The submitter is clueless. The 'British tabloid' is a scandal rag not above inventing a controversy. Everyone knows where Faslane is. Everyone knows what is there. Do you think no-one has wondered where all the nuclear subs dock? Where do you think the Russian missiles spent 50 years targeting during the cold war, (and may even still do)?
You would have had to buy that in a store to get it and therefore the $18 ripoff that you avoided
I think it is safe to assume that Lars already possesses a legally acquired copy of the album, unlike 99.9% of the others who similarly downloaded it. So he is not breaking any law by possessing it in another format for his own personal use.
But I don't suppose you'll be letting this glaring hole in your argument spoil things.
Employers are increasingly trolling the web for information about prospective employees
Trolling; a method of fishing using hooks and bait. Trawling; a method of fishing using a wide net dragged through the water.
Which would you say best functions as a metaphor for searching through a large number of websites? And which functions as a description for placing inflammatory material on the internet, hoping to catch a response?
So, unless the employers here are posting in internet forums invitations for applicants to make idiots of themselves, they are trawling.
Funniest thing on the article is even wondering if there was ever a human drummer within a million miles of Britney's "Hit Me Baby", click track or not. Like a large percentage of recent pop music it's clearly 100% sequenced from the bottom up. Not so much recorded against a "click track", but is entirely "click track".
That's not a criticism by the way. Music has room for all methods of recording, and sequencing is a good a method as any. It's the end product that counts.
This slashdot story has Google saying; "This is because Internet Explorer is tied to Microsoft's dominant computer operating system, giving it an unfair advantage over other browsers."
While this slashdot story about Chrome on the same front page; http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/26/1323211 , has them saying; "The web is becoming an integral part of the computer and the basic distinction between the OS and the browser doesn't matter very much any more" and "I think since the download is just one click away it's not that big a deal."
So which one is it? Either the browser should or shouldn't be part of the OS. You can't have it both ways.
Your boss loves it when you write a stupid, vengeful email after being made redundant.
No-one likes laying someone off, unless they're incompetent or have it coming. So receiving the FU email after breaking the bad news makes the task that bit easier. They can go home thinking "Yeah, we made the right decision there, that guy really was a real douche and we never knew it until now", and sleep guilt-free in their beds.
So go ahead, write that email that tells all your colleges what you really think of them. Your boss will thank you for it and everyone else won't miss you once you're gone.
... are the dolts who still repeat something that sounded cool or smart when it was new, but in the meantime it's just retarded and offtopic.
You mean like people who call things and people they don't like "retarded". Yeah. That bugs me too. I wish people would stop saying that. It's no longer smart or cool.
Actually.. you may be on to something here. Maybe kdawson's never ending stream of pointless and snarky posts about Microsoft are actually part of the Microsoft marketing borg. Anything that draws attention or browsers has to be a good thing.
To me he comes across as an anal retentive asshole who should be spending more time doing his job
The poster may have been foolhardy bringing it to slashdot, but it is totally his job to be concerned about it. As IT manager he needs to be know about software installed on the company's computers. This applies whether it's pirated, or completely legal copies of software not approved or suitable for the company's business.
Pirated software is more likely to have viruses and malware than legitimate copies. If this branch office is either networked or in regular email contact with the rest of the company, then any IT manager would be being negligent if they weren't taking an interest in what was installed on those computers.
If the IT manager doesn't have enough influence to instruct what should be on those computers, and what should not, then they he needs to tell his superiors he will bear no responsibility for any possible damage traced back to them. If his superiors are fine with that, then so be it. But you'd then be left wondering what they want an IT Manager for.
Sometimes, they even enjoy the content so much, they buy the official copy, just to inform the publisher that this formula works.
Interesting. Do you have any evidence of this bizarre method of communication? Perhaps people who really, really enjoy the content go out and buy it twice, just to inform the publisher? Because, of course, the publisher gets this message back in an encoded signal from your credit card.
People buy the official copy for one reason; they want the higher quality and the added value of the genuine packaging and associated content. As with all market forces, individuals are largely motivated by self-interest. They are not motivated by a desire to support the 'formula' and to suggest they are is laughable.
And correlation is not causation. Fact. How often is this pointed out on slashdot?
