sell as many units of his wares as he can for as high a price as he can command, and consumers want to get what they need/want for as little as they can, and the market finds a ballance between the two, to mutual benefit. Same with wages, but in this case, workers are the "sellers". They are selling labor, and want to get as much as they can in return for their effort, whereas employers want to get what they need for as little as possible, and the market eventually stabilizes and sets what is called a "natural rate" for wages.
In the US, we have been distorting the formation of natural rates of wages (and everything else, btw, such as interest and goods) for a century. Minimum wage laws and union protectionist legislation, while it may sound good on the surface, is devestating in the long run, especially combined with fiat currency and central banking. When a minimum wage is set, it disrupts natural wage rates by forcing an employer to pay someone more than they otherwise would to do a job, regardless of whether or not the person merits said wage. This forces the employer to hire fewer workers than they could otherwise, forcing unemployment higher. At the same time, the government inflates our currency (paying welfare checks for the newly unemployed, among other unconstitutional mis-appropriations), making every dollar worth less, so the higher wage rates commanded by the lucky are not really beneficial, as they must now spend more to get the same goods and services, so they buy less. This results in decreased profits for companies, so they can afford fewer workers still. You can see that this would become a vicious cycle.
The solution, at least to the woes of the employer, is to outsource. Human rights advocates are appalled to hear of foreigners making pennies on the dollar compared to US workers, but our cost of living is so much higher, it offsets a good bit of the difference. To the company, and the foreign worker, it's win-win. The company can pay half what a US worker would demand, enabling them to hire as many people as they need, and the foreign worker will still see their standard of living increase, as they now have jobs that either weren't available before, or pay better. The loser is the US worker.
In a free market (which the US isn't), US workers would be able to adjust. They could compete with foreign workers by acquiescing to lower wage rates that would be competetive with what the foreign worker demanded. However, with our already considerably higher cost of living, ridiculously high (and rising) tax rates, and the fact that these problems are only getting worse (think social security collapse and $15 trillion in additional debt), we are unable to compete with foreign workers, as we cannot survive in America on wages that would seem excessive elsewhere.
Those of you patient enough to read thus far are doubtless awaiting my suggested solution to this situation. The short answer: I don't think there is one. The only way to avoid outsourcing and massive US unemployment would be to end government meddling in economic matters, as it cannot successfuly micromanage the economy. However, the government has its regulatory bodies so deeply entwined in the economic affairs of this nation that I don't think it's possible to have a peaceful, stable transition to a free market. However, I also believe, conveniently enough, that, because of the aforementioned issues (among many, many others), the US economy is likely to collapse in the coming three decades, and on a scale that will make the early thirties seem like a boom. After this, we could establish a free market economic system, hopefully avoiding the pitfalls of soc
Actually, you are partially correct. The Pentium II is basically the Pentium Pro with the MMX instruction set added. However, around the same time as the Pro, Intel also released the Pentium MMX, which, as the name implies, is the original Pentium (post-recall, of course), with the sole addition being the MMX instruction set. The most common of these was the 233MHz version. I actually still have one of these running on an old Acer box (I worked all summer to buy myself that computer, just so I didn't have to continue worrying about the folks screwing up my system. Ah, the memories...), and I actually just installed Windows Server 2000 on it, so I can learn to set up an active directory domain controller, and it works great, albeit a bit slow.
Wow, if that's not innovation, I don't know what is. If there's no prior art pulled out in court, I would be astonished. Does anyone in the patent office even know what they're supposed to be doing all day? Do they simply not realize that to get a patent, not only can no existing patent have been issued, and the idea must be original, but that it also must be NON-OBVIOUS! Just another argument against total-state bureaucracy in favor of constitutional minarchy and common law...
Well, I'm glad at least someone admits openly that Jesus would likely have been a Red. Just goes to further confirm that we'll have to wait for the Antichrist to make an honest profit and keep it.
Well, if you won't say it, then I will: What you did was wrong, both at the time and in the end. It doesn't matter if she was really dead or not. It doesn't matter if it was really her father or not. Lots of people have nothing but hateful relationships with their parents, and lots of parents are nosey and spiteful. It is her right to be protected from privacy invasions. If she is still alive, your company could be (and should be) sued. Privacy policies exist for a good reason: to keep weak, bleeding hearts like you from doing stupid things to compromise the security of people's/companies' data.
