I don't think it's on level ground to compare safety technologies in a $1,000,000 racing car to an average $15,000 car. The truth is that consumers will likely never see this technology (or, if they do, much later) from the Big Three.
The way he worded it could have been interpreted two ways -- he meant one way, I thought the other -- and my reaction was based on a different interpretation.
As someone below said, both him and I were getting at the same things just in different words. There's nothing inaccurate about what I said. Planning is essential: that was not in dispute.
People are just impatient and expect returns quickly. You have to plan ahead at least 5 to 10 years if you are going to start a business.
Well isn't that great advice. Identify a market need, wait ten years to come to market and learn that someone else already executed nine years earlier?
I just can't understand the logic behind your advice. Things change quickly in business making it impossible to predict five to ten years ahead of time. You just can't plan for that, especially when you're not even in business yet.
The reasons new business fail is because they planned poorly (or not at all), couldn't adjust between what they expected and what they got (big revenues to big losses) etc.. It has nothing to do with long-term planning. That comes later.
Long term plans are only valuable if you've got the minerals to get yourself past day one.
The US government is not alone in wanting to snoop on everything citizens do over email/phone.
Hold on a second there.
I believe the reason the US government uses the BlackBerry is because the service cannot be decrypted. If it could be, then they wouldn't be able to rely on it due to security and privacy considerations, etc.
As much as that statement is kindle for a fire I'm quite certain that at least in the context of using BlackBerry's, the US government has no interest on being able to decrypt communications. I think it's safe to assume the government is content with the fact that there is no backdoor to RIM's services.
The point you misunderstood is that Bell, Rogers, etc., are involved in throttling Internet traffic on their own. There is no accountability. This group wants the government to step in to discourage/disallow this behaviour, not encourage it!
I think the government will listen. They might not act, but they will listen (while trying to ignore).
Rallies like this usually get a good amount of attention. Furthermore, there is some political backing (check out the speaker list) and there has already been a lot of coverage for this rally before it has begun. Plus, being on the Hill, it draws a lot of public attention from newspapers, local workers, etc.. Every time a protest comes through the downtown core, I can hear it and always wonder what it's about.
So even if the government does nothing immediately, which is expected, this rally has already been extremely successful at bringing the issue to the Canadian public. This is all over the news and will be throughout the day. I would call that a success already.
I wonder if game developers have ever even considered that some piracy occurs because the gamers cannot afford the games themselves.
Sure they have, but that doesn't affect the cost of doing business. They are losing customers if they don't keep making advances to try to prevent theft.
There are a lot of people out there who would pay money for a game but choose not to because they can get it for free. If I'm not mistaken, that's what they are trying to prevent -- losing the "would-be" customers to piracy, not those who never had any intention of purchasing it in the first place.
I really wasn't aware how many domains CNET has. Did a bit of research and they own search.com, mp3.com, tv.com, radio.com, chat.com, etc. Those are some extremely valuable domains.
It's a high-end product and people in the market know they can't purchase one "today" like you can with other cars. They know they have to wait. The showroom is to invigorate the senses and hope a wealthy buyer makes an order. It's the best kind of advertising they could buy.
You're a moron. I said "they ask for your Next of Kin" and what I meant to say was, "they DO NOT ask for your Next of Kin".
Are you too stupid to read the rest of my message to understand the context? Obviously I wasn't trying to suggest that they do collect it.
I disagree. When you register with Hotmail, MySpace, etc., they ask for your Next of Kin. And your Next of Kin could be anyone, it doesn't have to be a brother or sister. Since he didn't identify who his Next of Kin was in this case, the service provided is not going to just hand over the account details.
Besides, wasn't there a similar situation with a deceased US soldier's Yahoo Mail account a while ago? If I recall, Yahoo forbid the family from accessing his account because it was his property.
You have to wonder how the business world would succeed without insightful comments from Slashdot.
Did you seriously think no one at RallyPoint had considered the kind of environment it would be used in? Did they simply forget the last four major battles the US has been involved in? All involved heat, sweat, and things we don't even want to think of.
Be sure to contact RallyPoint to pickup your pay check for a hard day's work.
On the contrary here. I always receive three to four emails from GoDaddy reminding me to renew my domains. These reminders are sent right up until its set to expire. And it's an automatic system, so I don't know a registrar could forget. I know the general consensus on Slashdot is that GoDaddy is not a respected registrar, but I've been using them for years and have no complaints.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think it's on level ground to compare safety technologies in a $1,000,000 racing car to an average $15,000 car. The truth is that consumers will likely never see this technology (or, if they do, much later) from the Big Three.
If this were actually true, all men would drive monster trucks.
Please link me to this Google website you speak of, thanks.