Exactly. Out of all the whining in the article, not once is in mentioned that Britannica charges subscription. Sure, they have free access for a small amount. But you almost inevitably reach a "subscribe now" page within a couple of clicks in any normal use.
If I was a paid subscriber of Britannica I would be entering and searching site directly, ensuring I got my money's worth. I wouldn't be accessing it via Google. So the root of their complaint is that they want Google to pull in non-subscribers for them, indexing pages are not available to the browser unless they pay. And now they think it's a cool idea to get those same subscribers to write the article as well!
Well I suppose they get full marks for bare faced nerve.
"Their greatest coup to date was preventing Google from rescuing Yahoo."
Poor Google. Selflessly throwing a lifeline to troubled Yahoo without a thought for their own safety or position. And do people thank them for it? Noooo. You'd think they were doing it for their own benefit.
All very interesting, except the scenario of someone being prosecuted for having their email address on a shared file;
A/ Has never happened
B/ Exists only in the fevered imagination of some slathdotters
C/ Would never get within a million miles of being proof alone of illegal file sharing.
So really, the idea that it is "not reasonable" is only valid if you wish to invent reasons based on events that will never happen.
Apart from that, the rest of your iPod scenarios are classic "think of the children" FUD and would apply just as equally if you lost your laptop, briefcase, school-bag or diary. The only solution to your panic would be to own nothing, place your name on nothing, just in case it gets lost/stolen and subsequently re-appears at the scene of a crime.
I'm confused. If 'boycotting' means simply not buying what you don't like from some place that doesn't supply what you wish, then I guess I've been boycotting certain retail outlets all my life. With minimal effort on my part.
Should I be starting websites of my own to tell people what I won't be buying? Cos that could get pretty time consuming and frankly I have better things to be doing. Obviously these people don't.
If by "fully compatible" you mean works without random crashes and without half the functionality missing, then, yeah, that is my requirement.
You may think differently, but listing an application in the compatible list because the installer works up to the final step simply doesn't cut it in my book. If you want to include them then why not list Macintosh software too? They're "compatible" all the way through the "insert installation CD" process. That's compatibility right there!
It's not a compatibility list. If you click the "What does this screen mean?" link it becomes obvious it's a wish list. Inclusion on the list is no guarantee of usability, and if you click on any of the apps listed (which are mostly games, such are wish lists) you'll see lots of problems documented.
It's doesn't take a genius to see that all pens are symbolic of masculine aggression, suppressing the student with violent slashes across their virgin white paper.
Students will only truly enter into a nurturing and caring learning environment when teachers see pens as the instruments of oppression that they are, and mark papers with rose-petals sprinkled across the page to form kisses.
If you spend 10 mins per day turning you pc on and setting up your work environment, and 5 mins closing everything, the cost of your time spent on this task will negate $25 saved ten times.
What are you doing for the five minutes it takes to shut down? Sitting looking blankly at the monitor? Why aren't you putting your coat on and on your way out the door?
That is addressing the problem from an ISP's point of view
I see it more a case of addressing the problem from the point of view of reality.
No-one cares what fantasy arrangement you personally entered into with your ISP. You're both living in a dream world. Reality is bandwidth is a limited resource. Reality is that demand grows at a faster rate than supply until the buffers are hit and it's everyone for themselves.
If your ISP sold you magic beans that turned out to be just beans, what do you think is the sensible, mature reaction to the problem? Learn the hard way that there is no such thing as magic beans, or continue to stamp your feet demanding what you paid for?
this should be sent to countries where drought is a problem.
If drought is a problem I suspect there isn't going to be a whole lot of humid air to extract water from. "The mill ceases to be effective below about 30 per cent relative humidity levels,"
And after cranking that thing to produce 300W (about three light bulbs, and I'm guessing it means old-style, power inefficient, ones), you're going to need more than a glass of water.
Slashdot Mirror
The submitter is clueless. The 'British tabloid' is a scandal rag not above inventing a controversy. Everyone knows where Faslane is. Everyone knows what is there. Do you think no-one has wondered where all the nuclear subs dock? Where do you think the Russian missiles spent 50 years targeting during the cold war, (and may even still do)?
