Sure, they're on the side of Yahoo!, Amazon & Google NOW, but do you think they're going to take a stand and refuse to participate in the new tiered internet? When the bidding war for express "delivery" of content starts, they'll steamroll Google and Yahoo! with their hordes of cash. Having the best search engine won't matter anymore. Having an "adequate" search engine that works the fastest will be enough to rule the market, and MS will make SURE that nobody will be able to have their content "delivered" at higher speed.
The committee vote was 27-4 and it's "The Republicans" that are defeating Net Neutrality? What a ridiculous headline.
Both of the major political parties suck, but playing the blame game only perpetuates this horrendous duopolisitc control of our nation. The Republicans get blamed . . . so we must vote Democrat next time!(even though the majority of them endorse the same policies as those evil Republicans.
It's just like the Patriot Act . . . it passes 98-1 and is somehow the fault of GWB and the Republicans. Get a clue. The only wasted vote is the one cast for either of these two parties.
"How many boxes does, say, Dell ship without windows"
If you mean home/office PCs, it's hovering around ZERO. I called them last year and asked about getting one of their systems with Linux pre-installed. Sales rep said that it was not an option. I then aksed about having no OS installed. I got put on hold and was then informed that I could erase all of the pre-installed software if I didn't want it. I then called IBM's PC sales(IBM is a big Linux proponent right?) Same answer, except that the sales rep didn't have to ask someone before telling me I could re-format the hard drive to get rid of the software (that I was forced to purchase but didn't really want).
Linux will never have a solid presence in the desktop space until the major vendors offer it as an alternative pre-installed OS and give a discount on the system. Hard to imagine that happening when MS puts up a fight over selling a system with no OS whatsoever.
This is not about "CHILD PORNOGRAPHY". It is (supposedly) about a law that is designed to prevent children from LOOKING AT pornography. It's also a load of BS, but at least get their lame-assed excuse right.
Thanks for the insights David.
These Google critics seem to be a bunch of self-righteous grandstanders making a knee-jerk reaction to something that, although troubling, is innocuous compared to the dealings of other firms.
It's ridiculous to hold Google to some higher standard than we do Yah00 and M$(or all other companies that do business with China). Their choice was to provide NO Google capabilities, or to provide "censored" Google capabilities. Providing the latter isn't "doing evil". They've actually scaled the moral high ground by getting permission to fully inform the users that certain content has been censored!
I knew about the Yah00 info that had been used to incarcerate Chinese dissidents, but the inapproproate language filter (freedom, etc.) on the M$ blogs is a new one.
Notice that Google also stands up to a U.S. government that tries to grab their data while Yah00 and M$ roll over on their users with hardly a protest.
Go ahead and write your letters, send your e-mails and run your self-righteous mouths in criticism of Google. Maybe you'll get more attention that way, even though you're way off target. Make sure you don't have any Chinese components in your computer . . . or any Chinese products in your house for that matter.
"odds are overwhelming stacked against the resistance. You have a military that vastly outguns a ragtag citizen militia and a compliant media that would paint the opposition as traitors and terrorists . .."
Good points, but you're overlooking several things.
An armed uprising in the U.S. wouldn't consist of a bunch of farmers walking out into a field with a banner which reads "we are revolting" and taking on a modern military head to head. It would be a conflict of ambush, sabotage and other guerilla tactics. Never underestimate a determined resistance movement fighting on its home soil. Viet-Nam and Afghanistan in the 1980s come to mind, and let's not forget Iraq . . . whose insurgency had its "back broken" ages ago. The important thing here is that there is nothing superficial to distinguish a citizen going along with the program from a revolutionary or a sympathizer who isn't.
You also forget that members of the military, reserves, national guard, etc. are still citizens with friends and relatives. Some of the soldiers would not take kindly to orders directing them to kill other U.S. citizens.
The fundamental flaw with your argument is that you're thinking about the Internet as a "delivery" mechanism that would be covered by your generic statute. The Internet is not like the USPS where you "distribute" things from point A to point B. It's a marketplace/community where content is "made available" to anyone with access.
. . . and if you actually believe that this really about porn, you're misguided X 2
" . ..that would be like suing the manufacturer of a gun used in a murder because they made guns deliberately to kill things, which is completely ridiculous."
Yes, it's ridiculous, but that doesn't stop lawyers from tryng it anyway . . . i.e. Firearms Manufacturers ARE being sued for the criminal misuse of their products.
How is an artist, especially an up-and-comer supposed to get any exposure if you can't play their music on the radio and can't distribute it via the Internet? When last I checked, bands were mailing promo-CDs to radio stations all the time begging for air play.
How many people are going to go to a concert or buy a CD when they have never heard any of the band's music? Do we have to rely on MTV and a few Movie and TV soundtracks to tell us what to listen to?
"What if it is one of those free "alternative weeklies" that no-one has to pay for?"
I like that analogy. The paper was given away for free, so you should be able to save a copy and give it away for free.
