I think Paramount wants to kill off Enterprise because they're ready to start with something fresh after Berman/Braga are canned. It seems to me that a company that is consistantly rejecting bribes to keep a rather popular show on the air is either incredibly stupid, or has an ace up their sleeve and doesn't want anyone to know about it.
Well, either that or they're trying to piss off the people who watch it via bittorrent (quite a few if I'm not mistaken). "Haha!!! That'll show you commie pirates! We'll just cancel whatever you like to download."
Actually, you're wrong. I'm straight edge (don't read too much into that -- I'm not your stereotypical edger). In light of that, I'm for the legalization of all drugs and lowering the age at which one can puchase those drugs to 18 (possibly 16) and eliminating consumption restrictions.
I've heard from the hard-core conspiracy theorists that GM will be in bankruptcy by the end of the year. It doesn't seem too crazy since the UAW isn't negotiating and GM is about ready to be downgraded to "junk" status.
Finally, on a dialup (like at my parents place), adblock SIGNIFICANTLY improves performance.
Thank you!
I'm still on dial-up (free from university), and I often use Adblock in this way. Many pages I frequent have some images that simply waste bandwidth. For instance, I have blocked a lot of the images on my on-line banking website so that the response time is better. Getting rid of those images cuts down how long I'm dialed in.
This "social contract" BS is something marketers dreamed up to make it "bad" to block their ads. The TV people say the same thing about how you're "breaking contract" by muting commercials, getting up off your duff for a drink, or skipping past them on a recording you made.
I didn't sign any contract. I didn't agree to any ToS. I don't want to see your commercials, so poo on you.
As far as 4th amendment is concerned, I'm with you, but I think that can be remedied by having your city council pass an ordinance guaranteeing your privacy rights.
The saddest part of the bill is that CCCs can not only garnish wages, they can even take child support money. Way to go, assholes. Let's put some innocent children in poverty because a parent, at best, had no insurance and got sick, or at worse, tried to scam some people out of a few thousand dollars.
Now let's hope for usury laws. In some states, they are on the books, but not usually prosecuted.
My girlfriend lost her job as well and had to default on her car loan. One of her credit card companies immediately raised her interest rates to something near 25% and (the kicker) lowered her credit limit. So not only was she paying the 25% APR, she was now over her new credit limit and paying $39 fees because of that.
Only buying things I can afford is so liberating.
I know exactly how you feel. If only everyone knew.
1) Gov't grants local monopoly and regulates the monopoly like there is no tomorrow. 2) Gov't allows for wide open competition, in which case the Gov't gets in the business as a low-cost alternative with scaled back services to appeal to those who can't afford a commercial package.
Libertarians and conservatives will scream bloody murder at 2 (well, both really), but protective imitation (not outright collusion) often occurs and needs to be stopped.
Umm, good sir, a corporation is legally an individual as far as the law is concerned. So the Republicans can still be the party of the "individual"... the individual corporation.
<rant> There is no such thing as a party of the people. There are 2 parties who basically do the bidding of the interest groups who put them in power. The closest thing we have to a "people's party" is any one of the 3 "major" minor parties (Green, Libertarian, Constitution). I think its time to get those 3 working together to pull down the corrput 2. </rant>
Hehe. I still have rabbit ears. Mostly because having DSL and cable is redundant to me. I can just use my DSL line to download whatever shows I want to watch anyway.
Most of everything I'm saying is based on my principles of right and wrong. It has very little to do with what might happen if we implemented these policies. Also, I could really care less if jobs are lost in the "luxury item industry". Just so long as "old money" is first against the wall when the revolution comes.
This would also have the added benefit of increasing the tax burden on those states that are over-represented in the House of Representatives.
Thats over-represented in the Senate, good sir. You can't be over-represented in the House because its apportioned by population. Many small states have a lone House member.
* eliminate income taxes on labor -- People who sell their labor tend to be poorer. * make the capital gains tax >50% and tax stock transactions a flat fee of $.01 -- People who simply move money around (which requires no work) should be taxed accordingly. * institute a national sales tax in the form of a "progressive sales tax" -- "luxury" items should be taxed at much higher rates than necessities. That new mansion? 100%. That new H2? 50%. That new toaster? 1%.
I do. I'm 0/3 at the moment. When I see something interesting not on/. I submit it. Luckily one of my submissions would have been a dupe (I was on vacation, and missed a previous article). So apparently they do check for dupes every so often.
Yes, in theory, that would work. I think auto-update uses at least x% of bandwidth when downloading updates, so you could at least slow it down using a DoS
If I'm not mistaken, it allows the auto-update feature to only use idle bandwidth when downloading new updates.
This is good for Joe User who is trying to surf on a 56k modem while downloading 10MB of updates. ISPs probably got calls of "the internet being slow", likely due to auto-update running while they were trying to surf.
Slashdot Mirror
I think Paramount wants to kill off Enterprise because they're ready to start with something fresh after Berman/Braga are canned. It seems to me that a company that is consistantly rejecting bribes to keep a rather popular show on the air is either incredibly stupid, or has an ace up their sleeve and doesn't want anyone to know about it.
Well, either that or they're trying to piss off the people who watch it via bittorrent (quite a few if I'm not mistaken).
"Haha!!! That'll show you commie pirates! We'll just cancel whatever you like to download."
In this case, I think the good outweighs the bad. I can deal with spam if it means that people in China, N. Korea, etc. can get unbiased information.
Hehe. From "DrinkingIllini" no less.
