The difference is that Sony will most likely never make this the standard for Blu-Ray, because the last thing that Sony wants is for your existing hardware to be compatible with a Sony product. How else can they get you to replace everything you own with Sony products?
You're not addressing the issue I raised. What difference does it make to you personally if the person you vote for wins?
Frankly, I believe that voting for a Democrat or a Republican is a wasted vote. It's not like these parties need your vote. Percentage-wise, a vote for a third party makes a much bigger difference. I think your logic is backwards.
Sure. Out of the entire country, I get to choose between TWO people, neither of whom represent me.
Well, no politician completely represents any of his consitituents. There will always be some disagreement. But why do say you only have a choice between two people? Even if only two names appear on the ballot, there are write-in candidates. You just need to educate yourself on the choices.
Not only that, but used copies are half as expensive. And guess what - a used DVD is very often just as good as a new one. After all, if you're willing to buy a DRM'd movie, then you're not really looking to own a keepsake that you can display in your bookshelf, or something that you can give as a gift. You just want to watch the movie. In that case, you're highly likely to accept a used DVD that's in good condition.
People are against a tiered Internet because they fear that such a setup will reduce the quality of their Internet "experience" unless they pay more. For example, a web site that you might visit frequently could become slower because it has been placed on a lower tier.
The same applies to cable TV. If a channel I watch regularly is moved to a higher tier, then it means I need to pay more to watch something that I've been watching all along. That would make me mad. It would make anyone mad, which is why cable companies rarely do that. I've had regular analog cable for 8 years now, and I've never "lost" a channel I cared about.
I'm sure the Austin Game Conference (which ended a couple days ago) would be more than happy to host anyone no longer welcome at E3. Austin is a major game development hub, and the conference has a very impressive list of attendees.
"It started off with building dreams. We were not given any warning. They just told us the operations would now head back to the US," said a sacked employee.
Looks like they got a taste of their own medicine.
That an outside entity is filtering your internet access against your wish.
That some web sites will be forced into the.xxx domain against their wish.
Both of these situations are un-Libertarian. The first one does happen already to a degree, but not to the extant that I think it's a real problem. If a business decides to filter porn, a Libertarian should be okay with that, even if some employees don't like it. That's because when you surf the web at work, it's technically not "your" Internet access. As for the second assumption, I don't know of any web site that's been forced into a certain top-level domain, except for.edu and.gov sites, but I don't think those really count as being "bad".
I guess the argument is whether the.xxx domain will make either of those assumptions more likely to happen. I don't think it will.
Libertarians rejected the domain beucase it would make porn easier to block
I'm a Libertarian, and I can't see why Libertarians would oppose.xxx. Sure, it's easier to block, but who does the blocking? Private businesses and individuals, and Libertarians are very keen on these two groups more power.
I don't think anyone seriously expects the government to block.xxx. The Bush administration is a big fan of censorship, so since they oppose.xxx, obviously they don't believe they can block it from people.
From what I hear, NASA engineers are already cheap - they willingly get paid less than they would in the private sector because they love their work so much.
I already include all that. I do have a real accountant that does the final tax work. I just wanted to keep my post simple. However, dedicating a part of your house to business, if you own the house, isn't always a good idea, because then you'll owe taxes when you sell the house.
You're wrong. Services are taxable as straight income. Most likely, you're a sole proprietor and shoud therefore be filing a Schedule C with your 1040. Your tax rate will probably be around 40% of your profits.
I'd say you're screwed. If the IRS ever found you out, they would go medieval on your ass. If you've been doing this for several years, then you probably owe more in back taxes than you make in a year.
My wife is a graphic designer, and I do her taxes. She does have costs involved, because she subcontracts the printing and mailing to other companies, and charges her clients those costs plus her markup. She pays about 40% on her profit: her total income minus the costs of printing and mailing.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh come on, do you think any girl that dates a geek has her own money?
The difference is that Sony will most likely never make this the standard for Blu-Ray, because the last thing that Sony wants is for your existing hardware to be compatible with a Sony product. How else can they get you to replace everything you own with Sony products?
Frankly, I believe that voting for a Democrat or a Republican is a wasted vote. It's not like these parties need your vote. Percentage-wise, a vote for a third party makes a much bigger difference. I think your logic is backwards.
So what? Do you get some kind of prize if the person you vote for wins?
Except that you can easily and legally watch a DVD on any computer with a DVD drive.
Well, no politician completely represents any of his consitituents. There will always be some disagreement. But why do say you only have a choice between two people? Even if only two names appear on the ballot, there are write-in candidates. You just need to educate yourself on the choices.
Not only that, but used copies are half as expensive. And guess what - a used DVD is very often just as good as a new one. After all, if you're willing to buy a DRM'd movie, then you're not really looking to own a keepsake that you can display in your bookshelf, or something that you can give as a gift. You just want to watch the movie. In that case, you're highly likely to accept a used DVD that's in good condition.
There's only one metaphor - "you can't unring a bell", so there is no mixed metaphor.
The same applies to cable TV. If a channel I watch regularly is moved to a higher tier, then it means I need to pay more to watch something that I've been watching all along. That would make me mad. It would make anyone mad, which is why cable companies rarely do that. I've had regular analog cable for 8 years now, and I've never "lost" a channel I cared about.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0417148
No, I was thinking of the AGC. For some reason, I though this month was September.
I'm sure the Austin Game Conference (which ended a couple days ago) would be more than happy to host anyone no longer welcome at E3. Austin is a major game development hub, and the conference has a very impressive list of attendees.
I don't think that's correct. Last I heard, the PS3 will ship this November, but Halo 3 isn't slated until 2007.
http://bigmarv.net/how/tivo30secondskip.html
If you're going to make a sexist joke, at least don't embarrass yourself by screwing it up. It's supposed to be "bleeds for five days".
I agree 100%. It obviously was not designed by a advertising professional.
Looks like they got a taste of their own medicine.
Both of these situations are un-Libertarian. The first one does happen already to a degree, but not to the extant that I think it's a real problem. If a business decides to filter porn, a Libertarian should be okay with that, even if some employees don't like it. That's because when you surf the web at work, it's technically not "your" Internet access. As for the second assumption, I don't know of any web site that's been forced into a certain top-level domain, except for
I guess the argument is whether the .xxx domain will make either of those assumptions more likely to happen. I don't think it will.
I'm a Libertarian, and I can't see why Libertarians would oppose .xxx. Sure, it's easier to block, but who does the blocking? Private businesses and individuals, and Libertarians are very keen on these two groups more power.
I don't think anyone seriously expects the government to block .xxx. The Bush administration is a big fan of censorship, so since they oppose .xxx, obviously they don't believe they can block it from people.
No, it doesn't. It's not a hardware mod unless a soldering gun is involved.
From what I hear, NASA engineers are already cheap - they willingly get paid less than they would in the private sector because they love their work so much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_(software)
I already include all that. I do have a real accountant that does the final tax work. I just wanted to keep my post simple. However, dedicating a part of your house to business, if you own the house, isn't always a good idea, because then you'll owe taxes when you sell the house.
I'd say you're screwed. If the IRS ever found you out, they would go medieval on your ass. If you've been doing this for several years, then you probably owe more in back taxes than you make in a year.
My wife is a graphic designer, and I do her taxes. She does have costs involved, because she subcontracts the printing and mailing to other companies, and charges her clients those costs plus her markup. She pays about 40% on her profit: her total income minus the costs of printing and mailing.
Game companies are moving to Austin because it's cheaper and there are lots of game developers already there.