Haha. Reminds me of a Futurama episode where Farnsworth tells Fry "Yes, that comment was less stupid than your prior one, although made in a profoundly stupid way."
SBC has an absolute right to charge for use of it's equipment, but to make a statement in such a patronizing and stupid manner indicates problems down the road for SBC.
I'm being somewhat speculative, because I haven't visited the museum, but I can't conceive of how an existing museum would require $125 million to continue its operations. How much of an expenditure is needed to keep Woz's signature intact? This would be the amount required to build and fill a museum, from scratch! Granted the museum intends to expand it's infrastructure, it is nonetheless an exhorbitant sum. Will this money fund all their endeavors over the next decade? Probably not. They'll continue to collect entrance fees, continue their fundraisers, and continue to accept donations. Do you think this much money would be necessary if the staff wasn't being paid extremely well? The museum may have numerous active displays, which require professional maintenance and setup costs, and therefore warrant high wages, but in that case, wouldn't it be more cost-effective to hire contractors, not keep 6-figure employees year-round? There's nothing wrong with paying museum workers well, but when money is tight, I guess the alternative to running on a budget, is to continue to feed the monkey. Something is unsettling about all of this. Museums, as grand as they may be, generally learn to work with a limited budget, and this amount gives no indication of that. A government organization will often expand to fill the amount it's given, much like bacteria, but if you limit the amount it's given it'll work with that, too. I'm not sure what type of organization this museum is, but it sure seems to be acting like a government entity.
It houses an impressive collection of more than 4,000 computing artifacts, 10,000 images, 4,000 linear feet of catalogued documentation and gigabytes of software.
$125 million just to boost a collection of old artifacts? Hell, give me half that money and I'll double the size of that collection, with enough money left over to fill the toilets with beer!
Windows XP comes with an integrated firewall, which Norton SystemWorks replaces upon installation. Does an integrated virus scan propose some type of insurmountable difficulty for Symantec?
I'm inclined to think that most people nowadays equate Microsoft's Internet Explorer icon with the internet. Ask any technically deficient person (by which I mean the majority of people out there) to access the internet without an IE icon on their desktop, and they'll probably tell you the internet is missing, broken, or being held hostage by a hacker. So when people have the choice between an IE icon and a Netscape icon, you're probably gonna place your chips on Microsoft that their gonna pick the little blue 'e'. Hell, even at home I had to change all the Firefox icons to IE icons because I got so many complaints!
As a second year law student I do have some advice to offer. Gratuitous promises generally aren't enforceable at law, even when the promise is on a piece of paper prefaced with "Contract". You want to make it appear as though the right to keep the intellectual property is in return for something. For example, you could state that your company is giving you the intellectual property rights as a bonus for some new service you will be providing the company. Unless restrictions of your initial work contract dictate otherwise, this is probably an enforceable modification to the original terms of the contract. Make the contract modification short in order to avoid ambiguity, and make sure your boss has the authority to give you the rights to your IP. Make sure it's signed, dated, and you're good to go. I haven't studied intellectual property law per se, so I don't know if there are any additional requirements to a contract modification such as the one you're proposing, but more likely than not it'll be enforceable even if it's written on the back of a McDonald's napkin.
I've spent zero hours a week removing spyware from my family's computers for the last six months, even though my siblings spend about half their waking hours on spyware-proliferating sites. Anyone who has to consistently spend more than an hour a month dealing with spyware issues, outside of system administration work, has undermined any claims they have as a computer savant.
With power requirements quintupling that of a standard desktop computer, I'd probably have to use it at my local coffee shop, or only turn it on briefly to scare away song birds.
The reason it's not an issue for the U.S. to use nuclear power is because we're genuinely interested in only using nuclear power in virtue of its energy-providing capabilities, not in virtue of its WMD capabilities. If Iran had a consistent record of pacifist-endeavors, it, too could be part of this wonderful cause. The minute that NASA workers strap nukes to their chests and run amok in downtime Washington D.C. is the minute I revoke my support for the U.S.
