i agree the parent is +5 funny, however, it seems that some people actually believe that she hasn't a right to complain because the service was free. let's follow that logic for a moment:
i have a computer shop that offers a back up service for free (as an incentive to get people in the store to buy computers, eg). a customer uses it, say 6 months in the past. every 2 months i archive stuff off to a cheap medium, say dvd-r. customer comes back, says, hey, my hdd crashed, could you restore my old info to a new hdd. i tell him, "sure, oh by the way, you'll need to upgrade to a premium service for $19.99."
the customer gets irate, and no one can figure out why. even after i show him the original fine print, he feels cheated. why?
because he was under the impression it was a FREE service with no "catches". he entered the agreement with a trust -- a trust that i will venture to say was exploited. if i saw that he didn't read the agreement when he signed, did i point out to him that it would cost him $20 if he were to ever *use* the service?
of course not. he probably would've just bought a backup drive or something instead. by the same token, i bet the 30day provision was buried in the eula, which lycos bets no one reads (and they figure they don't both people that do as customers).
i think, as a business owner, i should be able to stand my ground, however underhanded it is. he did sign afterall. it's not my fault he had a general trust in people.
however, to respond how lycos did in this case is plain unethical -- i doubt there was language in the EULA that stated, "if user complains about any portion of agreement, lycos reserves the right to delete any and all of user's data."
i'm reading a lot of comments that go along the lines of, "i gave my notice, then stuck around to finish up any projects i was working on."
Why not wait unit the project is DONE, then, when you're at a good stopping point, so to speak, give your notice/quit then.
i guess a problem with this is if you've landed a new job and need to start before the current project is up. i suppose if you couldn't work it out with the new employer to wait until the current project is done, you're stuck.
it just seems that, rather than giving notice, then getting the project to a stopping point, it would be a bit better to work quietly to get it there first, THEN announce your imminent departure.
you know, i agree with your post -- but i have to say, there is a BIG difference between financial policy and TAKING AWAY THE RIGHTS of citizens. sorry. didn't mean to raise my voice. but telling me that because i like SS means i have to accept gonzales' speech is appalling.
again, i understand your point, and accept it -- but it's kneejerky.
I disagree. If I want to see a movie or listen to some music, I rent it from Netflix, or buy it on the iTMS. If I don't... I don't. The great thing about copyright is that you can opt out to certain degrees (see the GPL, Creative Commons, etc.) and it's not a requirement of copyright that you sell the material. Prices are market-driven; if you think there are enough people who think that a buck a track is too much, then that's a golden opportunity for you to go into the business of helping artists sell their work for $0.50 a track. The market will find a balance; if there's a demand for free content, and there are enough talented people who are willing to spend the time creating work and giving it away for free, then it will exist. But as long as people keep wanting to, say, buy music from major labels at a buck a track, then it will be an uphill battle. It's one thing to say "music is overpriced" but it's another thing to serve a demand that may not exist.
realistically, you're probably (and hopefully) right. i, like a lot of people, i'm sure, worry about our culture spiraling into a "corporate feudalism" state. i understand the viewpoint that the market will dictate a solution, but what happens when a monopoly can effectively control the market? this is where IP can look like a bad thing, and makes me think of a world where we, as people, have no choice to swallow the content the IP holder, without being able to appropriate or reuse it in any way. this seems to me dystopian. more and more our environment (esp. if you live in a city, like most people) IS the content of the media. not being able to react and interact with your environment seems very orwellian.
thanks for info on the copyright stuff, i'll look into it.
I'm sure this has been talked over a zillion times, but i have some questions about the issue.
is copyright infringement when party B makes copies of content that party A produced, and then proceeds to market it as if they (party B) are the rightful owners/creators?
that is, wasn't copyright put into place to protect companies from other *companies* (and "businessmen") stealing their IP?
i guess it's a matter of *licensing*. if i download the new metallica song (from p2p), i don't have a license to listen to it. i have a hard time understanding the legality of this in the private sector. the only license i really understand is my driver's license. i suppose it works the same, really, for IP.
i wonder what the fine is for driving without a license, and how that compares to the RIAA lawsuits . . .