Understood... the way your sentence read, it sounded like you were suggesting planning for five to ten years, then starting a business :)
The way he worded it could have been interpreted two ways -- he meant one way, I thought the other -- and my reaction was based on a different interpretation.
As someone below said, both him and I were getting at the same things just in different words. There's nothing inaccurate about what I said. Planning is essential: that was not in dispute.
People are just impatient and expect returns quickly. You have to plan ahead at least 5 to 10 years if you are going to start a business.
Well isn't that great advice. Identify a market need, wait ten years to come to market and learn that someone else already executed nine years earlier?
I just can't understand the logic behind your advice. Things change quickly in business making it impossible to predict five to ten years ahead of time. You just can't plan for that, especially when you're not even in business yet.
The reasons new business fail is because they planned poorly (or not at all), couldn't adjust between what they expected and what they got (big revenues to big losses) etc.. It has nothing to do with long-term planning. That comes later.
Long term plans are only valuable if you've got the minerals to get yourself past day one.
The US government is not alone in wanting to snoop on everything citizens do over email/phone.
Hold on a second there.
I believe the reason the US government uses the BlackBerry is because the service cannot be decrypted. If it could be, then they wouldn't be able to rely on it due to security and privacy considerations, etc.
As much as that statement is kindle for a fire I'm quite certain that at least in the context of using BlackBerry's, the US government has no interest on being able to decrypt communications. I think it's safe to assume the government is content with the fact that there is no backdoor to RIM's services.
Give him a break... he's from Soviet Russia, you insensitive clod!
In Russia Soviet, a cat has got your Tongueska.
The point you misunderstood is that Bell, Rogers, etc., are involved in throttling Internet traffic on their own. There is no accountability. This group wants the government to step in to discourage/disallow this behaviour, not encourage it!
I think the government will listen. They might not act, but they will listen (while trying to ignore).
Rallies like this usually get a good amount of attention. Furthermore, there is some political backing (check out the speaker list) and there has already been a lot of coverage for this rally before it has begun. Plus, being on the Hill, it draws a lot of public attention from newspapers, local workers, etc.. Every time a protest comes through the downtown core, I can hear it and always wonder what it's about.
So even if the government does nothing immediately, which is expected, this rally has already been extremely successful at bringing the issue to the Canadian public. This is all over the news and will be throughout the day. I would call that a success already.
I wonder if game developers have ever even considered that some piracy occurs because the gamers cannot afford the games themselves.
Sure they have, but that doesn't affect the cost of doing business. They are losing customers if they don't keep making advances to try to prevent theft.
There are a lot of people out there who would pay money for a game but choose not to because they can get it for free. If I'm not mistaken, that's what they are trying to prevent -- losing the "would-be" customers to piracy, not those who never had any intention of purchasing it in the first place.
I really wasn't aware how many domains CNET has. Did a bit of research and they own search.com, mp3.com, tv.com, radio.com, chat.com, etc. Those are some extremely valuable domains.
I accidentally converted to Euro. Thanks for correcting my mistake.
It's around $930 bucks for those wondering.
I would correct your mistake, but I run the risk of being modded Informative.
It's called advertising.
It's a high-end product and people in the market know they can't purchase one "today" like you can with other cars. They know they have to wait. The showroom is to invigorate the senses and hope a wealthy buyer makes an order. It's the best kind of advertising they could buy.
Tell your sister to text me and I would be happy to share the results with you.
You're a moron. I said "they ask for your Next of Kin" and what I meant to say was, "they DO NOT ask for your Next of Kin". Are you too stupid to read the rest of my message to understand the context? Obviously I wasn't trying to suggest that they do collect it.
As I said twice already, I made a typo. Obviously those services do NOT ask for next of kin.
As I just replied to the post above you, I made a typo.
Sorry, that was a typo.
I disagree. When you register with Hotmail, MySpace, etc., they ask for your Next of Kin. And your Next of Kin could be anyone, it doesn't have to be a brother or sister. Since he didn't identify who his Next of Kin was in this case, the service provided is not going to just hand over the account details.
Besides, wasn't there a similar situation with a deceased US soldier's Yahoo Mail account a while ago? If I recall, Yahoo forbid the family from accessing his account because it was his property.
You have to wonder how the business world would succeed without insightful comments from Slashdot.
Did you seriously think no one at RallyPoint had considered the kind of environment it would be used in? Did they simply forget the last four major battles the US has been involved in? All involved heat, sweat, and things we don't even want to think of.
Be sure to contact RallyPoint to pickup your pay check for a hard day's work.
On the contrary here. I always receive three to four emails from GoDaddy reminding me to renew my domains. These reminders are sent right up until its set to expire. And it's an automatic system, so I don't know a registrar could forget. I know the general consensus on Slashdot is that GoDaddy is not a respected registrar, but I've been using them for years and have no complaints.