Haha! The term "Linux-extremist" is redundant. The very definition of a "Linux-user" already contains the connotation of "extremist," inasmuch as all the users are zealous users and defenders of Linux. I have never met a lukewarm Linux user.
The fact that Microsoft is pursuing an expensive legal remedy instead of adopting or developing an alternative to JPEG indicates that it takes an immense amount of money to develop, establish, and market something as wonderful as the JPEG. However, on the other hand, it may just be that JPEG has become so pervasive that Microsoft has no choice but to support it, and in that case it does seem unfair that a company can continue to harvest so much money, just because they've created a certain degree of consumer dependency. Almost like a twisted kind of monopoly.
A lawsuit? Stupid. Microsoft should employ the same technique I use at BestBuy. Just purchase the license, use it for a while, and then return it claiming that the salesman scratched it.
Slashdot Mirror
Getting this type of publicity is probably a lot nicer than getting publicity about stiffing your girlfriend for child support. Anyone remember that?
Haha. Reminds me of a Futurama episode where Farnsworth tells Fry "Yes, that comment was less stupid than your prior one, although made in a profoundly stupid way." SBC has an absolute right to charge for use of it's equipment, but to make a statement in such a patronizing and stupid manner indicates problems down the road for SBC.
NVidia will make a competitve model, with blackjack, and hookers.
This has a lot to do with Canada being America's bitch. Oh yeah.
Yes, but what does this have to do with CmdrTaco's mom?
So do I, so do I.
Items with bullets represent full or partial failures.
* 1960 -- Marsnik 1
* 1960 -- Marsnik 2
* 1962 -- Sputnik 29
* 1962 -- Mars 1
* 1962 -- Sputnik 31
* 1964 -- Mariner 3
1964 -- Mariner 4
* 1964 -- Zond 2
* 1965 -- Zond 3
1969 -- Mariner 6
1969 -- Mariner 7
* 1969 -- Mars 1969A
* 1969 -- Mars 1969B
* 1971 -- Mariner 8
* 1971 -- Cosmos 419
* 1971 -- Mars 2
1971 -- Mars 3
1971 -- Mariner 9
* 1973 -- Mars 4
* 1973 -- Mars 5
* 1973 -- Mars 6
* 1973 -- Mars 7
1975 -- Viking 1
1975 -- Viking 2
* 1988 -- Phobos 1
* 1988 -- Phobos 2
* 1992 -- Mars Observer
1996 -- Mars Global Surveyor
* 1996 -- Mars 96
1996 -- Mars Pathfinder
* 1998 -- Nozomi (Planet-B)
* 1998 -- Mars Climate Orbiter
* 1998 -- Mars Polar Lander
* 1998 -- Deep Space 2 (part of Mars Polar Lander spacecraft)
2001 -- Mars Odyssey
2003 -- Mars Exploration Rovers
* 2003 -- Mars Express
Yes, what he said.
Your mom looks promising.
I'm being somewhat speculative, because I haven't visited the museum, but I can't conceive of how an existing museum would require $125 million to continue its operations. How much of an expenditure is needed to keep Woz's signature intact? This would be the amount required to build and fill a museum, from scratch! Granted the museum intends to expand it's infrastructure, it is nonetheless an exhorbitant sum. Will this money fund all their endeavors over the next decade? Probably not. They'll continue to collect entrance fees, continue their fundraisers, and continue to accept donations. Do you think this much money would be necessary if the staff wasn't being paid extremely well? The museum may have numerous active displays, which require professional maintenance and setup costs, and therefore warrant high wages, but in that case, wouldn't it be more cost-effective to hire contractors, not keep 6-figure employees year-round? There's nothing wrong with paying museum workers well, but when money is tight, I guess the alternative to running on a budget, is to continue to feed the monkey. Something is unsettling about all of this. Museums, as grand as they may be, generally learn to work with a limited budget, and this amount gives no indication of that. A government organization will often expand to fill the amount it's given, much like bacteria, but if you limit the amount it's given it'll work with that, too. I'm not sure what type of organization this museum is, but it sure seems to be acting like a government entity.