Actually, you're wrong. I'm straight edge (don't read too much into that -- I'm not your stereotypical edger). In light of that, I'm for the legalization of all drugs and lowering the age at which one can puchase those drugs to 18 (possibly 16) and eliminating consumption restrictions.
So, by all means, drink up, my friend.
I've heard from the hard-core conspiracy theorists that GM will be in bankruptcy by the end of the year. It doesn't seem too crazy since the UAW isn't negotiating and GM is about ready to be downgraded to "junk" status.
Finally, on a dialup (like at my parents place), adblock SIGNIFICANTLY improves performance.
Thank you!
I'm still on dial-up (free from university), and I often use Adblock in this way. Many pages I frequent have some images that simply waste bandwidth. For instance, I have blocked a lot of the images on my on-line banking website so that the response time is better. Getting rid of those images cuts down how long I'm dialed in.
Me too!
</AOL>
Even though that is the case, I plan to subscribe when I have the money.
Advertisers don't seem to get that I'm dead broke in college. I don't have the money to buy anything.
This "social contract" BS is something marketers dreamed up to make it "bad" to block their ads. The TV people say the same thing about how you're "breaking contract" by muting commercials, getting up off your duff for a drink, or skipping past them on a recording you made.
I didn't sign any contract. I didn't agree to any ToS. I don't want to see your commercials, so poo on you.
As far as 4th amendment is concerned, I'm with you, but I think that can be remedied by having your city council pass an ordinance guaranteeing your privacy rights.
The saddest part of the bill is that CCCs can not only garnish wages, they can even take child support money. Way to go, assholes. Let's put some innocent children in poverty because a parent, at best, had no insurance and got sick, or at worse, tried to scam some people out of a few thousand dollars.
Now let's hope for usury laws.
In some states, they are on the books, but not usually prosecuted.
My girlfriend lost her job as well and had to default on her car loan. One of her credit card companies immediately raised her interest rates to something near 25% and (the kicker) lowered her credit limit. So not only was she paying the 25% APR, she was now over her new credit limit and paying $39 fees because of that.
Only buying things I can afford is so liberating.
I know exactly how you feel. If only everyone knew.
!Republican != Democrat
If the same idiots that run the building department get to run the local internet - I'll will make AOL dial-up seem like a breath of fresh air.
In which case, no one will use the new wifi as a primary connection, so no business interests will be harmed.
And had the Founding Fathers seen that more than just white male property owners been able to vote, they may have balked at signing it, too.
Exactly ... not +3 Funny ... +5 Insighful.
I think it needs to be one of two ways. Either:
1) Gov't grants local monopoly and regulates the monopoly like there is no tomorrow.
2) Gov't allows for wide open competition, in which case the Gov't gets in the business as a low-cost alternative with scaled back services to appeal to those who can't afford a commercial package.
Libertarians and conservatives will scream bloody murder at 2 (well, both really), but protective imitation (not outright collusion) often occurs and needs to be stopped.
Umm, good sir, a corporation is legally an individual as far as the law is concerned. So the Republicans can still be the party of the "individual" ... the individual corporation.
<rant>
There is no such thing as a party of the people. There are 2 parties who basically do the bidding of the interest groups who put them in power. The closest thing we have to a "people's party" is any one of the 3 "major" minor parties (Green, Libertarian, Constitution). I think its time to get those 3 working together to pull down the corrput 2.
</rant>
Hey, you shut up. I have aluminum foil wrapped around the ends ... isn't that good enough?
Hehe. I still have rabbit ears. Mostly because having DSL and cable is redundant to me. I can just use my DSL line to download whatever shows I want to watch anyway.
Hopefully these ultra-cold atoms won't cost as much as those teeny-tiny atoms. Have you seen the price of those lately?
I'll bite.
Most of everything I'm saying is based on my principles of right and wrong. It has very little to do with what might happen if we implemented these policies. Also, I could really care less if jobs are lost in the "luxury item industry". Just so long as "old money" is first against the wall when the revolution comes.
(is he serious?)
This would also have the added benefit of increasing the tax burden on those states that are over-represented in the House of Representatives.
Thats over-represented in the Senate, good sir. You can't be over-represented in the House because its apportioned by population. Many small states have a lone House member.
I think the best way to fix the problem is to:
* eliminate income taxes on labor -- People who sell their labor tend to be poorer.
* make the capital gains tax >50% and tax stock transactions a flat fee of $.01 -- People who simply move money around (which requires no work) should be taxed accordingly.
* institute a national sales tax in the form of a "progressive sales tax" -- "luxury" items should be taxed at much higher rates than necessities. That new mansion? 100%. That new H2? 50%. That new toaster? 1%.
I do. I'm 0/3 at the moment. When I see something interesting not on /. I submit it. Luckily one of my submissions would have been a dupe (I was on vacation, and missed a previous article). So apparently they do check for dupes every so often.
Anyone who RTFA will find that the quote in question is false. Its spelled out in the page that it is a false quote.
Indeed, editors need to keep tabs, but asshat submitters need to shape up as well.
Yes, in theory, that would work. I think auto-update uses at least x% of bandwidth when downloading updates, so you could at least slow it down using a DoS
If I'm not mistaken, it allows the auto-update feature to only use idle bandwidth when downloading new updates.
This is good for Joe User who is trying to surf on a 56k modem while downloading 10MB of updates. ISPs probably got calls of "the internet being slow", likely due to auto-update running while they were trying to surf.
Is it critical? No. Helpful? Probably.