The question is whether archiving a web page and then allowing others to view it is the same as giving away your original version of the paper(OK) or re-printing it and giving away new copies(not OK)
The rule should be that if you visit the page 'X' times, then you can allow 'X' hits on your "copy" of the page . ..just like you picked up a whole stack of those free papers.:-)
Dissolve the U.S. Department of Education & repeal all Federal education laws/mandates
Create a standard nationwide school voucher program
Require that every student in a school take the same courses and allow them to move up only when they can pass those courses
special-ed expenditure/student ~= total expenditure/student
Remove computers from all K-[5|6|7|8] classrooms
Classes only for English-speaking students.
Get rid of the NEA(wishful thinking)
>>> So how many people have blown themselves up lately?
>>A lot of people might argue that's because law-enforcement is able to do more with their new powers.
I have an excellent method for keeping our streets safe from lions. I bend over at the waist, and keeping my feet in-line make small leaps forward making sure that the toe of the back foot strikes the heel of the front foot in mid-air while I snap my fingers on the right hand. There hasn't been a tiger-attack in my entire STATE since 9/11 thus proving the effectiveness of my method.
I'm not a huge USA football fan, but allow me to retort.
Athleticism is rather subjective outside the context of particular sports. You'd be hard-pressed to find a tennis player with the strength of a below average NFL player . . . even on a pound-per-pound basis. I also think you'd be absolutely stunned to see how fast some of those big fat boys really are. Your obesity metrics are absurd in the context of a sport where size and strength are of major importance.
If you want to talk about athletes, consider a top-notch NFL linebacker. I doubt that you could find the equivalent combination of strength, speed and agility in any other sport.
When they say "per patch" my guess is that they mean per patch AND per machine. i.e. 1 Linux box more expensive to upgrade that 1 Windows box. If not, I'll stand corrected.
In my experience, one Linux/Unix sysadmin can manage a larger number of machines than your average MCSE, and one Linux box can be performing more functions than the same box running Windows. "per patch per machine" doesn't account for either of these facts. I'd like to see a similar study performed in an aggregate sense . . . although a methodology might be difficult.
I recently saw a pretty decent deal on a Dell PC and called to ask if they would sell it with Linux pre-installed.
No.
Well, how about with no OS?
Sir, you can reformat the hard drive when you get it and. . .
OK, forget it.
I was then quite stunned when I called about an IBM PC and even THEY(one of the biggest corporate backers of Linux) wouldn't sell a PC with Linux pre-installed . . . or even a box without Windows.
???
How is Linux supposed to catch on and put a dent in the MS monopoly when the major vendors won't sell Linux boxes and force you to buy a Windows OEM license regardless?
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, they're on the side of Yahoo!, Amazon & Google NOW, but do you think they're going to take a stand and refuse to participate in the new tiered internet? When the bidding war for express "delivery" of content starts, they'll steamroll Google and Yahoo! with their hordes of cash. Having the best search engine won't matter anymore. Having an "adequate" search engine that works the fastest will be enough to rule the market, and MS will make SURE that nobody will be able to have their content "delivered" at higher speed.
The committee vote was 27-4 and it's "The Republicans" that are defeating Net Neutrality? What a ridiculous headline. Both of the major political parties suck, but playing the blame game only perpetuates this horrendous duopolisitc control of our nation. The Republicans get blamed . . . so we must vote Democrat next time!(even though the majority of them endorse the same policies as those evil Republicans. It's just like the Patriot Act . . . it passes 98-1 and is somehow the fault of GWB and the Republicans. Get a clue. The only wasted vote is the one cast for either of these two parties.
"How many boxes does, say, Dell ship without windows"
If you mean home/office PCs, it's hovering around ZERO. I called them last year and asked about getting one of their systems with Linux pre-installed. Sales rep said that it was not an option. I then aksed about having no OS installed. I got put on hold and was then informed that I could erase all of the pre-installed software if I didn't want it. I then called IBM's PC sales(IBM is a big Linux proponent right?) Same answer, except that the sales rep didn't have to ask someone before telling me I could re-format the hard drive to get rid of the software (that I was forced to purchase but didn't really want).
Linux will never have a solid presence in the desktop space until the major vendors offer it as an alternative pre-installed OS and give a discount on the system. Hard to imagine that happening when MS puts up a fight over selling a system with no OS whatsoever.
RTFA
This is not about "CHILD PORNOGRAPHY". It is (supposedly) about a law that is designed to prevent children from LOOKING AT pornography. It's also a load of BS, but at least get their lame-assed excuse right.
What "reson to believe" would that be? Movies and TV shows?
Thanks for the insights David. These Google critics seem to be a bunch of self-righteous grandstanders making a knee-jerk reaction to something that, although troubling, is innocuous compared to the dealings of other firms. It's ridiculous to hold Google to some higher standard than we do Yah00 and M$(or all other companies that do business with China). Their choice was to provide NO Google capabilities, or to provide "censored" Google capabilities. Providing the latter isn't "doing evil". They've actually scaled the moral high ground by getting permission to fully inform the users that certain content has been censored! I knew about the Yah00 info that had been used to incarcerate Chinese dissidents, but the inapproproate language filter (freedom, etc.) on the M$ blogs is a new one. Notice that Google also stands up to a U.S. government that tries to grab their data while Yah00 and M$ roll over on their users with hardly a protest. Go ahead and write your letters, send your e-mails and run your self-righteous mouths in criticism of Google. Maybe you'll get more attention that way, even though you're way off target. Make sure you don't have any Chinese components in your computer . . . or any Chinese products in your house for that matter.
