The public doesn't care because it has the Government to watch over these types of things. If the government only acted when the people were outraged, it wouldn't be efficient at all.
The general public may not care, but that does not make it ok to do. The general public puts its trust in institutions like the TSA to protect it. And if it's failing at that, while lying to the public, there should be an investigation of this. This is where Congress should be meddling instead of baseball or the Schiavo case.
Rather than the general public's apathy, the government's apathy is more shocking.
Also, the TSA may be trying to do a good thing, but it is failing. The "responses were not accurate", according to the spokesman.
True, the prevalent attitude is one of "why should I buy". However, this says more about the media offered than it does about the "pirates" themselves. No one wants to spend money for a CD which only has a few songs. No one wants to spend extra money to get extra channels on cable for only a few shows.
The success of iTunes has shown that if there is an alternative where customers can buy only a few songs for a reasonable price, they will. There have been a number of posts on/. about how people would pay to download TV shows. Not too many are happy with skirting the law for a few dollars. But if the **AA charge exorbitant prices for mediocre products, it pushes many people to piracy.
If a media company obtained a leaked copy of a competitor's movie and released it, they would indirectly be making a profit (relatively speaking). After all, once the competitor is ruined financially, it wouldn't be able to take on many more projects, ensuring the media company's survival in the market. I already addressed how/.'ers feel about this.
The point is that people believe it is wrong for anyone to make a profit of someone else's work.
If the company also wished only to encourage the sharing of information, it is free to share the GPL code and not charge for the code. But it does, and that is wrong.
When pirates start selling MP3s, like Maui X-Stream is doing with PearPC code, then I agree both sides are wrong. Until then, only the latter is wrong in my book.
The difference between music piracy and GPL violations is quite simple.
In the latter case, the company committing the violation is making a profit off the work of others, and in a way, cheating their customers.
In the former case, nothing is being stolen, and no one is being cheated, as many people would not have bought the CD or CD single to listen to the song(s) if they didn't download it.
It's about money. Nothing more, nothing less. That's just how I see it.
Why bother storing any document in MS Office formats? Just convert it when you need to send it to someone. Otherwise store everything in the OpenDocument formats.
Well, IANAL but since your bot will be reading the MS Office files, it should be ok. Google Desktop Search already does this (and even supports OpenOffice documents), so I don't think it's a real problem.
Quoting from the link you posted: here are several important differences between our Emergency Services dialing and traditional 911 Dialing that you need to know:
I think that says enough really. It says that there is a difference and it explains what those differences are. Sure it's not on the front page, but it shouldn't be. That would be bad design, from both a marketing and UI perspective.
It is optional, yes. But that doesn't mean it's not a benefit. Assume that there are VoIP services that do not offer this service. Then Vonage's offer of this service is a benefit.
I have no idea what your point is. It is clear Vonage has done enough to educate and inform its customers of its services. But there are still those who believe that they should be punished.
I'm a liberal by most accounts. But I believe that sometimes corporations are not as evil as people believe them to be.
When you buy a car from a dealer, it is your responsibility to check to see that it does perform like other cars. Learn about caveat emptor.
My opinion may be irrelevant, but that does not mean it is wrong or incorrect. What really gets me is that many/.ers blame users when they fall for spam attacks, but blame companies when users fail to read the relevant information.
Whether or not they should be regulated is not the point here. The point is that they are not regulated at the moment, and X is the service they provide. They are not forcing anyone to use their service.
However, those who are using Vonage's VoIP service should educate themselves as to the limits of the said service. There is no reason for Vonage to be sued over this.
Regulation of VoIP is another debate for another day.
Slashdot Mirror
Pfft. Your password is unguessable? Try my nick!
Clippy always, always, comes first.
It's part of their Windows Genuine Advantage program.
The public doesn't care because it has the Government to watch over these types of things. If the government only acted when the people were outraged, it wouldn't be efficient at all.
The general public may not care, but that does not make it ok to do. The general public puts its trust in institutions like the TSA to protect it. And if it's failing at that, while lying to the public, there should be an investigation of this. This is where Congress should be meddling instead of baseball or the Schiavo case.
Rather than the general public's apathy, the government's apathy is more shocking.
Also, the TSA may be trying to do a good thing, but it is failing. The "responses were not accurate", according to the spokesman.