I used to do customer support for Dish Network *shudders*. Until they really started implementing stupid policies (like "anyone can make any account changes they want!"), they were very strict about allowing relatives access to accounts. If they were dead, they had to send us a copy of the death certificate. If it was a divorce, they had to send in a copy of the divorce decree, etc. Only a damn fool would believe someone who simply *claimed* to be a grieving relative. In closing, let me just echo the sentiment that, were you in my employ, you would have been fired, and damn quick.
I don't know what everyone else on the planet is doing to the TV software (MMC) that ships with ATI VIVO cards, but I've used it on a couple of systems, and I have no problems (aside from the annoying driver bug for the HDTV Wonder). It will occasionally do quirky things, like the DVD window goes blank when you switch to full screen, but that happens only ocassionally, and it's not that big a deal. TV works perfectly for me, every time. The only way I run into problems is if I am upgrading and forget to uninstall all the old software first. Yes, it is a pain to have to do that, but at least it retains custom settings for the new installation, so it's not too bad.
I currently have two systems running ATI cards, as I have been a big fan of them in the past (no longer though. Would I like a card with SM3.0 and better performance? Why yes I would). One system has the AIW 9800Pro, and the other (the Shuttle system) has a Sapphire Radeon 9800Pro 256MB. I never had problems with the AIW card, although ATI's drivers can be a pain. The tuner worked perfectly from day one. However, I just bought the HDTV Wonder card for my Shuttle system (gotta get one before the broadcast flag!), and THAT was a real nightmare. I uninstalled and reinstalled the catalyst drivers, as well as those for the HDTV wonder a half dozen times, to no effect. DTV worked TV didn't. Finally, burried on their website, ATI has a bit about how their drivers are flawed, and a path variable had to be set in the environmental variables before it would work. You'd think they could fix something like that in ten minutes, but the updated drivers on their website are no better than the ones that ship with the card. I'm really disillusioned regarding ATI, and will probably start buying NVidia if they don't get it together. I shouldn't have to waste three hours because they can't make their driver set a path variable.
That was the problem with the Mitnick case, if I understood it correctly. The way I heard it, the judge in the case banned him from using a computer, in general, for professional or personal reasons, for some number of years. Which prevents him from doing anything but manual labor. McDonalds uses computers for taking orders, so he couldn't even work there. I could be mistaken, but that was what I was given for the details of the case. Of course, I was 16 and rather impressionable at the time, and I was reading about this on 2600.com, so my information may not be correct. If that was the case, he might still be able to use VOIP services like Vonage, as you don't need a computer per-se, so much as an internet connection and a unit to perform the protocol conversion. But for all I know, the converter could be considered a computer, since it does have a processor, memory, os, etc., so he might not even have been able to do that. If a court order can go that far, they could kill a man these days. Couldn't work, couldn't park, couldn't use an advanced cell phone, couldn't use the self-check-out at the supermarket... IANAL, but if it does go that far, I'd be appaled.
Slashdot Mirror
A minarchist style of government in a laissez faire economic climate requires no welfare, no IRS, no FBI, and no spying, and therefore no spy satellites.
Also, I wasn't suggesting the need for a civilian oversight committee, as these are still people selected to work within the same system that appropriates this money (the federal government). I was reffering to UNIVERSAL civillian oversight, i.e. anyone who wants to can access all government accounting records. That is what is meant in the constitution when it says the government's accounting records should be published. It doesn't say they should be published and then made available only to an appointed committee.
i don't know how a car works yet i still use it on a daily basis.
Maybe, but could you identify if a part for your car was legit or from a chopshop? Being able to click an icon and check your email is "using" a computer, but it doesn't really qualify you for a position in computer forensics.
Then you won't do so well in Brave New America, either.
The problem is, DVD+R is the only format that supports dual layer, currently. I was really looking forward to the price of the discs falling, but this will raise the price, according to the article. Guess this means we'll have to start stockpiling DVD+R9 as soon as it is cheap enough, before these new discs flood the market.
The big issue here is that this guy has been charged under provisions of the USA PATRIOT act, which means he IS being charged under anti-terrorism (and anti-freedom) laws, so he is being regarded legally as a terrorist, even though there is no reason to suspect he was endevouring to bring down the plane. He was apparently a moronic smartass, but that doesn't qualify him as a terrorist (it would qualify him for a run at the White House, though).