the only people (like 2) that i've met who really believe that it's wrong to download music AND whom actually *don't* do it see the issue totally in terms of material possession. they can't conceptually differentiate between a cd and mp3.
something to think about: record labels' biggest costs are distribution and promotion. so when i buy a cd, i'm paying for the promotion and distribution behind it -- not so much the creation of the content (the artist is responsible for that).
i think the labels (and society) is just beginning to come to terms with the issues. i'm still unclear on a lot of them. but i do know that a future with strong IP law is a dystopian one. i think it's one of the top issues of our time.
too late. i used that phrase because i had heard it somewhere else. the english language is full of such instances. imagine my chagrin when i found one of my pet peeves actually made it into the dictionary -- irregardless. in fact, my spell check allows it. face it -- those of us who insist on some sort of standard of grammar and usage for the english language have all but lost the fight.
in summary, thanks for the correction. i'll ask my grammar guru what she has to say about it. but it's moot, anyway.
is the question this begs (in my mind at least). is it the UI? or is it the architecture? the kernel?
another post mentioned that if it's os x on intell and ppc, then why not arm?
the summary implies that for it to be os x in a "meaningful" sense, it must be the same kernel (darwin). what if it was a complete different kernel with the same core services on top of it. in other words, isn't it the API that defines an os? if my app can get access to the hardware through the same API calls, and i don't have to worry about said hardware, isn't that the same os? java comes to mind, but it abstracts the os (thus the hardware). . .
i understand the gist of the summary, and there may be a CS defined standard of "what makes an os an os" that i'm unaware of, but it seems it would have to be API-based or architecture/paradigm based, or both.
hopefully other/.'ers can shed some light on this for me!
ok, i'm a begrudgingly admitted macboi, and *i'm* tired of hearing about the iphone debate. it's like arguing the existence of god (or something) -- what does it matter?
ok, so i'm probably more of a macboi than i want to admit, but here goes:
this seems to me like burger king coming out with a McCoffee drink, knowing McDonald's is about to do the same, then suing McD's when they do.
apple has been using the i* for quite some time, going back to the iMac in what? 1999? i know of no i* branding used by cisco before the iPhone. I think that apple would have a compelling argument on that fact alone.
it really seems like cisco is saying "hey, wait for me guys!... guys?", by sneaking in an iPhone months before the keynote, as another post pointed out.
if someone passing through an area is unfamiliar with that area (as tourist or otherwise), that person could get notes about the immediate local relevant to their interest -- say you're hanging out on the other side of town and want to see if there's any good sushi around. or comic book stores, or whatever.
would be like local.google does now, except on my phone, and i don't have to type in my location.
you know, i'm surprised i'm not hearing more about this. i bought a portable computer to be just that -- portable. so apple nixed the 12" powerbook and forced the line to the 15" -- i am now holding onto my 12" PB with a deathgrip until apple (hopefully) gets a clue and comes out with a 12" MB pro.
does anyone have a clue why they supersized their whole laptop line? the only two things i can think of are 1) their market research suggested that people want bigger or 2) they need the space to squeeze in the extra processing/gadgets.
to 1) i suppose i understand. i guess. no. no i don't. i thought the trend was smaller and lighter...
to 2) i can say, give me less processing and gadgets. the small size and weight of a laptop are the biggest selling points for me.
also, what's with the glossy screens? after going through years of those shields to go over your monitor to cut glare, and other check-out lane solutions to the glare problem, the new trend is *GLOSSY* screens? OMGWTF?!?!?!
i remember reading about a proposed dc bus in pop sci some years ago that really grabbed my imagination. basically, in your house, along with the 120 vac outlets, there would be connections for +/-12vdc and +5vdc -- the most common voltages for analog and digital electronics.
the horribly stupid situation we've gotten ourselves into is that now we have a myriad transformers in our houses. i can think of five that are currently plugged in right now in this room. put your hand on one of these -- that heat is wasted electricity.
the thing that should be investigated, i suppose is whether one big power supply is more efficient than a bazillion little ones . . .
also, electronics required 9vdc, eg, will still need to convert the 12vdc, and newer cpu cores use 3.3vdc....