Paris Hilton could have used one of those in her sex video.
Too little too late, unfortunately.
You can't own technology (unless you mean the marketing jargon for software/hardware, which I don't). You can own products, however.
He's more of a technology-user/product-owner.
Groklaw should put up PDFs of court documents filled with lines of "What the !#@$ do you think you are doing?", signed by Madonna.
Ironically, your rant was just as useless. You could have just written "GNAA rules".
Microsoft too would lose credibility, if it had any to lose.
It's got nothing to lose, because it's lost it all already.
As if any of Microsoft's time estimates have been correct.
Case in point: try copying a file to another place on any Windows PC.
"Hey google what the hell is this yellow stuff in the picture eating my plants"
Spongebob?
True, the prevalent attitude is one of "why should I buy". However, this says more about the media offered than it does about the "pirates" themselves. No one wants to spend money for a CD which only has a few songs. No one wants to spend extra money to get extra channels on cable for only a few shows.
/. about how people would pay to download TV shows. Not too many are happy with skirting the law for a few dollars. But if the **AA charge exorbitant prices for mediocre products, it pushes many people to piracy.
/.'ers feel about this.
The success of iTunes has shown that if there is an alternative where customers can buy only a few songs for a reasonable price, they will. There have been a number of posts on
If a media company obtained a leaked copy of a competitor's movie and released it, they would indirectly be making a profit (relatively speaking). After all, once the competitor is ruined financially, it wouldn't be able to take on many more projects, ensuring the media company's survival in the market. I already addressed how
The point is that people believe it is wrong for anyone to make a profit of someone else's work.
If the company also wished only to encourage the sharing of information, it is free to share the GPL code and not charge for the code. But it does, and that is wrong.
When pirates start selling MP3s, like Maui X-Stream is doing with PearPC code, then I agree both sides are wrong. Until then, only the latter is wrong in my book.
Please remember that comment moderation points may go down as well as up.
There are mods who disagree with him. This does not make it a hypocrisy. The OP is confusing two different types of violations.
It's an interesting argument, not a good one.
The difference between music piracy and GPL violations is quite simple.
In the latter case, the company committing the violation is making a profit off the work of others, and in a way, cheating their customers.
In the former case, nothing is being stolen, and no one is being cheated, as many people would not have bought the CD or CD single to listen to the song(s) if they didn't download it.
It's about money. Nothing more, nothing less. That's just how I see it.
Sounds like college to me.
3 words:
God bless Mozilla
Why bother storing any document in MS Office formats? Just convert it when you need to send it to someone. Otherwise store everything in the OpenDocument formats.
Well, IANAL but since your bot will be reading the MS Office files, it should be ok. Google Desktop Search already does this (and even supports OpenOffice documents), so I don't think it's a real problem.
They got the wrong definition. Redmond thought it meant "eXclusive Markup Language".
Small typos like that get passed around in memos and next thing you know, you have patents for numerous things.
If it weighs as much as a duck, and made of wood, it's a witch.
Quoting from the link you posted: here are several important differences between our Emergency Services dialing and traditional 911 Dialing that you need to know:
I think that says enough really. It says that there is a difference and it explains what those differences are. Sure it's not on the front page, but it shouldn't be. That would be bad design, from both a marketing and UI perspective.
It is optional, yes. But that doesn't mean it's not a benefit. Assume that there are VoIP services that do not offer this service. Then Vonage's offer of this service is a benefit.
I have no idea what your point is. It is clear Vonage has done enough to educate and inform its customers of its services. But there are still those who believe that they should be punished.
I'm a liberal by most accounts. But I believe that sometimes corporations are not as evil as people believe them to be.
When you buy a car from a dealer, it is your responsibility to check to see that it does perform like other cars. Learn about caveat emptor.
/.ers blame users when they fall for spam attacks, but blame companies when users fail to read the relevant information.
My opinion may be irrelevant, but that does not mean it is wrong or incorrect. What really gets me is that many
I don't like dual standards.
Whether or not they should be regulated is not the point here. The point is that they are not regulated at the moment, and X is the service they provide. They are not forcing anyone to use their service.
However, those who are using Vonage's VoIP service should educate themselves as to the limits of the said service. There is no reason for Vonage to be sued over this.
Regulation of VoIP is another debate for another day.