$125 million just to boost a collection of old artifacts? Hell, give me half that money and I'll double the size of that collection, with enough money left over to fill the toilets with beer!
If you're talking about what Jack Daniels can do to you in half-liter doses, I'm way ahead of you, buddy.
Heads up!
Windows XP comes with an integrated firewall, which Norton SystemWorks replaces upon installation. Does an integrated virus scan propose some type of insurmountable difficulty for Symantec?
I'm inclined to think that most people nowadays equate Microsoft's Internet Explorer icon with the internet. Ask any technically deficient person (by which I mean the majority of people out there) to access the internet without an IE icon on their desktop, and they'll probably tell you the internet is missing, broken, or being held hostage by a hacker. So when people have the choice between an IE icon and a Netscape icon, you're probably gonna place your chips on Microsoft that their gonna pick the little blue 'e'. Hell, even at home I had to change all the Firefox icons to IE icons because I got so many complaints!
Blackjack and hookers.
Linux is to Windows as Woman is to Man. It lacks a penis, and is inferior in most respects. Mod me. Please.
As a second year law student I do have some advice to offer. Gratuitous promises generally aren't enforceable at law, even when the promise is on a piece of paper prefaced with "Contract". You want to make it appear as though the right to keep the intellectual property is in return for something. For example, you could state that your company is giving you the intellectual property rights as a bonus for some new service you will be providing the company. Unless restrictions of your initial work contract dictate otherwise, this is probably an enforceable modification to the original terms of the contract. Make the contract modification short in order to avoid ambiguity, and make sure your boss has the authority to give you the rights to your IP. Make sure it's signed, dated, and you're good to go. I haven't studied intellectual property law per se, so I don't know if there are any additional requirements to a contract modification such as the one you're proposing, but more likely than not it'll be enforceable even if it's written on the back of a McDonald's napkin.
Except that a country whose primary trade is exporting cocaine and opium should probably be resolving other issues, first.
I've spent zero hours a week removing spyware from my family's computers for the last six months, even though my siblings spend about half their waking hours on spyware-proliferating sites. Anyone who has to consistently spend more than an hour a month dealing with spyware issues, outside of system administration work, has undermined any claims they have as a computer savant.
With power requirements quintupling that of a standard desktop computer, I'd probably have to use it at my local coffee shop, or only turn it on briefly to scare away song birds.
40 thousand dollar?! This is what Texas Holdem's all about!!
The reason it's not an issue for the U.S. to use nuclear power is because we're genuinely interested in only using nuclear power in virtue of its energy-providing capabilities, not in virtue of its WMD capabilities. If Iran had a consistent record of pacifist-endeavors, it, too could be part of this wonderful cause. The minute that NASA workers strap nukes to their chests and run amok in downtime Washington D.C. is the minute I revoke my support for the U.S.
"Nu-cul-ar, it's pronounced, nu-cul-ar."
-Homer Simpson
Haha! The term "Linux-extremist" is redundant. The very definition of a "Linux-user" already contains the connotation of "extremist," inasmuch as all the users are zealous users and defenders of Linux. I have never met a lukewarm Linux user.
The fact that Microsoft is pursuing an expensive legal remedy instead of adopting or developing an alternative to JPEG indicates that it takes an immense amount of money to develop, establish, and market something as wonderful as the JPEG. However, on the other hand, it may just be that JPEG has become so pervasive that Microsoft has no choice but to support it, and in that case it does seem unfair that a company can continue to harvest so much money, just because they've created a certain degree of consumer dependency. Almost like a twisted kind of monopoly.
A lawsuit? Stupid. Microsoft should employ the same technique I use at BestBuy. Just purchase the license, use it for a while, and then return it claiming that the salesman scratched it.