You would have had to buy that in a store to get it and therefore the $18 ripoff that you avoided
I think it is safe to assume that Lars already possesses a legally acquired copy of the album, unlike 99.9% of the others who similarly downloaded it. So he is not breaking any law by possessing it in another format for his own personal use.
But I don't suppose you'll be letting this glaring hole in your argument spoil things.
Employers are increasingly trolling the web for information about prospective employees
Trolling; a method of fishing using hooks and bait.
Trawling; a method of fishing using a wide net dragged through the water.
Which would you say best functions as a metaphor for searching through a large number of websites? And which functions as a description for placing inflammatory material on the internet, hoping to catch a response?
So, unless the employers here are posting in internet forums invitations for applicants to make idiots of themselves, they are trawling.
Funniest thing on the article is even wondering if there was ever a human drummer within a million miles of Britney's "Hit Me Baby", click track or not. Like a large percentage of recent pop music it's clearly 100% sequenced from the bottom up. Not so much recorded against a "click track", but is entirely "click track".
That's not a criticism by the way. Music has room for all methods of recording, and sequencing is a good a method as any. It's the end product that counts.
This slashdot story has Google saying; "This is because Internet Explorer is tied to Microsoft's dominant computer operating system, giving it an unfair advantage over other browsers."
While this slashdot story about Chrome on the same front page; http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/26/1323211 , has them saying; "The web is becoming an integral part of the computer and the basic distinction between the OS and the browser doesn't matter very much any more" and "I think since the download is just one click away it's not that big a deal."
So which one is it? Either the browser should or shouldn't be part of the OS. You can't have it both ways.
Your boss loves it when you write a stupid, vengeful email after being made redundant.
No-one likes laying someone off, unless they're incompetent or have it coming. So receiving the FU email after breaking the bad news makes the task that bit easier. They can go home thinking "Yeah, we made the right decision there, that guy really was a real douche and we never knew it until now", and sleep guilt-free in their beds.
So go ahead, write that email that tells all your colleges what you really think of them. Your boss will thank you for it and everyone else won't miss you once you're gone.
... are the dolts who still repeat something that sounded cool or smart when it was new, but in the meantime it's just retarded and offtopic.
You mean like people who call things and people they don't like "retarded". Yeah. That bugs me too. I wish people would stop saying that. It's no longer smart or cool.
But then what would kdawson post on slashdot?
Actually.. you may be on to something here. Maybe kdawson's never ending stream of pointless and snarky posts about Microsoft are actually part of the Microsoft marketing borg. Anything that draws attention or browsers has to be a good thing.
To me he comes across as an anal retentive asshole who should be spending more time doing his job
The poster may have been foolhardy bringing it to slashdot, but it is totally his job to be concerned about it. As IT manager he needs to be know about software installed on the company's computers. This applies whether it's pirated, or completely legal copies of software not approved or suitable for the company's business.
Pirated software is more likely to have viruses and malware than legitimate copies. If this branch office is either networked or in regular email contact with the rest of the company, then any IT manager would be being negligent if they weren't taking an interest in what was installed on those computers.
If the IT manager doesn't have enough influence to instruct what should be on those computers, and what should not, then they he needs to tell his superiors he will bear no responsibility for any possible damage traced back to them. If his superiors are fine with that, then so be it. But you'd then be left wondering what they want an IT Manager for.
Sometimes, they even enjoy the content so much, they buy the official copy, just to inform the publisher that this formula works.
Interesting. Do you have any evidence of this bizarre method of communication? Perhaps people who really, really enjoy the content go out and buy it twice, just to inform the publisher? Because, of course, the publisher gets this message back in an encoded signal from your credit card.
People buy the official copy for one reason; they want the higher quality and the added value of the genuine packaging and associated content. As with all market forces, individuals are largely motivated by self-interest. They are not motivated by a desire to support the 'formula' and to suggest they are is laughable.
And correlation is not causation. Fact. How often is this pointed out on slashdot?
Does this reluctance also apply to the name changes of the Thirteen Colonies of North America?
Seriously, if you're going to be a historical pedant it helps to know a just bit more than the dates.
Nope.
It will be developed in .NIET
I believe Trotskyux was popular for a while, but discontinued after being shown to be susceptible to hacking.