I would disagree. The whole reason this clasue was placed in the constiution was quite simple: how can you trust an organization to be in charge of oversight for its own activities and remain honest? The idea is that citizens have the right to scrutinize the actions of their elected and appointed officials to ensure they are not succumbing to corruption. Without getting into the fact that most everything the government now does is corrupt and unconstitutional (show me where the constitution mandates the FCC, welfare, social security, or, in this case, international and domestic espionage), how do you know "$10 billion for HUD" is being spent as intended, and not stolen or funneled into illicit projects? Without citizen oversight from DETAILED ledgers, you can't.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the constituttion mandate that congress make publicly available a DETAILED ledger of expenses? Oh well, it's not like the US government cares about little things like their founding charter any more. After all, who needs a pretense of legitimacy?
So, you somehow still feel restricted by the inclusion of IE in Windows? As stated, if you don't like it, don't use it. Use your browser of choice, use your OS of choice, and if you believe your current choice restricts you too greatly, change it. Get a new browser. Get a new OS. Get a new computer (not a Dell, for christ sake). Just take responsibility for your own choices, your own actions. Quit blaming MS and seek an alternative, if you don't like IE. Don't tell me about all the "poor souls" out there who don't know about firefox. Even if they don't know about firefox, is that MS's problem? No, of course not. It's their own problem. If people believe their browser is too lacking in security to be used effectively, then they switch. Let's all try a fresh dose of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. It might really change the way you see the world, if you have to view your life as your own responsibility...
Again, you're saying that MS should be punished for the ignorance of their consumer base. Can a consumer who has bought only GM certified parts for the life of their vehicle sue GM because they were suddenly told that generic parts would work too? Can I sue a drug manufacturer for duping me because I didn't know I could buy generics? Of course not. I am responsible for my own lot in life. If I am unhappy with my situation, I work to recify it. It is not the responsibility of anyone other than me. Just as every man's fate is the responsibility of no one but himself. Just because they lack the technical knowledge to build their own browser, or the logical skills to assume that someone else has created a product superior to on they know to be defective, does not make someone else (MS, in this case) responsible for their failings. To each his own fate...
How about this: the US government stops instituting "regime change" all over the world. The US put Saddam in power. The US put Noriega in power. The US is responsible for putting into power the most brutal and violent regimes in most of history. And now, when they say they are trying to put down a brutal dictatorship, which they themselves instigated, all the saps in the country rally behind them and wave their little American flags. The reason we had dictators like Saddam in power in the first place is a direct result of America's interference with the internal affairs of foreign nations. A policy of extremely limited (think near-common-law anarchy) central government, combined with a policy of political (not economic) isolationism would ensure that terrorists had no interrest in America. Of course, if you're one of those imbeciles that believe in a strong central police state (such as we currently have in the US), then you'll surely rally against my comments, in defense of the police state that currently exists in America, ensuring that it no longer represents anything worth defending.
No, this isn't at all the problem. The problem is, America has become a police state. A pathetic victim of democracy (for all you stupid shits that think this is a nation of democracy, I urge you to consult both the dictionary and the constitution to correct your errors), not the great republic that could have been. The government has no right to tag you, as it has no right to tax you, as it has no right to invade your home. Very few left in America seem to realize that the reason their forefarthers created a system of limited central government is for the simple reason that Lord Akton was right: power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. All the imbeciles in America are blathering about how we need to sacrifice this, that, and the other for the sake of "security". Did any of you stupid pieces of shit realize that you can't sacrifice freedom for security? Do any of you realize that by attempting this, you are merely sacrificing freedom, security, AND morality? Do any of you stupid shits realize that the checks and ballances in the constitution were meant to guard the people against the GOVERNMENT, not vice versa? A strong central government is paramount to weak individual freedoms. You pathetic fools would protect America at the expense of everything that makes it worth protecting. Welcome to 1984, you stupid fucks. I hope you enjoy everything you begged for all these years. Let them tag you, let them tax you, let them own you. If you take it, you deserve what you get. May you be damned for it. Call me a troll, call me flaimbait. This is what I believe. You have castrated personal freedom to create an absolute state. You have killed liberty. Now you complain about the police state you have created. Don't you like what you've been begging for all these years? Doesn't it suit your taste to be a number in a government database? Fight this, fight the central government, it will consume and destroy you. Fight for your rights, not as an American, not as a man or woman, black or white, but as a human. Your government would destroy you. Will you allow it? You've already been tagged, you've already been classified. Now break the mold they have created for you.
Each man and woman is responsible for their own lot in life. If you command fools to represent you, you will see war in your lifetime. If you live by enlightened self-interrest, you will see your progeny prosper as you never dreamed possible.
Flame all you want. I don't really care. I will awake one day, a free man. Enjoy your serfdom.