the cool thing about an installed dc bus means that a small solar power system to drive it would become quite economical -- a solar cell and a battery, and you could power a good percentage of your electronic gadgetry.
but just a moment of reflection should tell you that yes, anything that generates heat is going to be a huge draw of power. one can directly express heat power in Watts; yes, the same watts used to express electrical power.
electric heaters are usually 1500 watts. light bulbs from 60 to 100 watts. appliance motors in the home are around 1/4 to 1/2 horsepower (1 horsepower ~= 746 watts).
let's keep this in terms of heat for a second. in case you're wondering what uses more power -- your hair dryer or wireless router, you can do this simple test. put your hand on the hair dryer -- in just a few seconds, it will burn. perhaps a 1st degree burn. now, put your hand on your wireless router. warm, but not burn. in fact, it might feel cozy depending on your clime. therefore, i give to you the severity of the burn is proportional to how much electricity a device is using.
another indication is the size of the power cable something uses.
i dunno. i thought every self-respecting nerd had a handle on basic home power and loading.
a lot of people complain about the inconsistency of apple's UI between their programs -- but it happens here on slashdot -- each section has a different color scheme. i wonder if apple has it in the works to make different key applications present a different scheme. either way, i don't really notice -- the difference is cosmetic, and trivial.
so you continue to use this operating system that you hate because you're too cheap/lazy to fix a $15/15 minute cpu fan.
anyway, your point about not knowing what's going on behind the scenes --> and you know what's going on behind the scenes in windows? (i guess you're 1 in 3 people who understand the registry. . ..)
The worst part about all of this is that it defeats the honor system. In other words, rather than innocent until found guilty, students are seen as guilty until found innocent.
I would be very worried about false positives. Having written some papers for undergrad classes, they were not, by nature, requiring original thought -- that is, I think a lot of (undergrad) papers are simply about gathering information more than interpreting it -- so the 4-5 sources I've uses were likely used by the other 5000 students who did a paper on the same subject.
All in all, this is nasty business -- it's bad enough in the airport (I've never carried a bomb onto an airplane, nor ever plan to, but I'm still a bit on edge going through security) -- I think it has no place in acedemia.
i want to say i see your point that it's the perception that matters. but what i failed to point out before is that my experience with linux (and this is going back a few years), was that a quick visit to a few websites would get you lists of which hardware was and wasn't supported and if so, to what degree; so that really, in the end, you were left with the "just go buy the right card" solution.
The cool thing about linux here, is that if you're a technerd, you can get in there and start fiddling around with an unsupported card more extensively than you can OS X or WinXP -- hell, maybe even write your own driver.
I think esr makes a valid point, but there's so much more to the picture: OS X works so well because apple keeps COMPLETE control of the whole distribution, a vertical monopoly if you will. microsoft works because they have NEAR control of the desktop, a horizontal monopoly. so really, what linux should be doing, is getting a MONOPOLY! -- then the rest will fall into place, right?
i personally think linux is on the right path because of the strength of its principles, and microsoft is goin down on the weakness of its, but really, it's the distros who must fill in the marketing gap, not the community.
should the community be less self-rightous? probably. does reprimanding it for being so matter? probably not.
mr c
wait a minute -- you're complaining that linux was a hassle because you couldn't get the hardware to work, then you switched to a mac, and bingo! it all automagically worked! so mac os == good and linux == bad.
look, macs basically support ONE wireless card, and only a handful of video cards, eg. but since the computer CAME with it when you bought it, it's no big deal. but since the hodge-podge of parts you had laying in the closet weren't all supported by your linux distro, it's the OSS community's problem?
in fact, macs are probably worse, they just SEEM easier, because if it works, it works, if it doesn't, too bad. end of story, right? EASY! you fix the problem in macland by going and buying the part from the apple store.
i still call bullshit her
fwiw, I use a mac -- but let's be fair about all of this.