"when Cook laid claim to it for England"
No they don't and no he didn't. From Wikipedia;
"James Cook sailed along and mapped the east coast of Australia, which he named New South Wales and claimed for Great Britain."
Exactly. Out of all the whining in the article, not once is in mentioned that Britannica charges subscription. Sure, they have free access for a small amount. But you almost inevitably reach a "subscribe now" page within a couple of clicks in any normal use.
If I was a paid subscriber of Britannica I would be entering and searching site directly, ensuring I got my money's worth. I wouldn't be accessing it via Google. So the root of their complaint is that they want Google to pull in non-subscribers for them, indexing pages are not available to the browser unless they pay. And now they think it's a cool idea to get those same subscribers to write the article as well!
Well I suppose they get full marks for bare faced nerve.
"Their greatest coup to date was preventing Google from rescuing Yahoo."
Poor Google. Selflessly throwing a lifeline to troubled Yahoo without a thought for their own safety or position. And do people thank them for it? Noooo. You'd think they were doing it for their own benefit.
All very interesting, except the scenario of someone being prosecuted for having their email address on a shared file;
A/ Has never happened
B/ Exists only in the fevered imagination of some slathdotters
C/ Would never get within a million miles of being proof alone of illegal file sharing.
So really, the idea that it is "not reasonable" is only valid if you wish to invent reasons based on events that will never happen.
Apart from that, the rest of your iPod scenarios are classic "think of the children" FUD and would apply just as equally if you lost your laptop, briefcase, school-bag or diary. The only solution to your panic would be to own nothing, place your name on nothing, just in case it gets lost/stolen and subsequently re-appears at the scene of a crime.
I'm confused. If 'boycotting' means simply not buying what you don't like from some place that doesn't supply what you wish, then I guess I've been boycotting certain retail outlets all my life. With minimal effort on my part.
Should I be starting websites of my own to tell people what I won't be buying? Cos that could get pretty time consuming and frankly I have better things to be doing. Obviously these people don't.
If by "fully compatible" you mean works without random crashes and without half the functionality missing, then, yeah, that is my requirement.
You may think differently, but listing an application in the compatible list because the installer works up to the final step simply doesn't cut it in my book. If you want to include them then why not list Macintosh software too? They're "compatible" all the way through the "insert installation CD" process. That's compatibility right there!
It's not a compatibility list. If you click the "What does this screen mean?" link it becomes obvious it's a wish list. Inclusion on the list is no guarantee of usability, and if you click on any of the apps listed (which are mostly games, such are wish lists) you'll see lots of problems documented.
Anyone can put together an impressive wish list.
It's doesn't take a genius to see that all pens are symbolic of masculine aggression, suppressing the student with violent slashes across their virgin white paper.
Students will only truly enter into a nurturing and caring learning environment when teachers see pens as the instruments of oppression that they are, and mark papers with rose-petals sprinkled across the page to form kisses.
If you spend 10 mins per day turning you pc on and setting up your work environment, and 5 mins closing everything, the cost of your time spent on this task will negate $25 saved ten times.
What are you doing for the five minutes it takes to shut down? Sitting looking blankly at the monitor? Why aren't you putting your coat on and on your way out the door?
That is addressing the problem from an ISP's point of view
I see it more a case of addressing the problem from the point of view of reality.
No-one cares what fantasy arrangement you personally entered into with your ISP. You're both living in a dream world. Reality is bandwidth is a limited resource. Reality is that demand grows at a faster rate than supply until the buffers are hit and it's everyone for themselves.
If your ISP sold you magic beans that turned out to be just beans, what do you think is the sensible, mature reaction to the problem? Learn the hard way that there is no such thing as magic beans, or continue to stamp your feet demanding what you paid for?
this should be sent to countries where drought is a problem.
If drought is a problem I suspect there isn't going to be a whole lot of humid air to extract water from. "The mill ceases to be effective below about 30 per cent relative humidity levels,"
And after cranking that thing to produce 300W (about three light bulbs, and I'm guessing it means old-style, power inefficient, ones), you're going to need more than a glass of water.
And that's before we even consider the price tag.
The recording was not so innocent a blunder, but not so bad either.
Which was kind of my point. But good to see you picked up on it.
Oops, you didn't.