One further comment I forgot in the previous post. If MS didn't include IE with Windows, how the hell would I conveniently download Firefox?
Remember folks, if you don't like it, don't use it.
So you would break up Microsoft because of the willful ignorance of its user base? I dislike their crap software as much as the next guy, but I realize that if I have a problem with it, it is MY responsiblity to find an alternative, or create one if it does not exist. I thought that was the whole philosophy behind OSS: making a better alternative. Just because most users are too oblivious to look for alternatives is no reason to punish MS. If you run to the government to "solve" all your problems, you take no responsibility for your own condition, and thus take no measures to improve it yourself.
Absolutely! This is why I am opposed to the entire concept of "public property". If it's publicly owned, then anyone can use it, right? Nope, only those the government (that great protector of whatever it deems to be "public interest") decides is worthy may access the land. Some profit at the expense of others. Such is the perversion called democracy...
I don't believe congress has yet legislated laser ownership, nor has the ATF decided to unconstitutionally grant itself the right to regulate lasers, but I'm sure it's coming. Whatever they decide, you can be sure of one thing: it will be arbitrary and patently unconstitutional.
So it could be used as a weapon. So what? Does the constitution not enumerate the right to keep and bear arms? Sure, we've trampled the bill of rights into the ground, but it's still technically there. Besides, a gun is a much more dangerous weapon than this laser.
Yeah, time to throw out the dremmel.
Thank you! Outsourcing can't be sucessfully eliminated by government regulation, because the problem is caused, in large part, by government regulation. What most people fail to realize is that wage rates in a free market are governed by the same forces that govern the pricing of consumer goods - Smith's "Invisible Hand". A seller wants to sell as many units of his wares as he can for as high a price as he can command, and consumers want to get what they need/want for as little as they can, and the market finds a ballance between the two, to mutual benefit. Same with wages, but in this case, workers are the "sellers". They are selling labor, and want to get as much as they can in return for their effort, whereas employers want to get what they need for as little as possible, and the market eventually stabilizes and sets what is called a "natural rate" for wages.
In the US, we have been distorting the formation of natural rates of wages (and everything else, btw, such as interest and goods) for a century. Minimum wage laws and union protectionist legislation, while it may sound good on the surface, is devestating in the long run, especially combined with fiat currency and central banking. When a minimum wage is set, it disrupts natural wage rates by forcing an employer to pay someone more than they otherwise would to do a job, regardless of whether or not the person merits said wage. This forces the employer to hire fewer workers than they could otherwise, forcing unemployment higher. At the same time, the government inflates our currency (paying welfare checks for the newly unemployed, among other unconstitutional mis-appropriations), making every dollar worth less, so the higher wage rates commanded by the lucky are not really beneficial, as they must now spend more to get the same goods and services, so they buy less. This results in decreased profits for companies, so they can afford fewer workers still. You can see that this would become a vicious cycle.
The solution, at least to the woes of the employer, is to outsource. Human rights advocates are appalled to hear of foreigners making pennies on the dollar compared to US workers, but our cost of living is so much higher, it offsets a good bit of the difference. To the company, and the foreign worker, it's win-win. The company can pay half what a US worker would demand, enabling them to hire as many people as they need, and the foreign worker will still see their standard of living increase, as they now have jobs that either weren't available before, or pay better. The loser is the US worker.
In a free market (which the US isn't), US workers would be able to adjust. They could compete with foreign workers by acquiescing to lower wage rates that would be competetive with what the foreign worker demanded. However, with our already considerably higher cost of living, ridiculously high (and rising) tax rates, and the fact that these problems are only getting worse (think social security collapse and $15 trillion in additional debt), we are unable to compete with foreign workers, as we cannot survive in America on wages that would seem excessive elsewhere.
Those of you patient enough to read thus far are doubtless awaiting my suggested solution to this situation. The short answer: I don't think there is one. The only way to avoid outsourcing and massive US unemployment would be to end government meddling in economic matters, as it cannot successfuly micromanage the economy. However, the government has its regulatory bodies so deeply entwined in the economic affairs of this nation that I don't think it's possible to have a peaceful, stable transition to a free market. However, I also believe, conveniently enough, that, because of the aforementioned issues (among many, many others), the US economy is likely to collapse in the coming three decades, and on a scale that will make the early thirties seem like a boom. After this, we could establish a free market economic system, hopefully avoiding the pitfalls of soc
Actually, you are partially correct. The Pentium II is basically the Pentium Pro with the MMX instruction set added. However, around the same time as the Pro, Intel also released the Pentium MMX, which, as the name implies, is the original Pentium (post-recall, of course), with the sole addition being the MMX instruction set. The most common of these was the 233MHz version. I actually still have one of these running on an old Acer box (I worked all summer to buy myself that computer, just so I didn't have to continue worrying about the folks screwing up my system. Ah, the memories...), and I actually just installed Windows Server 2000 on it, so I can learn to set up an active directory domain controller, and it works great, albeit a bit slow.