Slashdot Mirror
i agree the parent is +5 funny, however, it seems that some people actually believe that she hasn't a right to complain because the service was free. let's follow that logic for a moment:
i have a computer shop that offers a back up service for free (as an incentive to get people in the store to buy computers, eg). a customer uses it, say 6 months in the past. every 2 months i archive stuff off to a cheap medium, say dvd-r. customer comes back, says, hey, my hdd crashed, could you restore my old info to a new hdd. i tell him, "sure, oh by the way, you'll need to upgrade to a premium service for $19.99."
the customer gets irate, and no one can figure out why. even after i show him the original fine print, he feels cheated. why?
because he was under the impression it was a FREE service with no "catches". he entered the agreement with a trust -- a trust that i will venture to say was exploited. if i saw that he didn't read the agreement when he signed, did i point out to him that it would cost him $20 if he were to ever *use* the service?
of course not. he probably would've just bought a backup drive or something instead. by the same token, i bet the 30day provision was buried in the eula, which lycos bets no one reads (and they figure they don't both people that do as customers).
i think, as a business owner, i should be able to stand my ground, however underhanded it is. he did sign afterall. it's not my fault he had a general trust in people.
however, to respond how lycos did in this case is plain unethical -- i doubt there was language in the EULA that stated, "if user complains about any portion of agreement, lycos reserves the right to delete any and all of user's data."
mr c
i'm reading a lot of comments that go along the lines of, "i gave my notice, then stuck around to finish up any projects i was working on."
Why not wait unit the project is DONE, then, when you're at a good stopping point, so to speak, give your notice/quit then.
i guess a problem with this is if you've landed a new job and need to start before the current project is up. i suppose if you couldn't work it out with the new employer to wait until the current project is done, you're stuck.
it just seems that, rather than giving notice, then getting the project to a stopping point, it would be a bit better to work quietly to get it there first, THEN announce your imminent departure.
mr c
i think it's kinda funny the parent was modded informative -- indicating that he's one of the two people who actually READ the eula. . .
mr c
you know, i agree with your post -- but i have to say, there is a BIG difference between financial policy and TAKING AWAY THE RIGHTS of citizens. sorry. didn't mean to raise my voice. but telling me that because i like SS means i have to accept gonzales' speech is appalling.
again, i understand your point, and accept it -- but it's kneejerky.
mr c
realistically, you're probably (and hopefully) right. i, like a lot of people, i'm sure, worry about our culture spiraling into a "corporate feudalism" state. i understand the viewpoint that the market will dictate a solution, but what happens when a monopoly can effectively control the market? this is where IP can look like a bad thing, and makes me think of a world where we, as people, have no choice to swallow the content the IP holder, without being able to appropriate or reuse it in any way. this seems to me dystopian. more and more our environment (esp. if you live in a city, like most people) IS the content of the media. not being able to react and interact with your environment seems very orwellian.
thanks for info on the copyright stuff, i'll look into it.
mr c
I'm sure this has been talked over a zillion times, but i have some questions about the issue.
is copyright infringement when party B makes copies of content that party A produced, and then proceeds to market it as if they (party B) are the rightful owners/creators?
that is, wasn't copyright put into place to protect companies from other *companies* (and "businessmen") stealing their IP?
i guess it's a matter of *licensing*. if i download the new metallica song (from p2p), i don't have a license to listen to it. i have a hard time understanding the legality of this in the private sector. the only license i really understand is my driver's license. i suppose it works the same, really, for IP.
i wonder what the fine is for driving without a license, and how that compares to the RIAA lawsuits . . .
the only people (like 2) that i've met who really believe that it's wrong to download music AND whom actually *don't* do it see the issue totally in terms of material possession. they can't conceptually differentiate between a cd and mp3.
something to think about: record labels' biggest costs are distribution and promotion. so when i buy a cd, i'm paying for the promotion and distribution behind it -- not so much the creation of the content (the artist is responsible for that).
i think the labels (and society) is just beginning to come to terms with the issues. i'm still unclear on a lot of them. but i do know that a future with strong IP law is a dystopian one. i think it's one of the top issues of our time.
mr c
although offtopic i'll respond.
too late. i used that phrase because i had heard it somewhere else. the english language is full of such instances. imagine my chagrin when i found one of my pet peeves actually made it into the dictionary -- irregardless. in fact, my spell check allows it. face it -- those of us who insist on some sort of standard of grammar and usage for the english language have all but lost the fight.
in summary, thanks for the correction. i'll ask my grammar guru what she has to say about it. but it's moot, anyway.
mr c.
is the question this begs (in my mind at least). is it the UI? or is it the architecture? the kernel?