Please tell me that's NOT the cheat code in the NES game "Contra"??
I think you have an extra A-B in there, and of course the end was "Select Start" instead of Ctrl Enter
"odds are overwhelming stacked against the resistance. You have a military that vastly outguns a ragtag citizen militia and a compliant media that would paint the opposition as traitors and terrorists . . ."
Good points, but you're overlooking several things.
An armed uprising in the U.S. wouldn't consist of a bunch of farmers walking out into a field with a banner which reads "we are revolting" and taking on a modern military head to head. It would be a conflict of ambush, sabotage and other guerilla tactics. Never underestimate a determined resistance movement fighting on its home soil. Viet-Nam and Afghanistan in the 1980s come to mind, and let's not forget Iraq . . . whose insurgency had its "back broken" ages ago. The important thing here is that there is nothing superficial to distinguish a citizen going along with the program from a revolutionary or a sympathizer who isn't.
You also forget that members of the military, reserves, national guard, etc. are still citizens with friends and relatives. Some of the soldiers would not take kindly to orders directing them to kill other U.S. citizens.
The fundamental flaw with your argument is that you're thinking about the Internet as a "delivery" mechanism that would be covered by your generic statute. The Internet is not like the USPS where you "distribute" things from point A to point B. It's a marketplace/community where content is "made available" to anyone with access. . . . and if you actually believe that this really about porn, you're misguided X 2
" . . .that would be like suing the manufacturer of a gun used in a murder because they made guns deliberately to kill things, which is completely ridiculous."
Yes, it's ridiculous, but that doesn't stop lawyers from tryng it anyway . . . i.e. Firearms Manufacturers ARE being sued for the criminal misuse of their products.
How is an artist, especially an up-and-comer supposed to get any exposure if you can't play their music on the radio and can't distribute it via the Internet? When last I checked, bands were mailing promo-CDs to radio stations all the time begging for air play. How many people are going to go to a concert or buy a CD when they have never heard any of the band's music? Do we have to rely on MTV and a few Movie and TV soundtracks to tell us what to listen to?
"What if it is one of those free "alternative weeklies" that no-one has to pay for?"
.just like you picked up a whole stack of those free papers. :-)
I like that analogy. The paper was given away for free, so you should be able to save a copy and give it away for free.
The question is whether archiving a web page and then allowing others to view it is the same as giving away your original version of the paper(OK) or re-printing it and giving away new copies(not OK)
The rule should be that if you visit the page 'X' times, then you can allow 'X' hits on your "copy" of the page . .
Dissolve the U.S. Department of Education & repeal all Federal education laws/mandates Create a standard nationwide school voucher program Require that every student in a school take the same courses and allow them to move up only when they can pass those courses special-ed expenditure/student ~= total expenditure/student Remove computers from all K-[5|6|7|8] classrooms Classes only for English-speaking students. Get rid of the NEA(wishful thinking)
>>> So how many people have blown themselves up lately?
>>A lot of people might argue that's because law-enforcement is able to do more with their new powers.
I have an excellent method for keeping our streets safe from lions. I bend over at the waist, and keeping my feet in-line make small leaps forward making sure that the toe of the back foot strikes the heel of the front foot in mid-air while I snap my fingers on the right hand. There hasn't been a tiger-attack in my entire STATE since 9/11 thus proving the effectiveness of my method.
I'm not a huge USA football fan, but allow me to retort.
Athleticism is rather subjective outside the context of particular sports. You'd be hard-pressed to find a tennis player with the strength of a below average NFL player . . . even on a pound-per-pound basis. I also think you'd be absolutely stunned to see how fast some of those big fat boys really are. Your obesity metrics are absurd in the context of a sport where size and strength are of major importance.
If you want to talk about athletes, consider a top-notch NFL linebacker. I doubt that you could find the equivalent combination of strength, speed and agility in any other sport.
When they say "per patch" my guess is that they mean per patch AND per machine. i.e. 1 Linux box more expensive to upgrade that 1 Windows box. If not, I'll stand corrected. In my experience, one Linux/Unix sysadmin can manage a larger number of machines than your average MCSE, and one Linux box can be performing more functions than the same box running Windows. "per patch per machine" doesn't account for either of these facts. I'd like to see a similar study performed in an aggregate sense . . . although a methodology might be difficult.
I recently saw a pretty decent deal on a Dell PC and called to ask if they would sell it with Linux pre-installed. No. Well, how about with no OS? Sir, you can reformat the hard drive when you get it and. . . OK, forget it. I was then quite stunned when I called about an IBM PC and even THEY(one of the biggest corporate backers of Linux) wouldn't sell a PC with Linux pre-installed . . . or even a box without Windows. ??? How is Linux supposed to catch on and put a dent in the MS monopoly when the major vendors won't sell Linux boxes and force you to buy a Windows OEM license regardless?