Wow, if that's not innovation, I don't know what is. If there's no prior art pulled out in court, I would be astonished. Does anyone in the patent office even know what they're supposed to be doing all day? Do they simply not realize that to get a patent, not only can no existing patent have been issued, and the idea must be original, but that it also must be NON-OBVIOUS! Just another argument against total-state bureaucracy in favor of constitutional minarchy and common law...
Well, I'm glad at least someone admits openly that Jesus would likely have been a Red. Just goes to further confirm that we'll have to wait for the Antichrist to make an honest profit and keep it.
Well, if you won't say it, then I will: What you did was wrong, both at the time and in the end. It doesn't matter if she was really dead or not. It doesn't matter if it was really her father or not. Lots of people have nothing but hateful relationships with their parents, and lots of parents are nosey and spiteful. It is her right to be protected from privacy invasions. If she is still alive, your company could be (and should be) sued. Privacy policies exist for a good reason: to keep weak, bleeding hearts like you from doing stupid things to compromise the security of people's/companies' data. I used to do customer support for Dish Network *shudders*. Until they really started implementing stupid policies (like "anyone can make any account changes they want!"), they were very strict about allowing relatives access to accounts. If they were dead, they had to send us a copy of the death certificate. If it was a divorce, they had to send in a copy of the divorce decree, etc. Only a damn fool would believe someone who simply *claimed* to be a grieving relative. In closing, let me just echo the sentiment that, were you in my employ, you would have been fired, and damn quick.
I don't know what everyone else on the planet is doing to the TV software (MMC) that ships with ATI VIVO cards, but I've used it on a couple of systems, and I have no problems (aside from the annoying driver bug for the HDTV Wonder). It will occasionally do quirky things, like the DVD window goes blank when you switch to full screen, but that happens only ocassionally, and it's not that big a deal. TV works perfectly for me, every time. The only way I run into problems is if I am upgrading and forget to uninstall all the old software first. Yes, it is a pain to have to do that, but at least it retains custom settings for the new installation, so it's not too bad.
I currently have two systems running ATI cards, as I have been a big fan of them in the past (no longer though. Would I like a card with SM3.0 and better performance? Why yes I would). One system has the AIW 9800Pro, and the other (the Shuttle system) has a Sapphire Radeon 9800Pro 256MB. I never had problems with the AIW card, although ATI's drivers can be a pain. The tuner worked perfectly from day one. However, I just bought the HDTV Wonder card for my Shuttle system (gotta get one before the broadcast flag!), and THAT was a real nightmare. I uninstalled and reinstalled the catalyst drivers, as well as those for the HDTV wonder a half dozen times, to no effect. DTV worked TV didn't. Finally, burried on their website, ATI has a bit about how their drivers are flawed, and a path variable had to be set in the environmental variables before it would work. You'd think they could fix something like that in ten minutes, but the updated drivers on their website are no better than the ones that ship with the card. I'm really disillusioned regarding ATI, and will probably start buying NVidia if they don't get it together. I shouldn't have to waste three hours because they can't make their driver set a path variable.
That was the problem with the Mitnick case, if I understood it correctly. The way I heard it, the judge in the case banned him from using a computer, in general, for professional or personal reasons, for some number of years. Which prevents him from doing anything but manual labor. McDonalds uses computers for taking orders, so he couldn't even work there. I could be mistaken, but that was what I was given for the details of the case. Of course, I was 16 and rather impressionable at the time, and I was reading about this on 2600.com, so my information may not be correct. If that was the case, he might still be able to use VOIP services like Vonage, as you don't need a computer per-se, so much as an internet connection and a unit to perform the protocol conversion. But for all I know, the converter could be considered a computer, since it does have a processor, memory, os, etc., so he might not even have been able to do that. If a court order can go that far, they could kill a man these days. Couldn't work, couldn't park, couldn't use an advanced cell phone, couldn't use the self-check-out at the supermarket... IANAL, but if it does go that far, I'd be appaled.