/.'ers can shed some light on this for me!
another post mentioned that if it's os x on intell and ppc, then why not arm?
the summary implies that for it to be os x in a "meaningful" sense, it must be the same kernel (darwin). what if it was a complete different kernel with the same core services on top of it. in other words, isn't it the API that defines an os? if my app can get access to the hardware through the same API calls, and i don't have to worry about said hardware, isn't that the same os? java comes to mind, but it abstracts the os (thus the hardware). . .
i understand the gist of the summary, and there may be a CS defined standard of "what makes an os an os" that i'm unaware of, but it seems it would have to be API-based or architecture/paradigm based, or both.
hopefully other
cheers,
mr c
ok, i'm a begrudgingly admitted macboi, and *i'm* tired of hearing about the iphone debate. it's like arguing the existence of god (or something) -- what does it matter?
mr c
ok, so i'm probably more of a macboi than i want to admit, but here goes:
this seems to me like burger king coming out with a McCoffee drink, knowing McDonald's is about to do the same, then suing McD's when they do.
apple has been using the i* for quite some time, going back to the iMac in what? 1999? i know of no i* branding used by cisco before the iPhone. I think that apple would have a compelling argument on that fact alone.
it really seems like cisco is saying "hey, wait for me guys!... guys?", by sneaking in an iPhone months before the keynote, as another post pointed out.
mr c.
if someone passing through an area is unfamiliar with that area (as tourist or otherwise), that person could get notes about the immediate local relevant to their interest -- say you're hanging out on the other side of town and want to see if there's any good sushi around. or comic book stores, or whatever.
would be like local.google does now, except on my phone, and i don't have to type in my location.
mrc
you know, i'm surprised i'm not hearing more about this. i bought a portable computer to be just that -- portable. so apple nixed the 12" powerbook and forced the line to the 15" -- i am now holding onto my 12" PB with a deathgrip until apple (hopefully) gets a clue and comes out with a 12" MB pro.
does anyone have a clue why they supersized their whole laptop line? the only two things i can think of are 1) their market research suggested that people want bigger or 2) they need the space to squeeze in the extra processing/gadgets.
to 1) i suppose i understand. i guess. no. no i don't. i thought the trend was smaller and lighter...
to 2) i can say, give me less processing and gadgets. the small size and weight of a laptop are the biggest selling points for me.
also, what's with the glossy screens? after going through years of those shields to go over your monitor to cut glare, and other check-out lane solutions to the glare problem, the new trend is *GLOSSY* screens? OMGWTF?!?!?!
anyway, to the parent: like, right-on, man.
mr c
i remember reading about a proposed dc bus in pop sci some years ago that really grabbed my imagination. basically, in your house, along with the 120 vac outlets, there would be connections for +/-12vdc and +5vdc -- the most common voltages for analog and digital electronics.
the horribly stupid situation we've gotten ourselves into is that now we have a myriad transformers in our houses. i can think of five that are currently plugged in right now in this room. put your hand on one of these -- that heat is wasted electricity.
the thing that should be investigated, i suppose is whether one big power supply is more efficient than a bazillion little ones . . .
also, electronics required 9vdc, eg, will still need to convert the 12vdc, and newer cpu cores use 3.3vdc....
the cool thing about an installed dc bus means that a small solar power system to drive it would become quite economical -- a solar cell and a battery, and you could power a good percentage of your electronic gadgetry.
mr c
hehe -- is this related to the inverse squarecasm law?
oooh. that one hurt. i'll stop now.
mr c
ok, ok. you out-nerded me! i should have known better than not allowing for heat/area. but really, i was going for the joke.
:sheesh:
what i really should have known better than was to forget that nerds aren't known for their sense of humor. . .
so, let me revise my handy rule-of-burn:
the amount of energy used is proportional to the burn received *if the area is equal*.
mr c
but just a moment of reflection should tell you that yes, anything that generates heat is going to be a huge draw of power. one can directly express heat power in Watts; yes, the same watts used to express electrical power.
electric heaters are usually 1500 watts. light bulbs from 60 to 100 watts. appliance motors in the home are around 1/4 to 1/2 horsepower (1 horsepower ~= 746 watts).
let's keep this in terms of heat for a second. in case you're wondering what uses more power -- your hair dryer or wireless router, you can do this simple test. put your hand on the hair dryer -- in just a few seconds, it will burn. perhaps a 1st degree burn. now, put your hand on your wireless router. warm, but not burn. in fact, it might feel cozy depending on your clime. therefore, i give to you the severity of the burn is proportional to how much electricity a device is using.
another indication is the size of the power cable something uses.
i dunno. i thought every self-respecting nerd had a handle on basic home power and loading.
mr c
oh -- it's this guy !!!!
mr c
a lot of people complain about the inconsistency of apple's UI between their programs -- but it happens here on slashdot -- each section has a different color scheme. i wonder if apple has it in the works to make different key applications present a different scheme. either way, i don't really notice -- the difference is cosmetic, and trivial.
mr c
so you continue to use this operating system that you hate because you're too cheap/lazy to fix a $15/15 minute cpu fan.
.)
anyway, your point about not knowing what's going on behind the scenes --> and you know what's going on behind the scenes in windows? (i guess you're 1 in 3 people who understand the registry. . .
here are a few hints for you:
applications>>utilities>>terminal
developer.apple.com
mr c
> (semi-half pipe)....
is this anything like . . . a quarter pipe?
is that the screen is "portrait" oriented, allowing a larger screen on the device. simply rotate the device 90 degrees to watch video.
however, the thing is rather large as a whole. would fit great in a bag, don't know about a pocket....
mr c
The worst part about all of this is that it defeats the honor system. In other words, rather than innocent until found guilty, students are seen as guilty until found innocent.
I would be very worried about false positives. Having written some papers for undergrad classes, they were not, by nature, requiring original thought -- that is, I think a lot of (undergrad) papers are simply about gathering information more than interpreting it -- so the 4-5 sources I've uses were likely used by the other 5000 students who did a paper on the same subject.
All in all, this is nasty business -- it's bad enough in the airport (I've never carried a bomb onto an airplane, nor ever plan to, but I'm still a bit on edge going through security) -- I think it has no place in acedemia.
mr c
uh, maybe they just weren't too good of farmers. . .
i want to say i see your point that it's the perception that matters. but what i failed to point out before is that my experience with linux (and this is going back a few years), was that a quick visit to a few websites would get you lists of which hardware was and wasn't supported and if so, to what degree; so that really, in the end, you were left with the "just go buy the right card" solution. The cool thing about linux here, is that if you're a technerd, you can get in there and start fiddling around with an unsupported card more extensively than you can OS X or WinXP -- hell, maybe even write your own driver. I think esr makes a valid point, but there's so much more to the picture: OS X works so well because apple keeps COMPLETE control of the whole distribution, a vertical monopoly if you will. microsoft works because they have NEAR control of the desktop, a horizontal monopoly. so really, what linux should be doing, is getting a MONOPOLY! -- then the rest will fall into place, right? i personally think linux is on the right path because of the strength of its principles, and microsoft is goin down on the weakness of its, but really, it's the distros who must fill in the marketing gap, not the community. should the community be less self-rightous? probably. does reprimanding it for being so matter? probably not. mr c
wait a minute -- you're complaining that linux was a hassle because you couldn't get the hardware to work, then you switched to a mac, and bingo! it all automagically worked! so mac os == good and linux == bad.
look, macs basically support ONE wireless card, and only a handful of video cards, eg. but since the computer CAME with it when you bought it, it's no big deal. but since the hodge-podge of parts you had laying in the closet weren't all supported by your linux distro, it's the OSS community's problem?
in fact, macs are probably worse, they just SEEM easier, because if it works, it works, if it doesn't, too bad. end of story, right? EASY! you fix the problem in macland by going and buying the part from the apple store.
i still call bullshit her
fwiw, I use a mac -- but let's be fair about all of this.
mr c