I'd take the article a bit more seriously if it wasn't The Register. They read like a blog, and they tend to have a tad more than a little anti-microsoft bias. Point me to the study that shows me where a majority of users disable the UAC and I'll start paying attention.
That and the fact that every other GTA game had a caucasian protagonist. I'll bet he'd be complaining about racial underrepresentation if SA didn't have the main character that it does.
Now that Wikipedia has reached a critical mass, the time has come to establish a trusted editorial board that can vet articles to established experts in the field of subjects.
The problem is there's a lot of things that there aren't any experts for...or no experts who're going to want to step up to take the time to keep track of the articles. The problem that I have with it involves the web-based articles, and how many of them are deleted because apparently the web isn't real and items need notoriety outside of the web to be considered articles, and how many times it's done by people who agree with this point of view. Right now I put more trust in getting information out of Encyclopedia Dramatica, Uncyclopedia, or Urban Dictionary than I do out of Wikipedia-- it may be biased, it may be written with an eye towards the satirical or humourous, but it's usually more information than Wikipedia has, if it exists at all on Wikipedia.
So in the end, you have the articles on information that barely serves as a starting point of things in the quote-unquote "real world", and little-to-no information on everything that you'd actually go to Wikipedia for. Way to go.
I guess the real debate here is how far you can get from the basis of Christianity, or even what that basis is. I could create my own religion that completely rewrites the bible, merges it with Scientology, and say I believe that Christ is the second coming of Xenu, does that make it Christianity?
...but I think some caution is warranted if you're going to claim people disagree with the Word of God because they interpret it differently than you do...
I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I'm claiming that Mormons disagree with the Word of God; it's more the fact that they disagree with (insert Christian sect here)'s interpretation of the Word of God. I'm an atheist and hardly a theologian, so I'm hardly qualified to say who's right or wrong when it comes to interpretations there.
As for the Revelations bit, whether or not it's divinely inspired or belongs in the bible may be up for debate, but no religion as a whole is (I think) going to be very happy with another sect coming in and saying "Well, we have this other book that adds a lot to your bible...and replaces a few bits...oh, yeah, and this other book is really the way your religion was meant to be. You just read it wrong." It seems like with most other offshoots of Christianity are just over translation, rather than adding their own hefty expansions to it.
I guess the real debate here is how far you can get from the basis of Christianity, or even what that basis is. I could create my own religion that completely rewrites the bible, merges it with Scientology, and say I believe that Christ is the second coming of Xenu, does that make it Christianity?
I love how you turn an argument about the validity of Mormonism as a Christian establishment into a talk about how nice Mormons are.
As to why people don't take Mormonism seriously...well, two reasons. Everyone who's not a Christian sees the history of your church from Joe Smith on and says "Holy crap, who could fall for that? Gold plates from the ground that no one else was allowed to see? An angel named Moroni? I can't make this stuff up!" And everyone else who believes in the Bible and not the Book of Mormon takes a look at Revelation 22:18 and says "Hey! Saying that we 'misinterpreted' parts of the Bible and adding to it via the Book of Mormon is exactly what John said to look out for!"
Now I'll follow this up with a statement that I live in SLC, and know some pretty kick-ass Mormons. I'm not trying to harp on them, but really, there's enough of a schism to warrent debate about the status of Christianity. "We agree with the word of God except in the places where we disagree with him" doesn't seem, to me, to be a horridly valid argument.
I'm actually kind of irritated; I got my key for guildwars off of ebay. New key with no characters on it, cheaper than buying it from the store, and I didn't have to wait for a package with a CD just for the sake of having a CD (I had downloaded the client whilst browsing ebay for the key). It was quick, it was easy, and I actually used eBay for the first time in 2 years. And now they're disallowing it. They get the thumbs-down from me for this, imo.
They didn't place a chokehold on the Internet to shut down the website.
No, they put a chokehold on the website to shut down a single page. If it makes you feel any better, we can change the analogy to arresting a household of 10 because 1 person did something wrong.
2 - Reinstall windows when you find the default image is borked.
3 - Return Dell to Best Buy when reinstalling windows breaks the Dell hardware.
4 - Realize that by reinstalling windows you apparently broke the service contract and you'll have to fix it yourself.
5 - ???
6 - Install Linux anyways.
You're missing one major point. This isn't a link to the other site. This is a link to material on the other person's site. Sounds mild, but I believe the more heard-of term is hotlinking. It's saying is illegal. Which makes sense. What the other side had a problem with is the fact that people were viewing their material, at the cost of their bandwidth, without their ads on their site being viewed. Before, it was just a really asshole thing to do. Now it seems to be plain illegal.
Yes, and I can run SNES roms with ZSNES on my computer too. That doesn't mean that Microsoft made it. The crux of the matter is that Microsoft tried to program in this inane backward compatibility into the operating system itself. He was commenting on the "mind-numbingly complicated" bit because that's what MS did (tried to do?) without making it a separate application. There's no debate about the fact that there's better DOS emulators out there.
That's what the database is, yes, but not how it gets the information out of the database. If you look at the linked Wikipedia article, it says that the retrieval method is "fuzzy"-- that, alone, makes the grabbing of items out of the database patentable. Not that I'm saying what Gracenote did was right, nor am I saying that the database itself is patentable; but it seems that in that idea, at least, they have the right to patent it. Even if you could get them to turn ownership of the database over, they wouldn't be compelled to turn over the method in which they compare and retrieve items out of said database.
Granted, but Sony can't slip advertisements for it's MP3 player into MSN Messanger, or the first (and sometimes only) homepage users see at a freshly installed Windows installation.
There's a difference between "bottle marked with an unknown language that you might be able translate" and "a bottle that sometimes has a poison label, sometimes a not-poison label, and sometimes no label, depending on what time of day it is and what bottle it's sitting next to".
I can just hear the advertisements: "Bose Noise-canceling headphones: For when you don't want to hear your roommate's laptop exploding!" I think it has potential.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd take the article a bit more seriously if it wasn't The Register. They read like a blog, and they tend to have a tad more than a little anti-microsoft bias. Point me to the study that shows me where a majority of users disable the UAC and I'll start paying attention.
That and the fact that every other GTA game had a caucasian protagonist. I'll bet he'd be complaining about racial underrepresentation if SA didn't have the main character that it does.
The problem is there's a lot of things that there aren't any experts for...or no experts who're going to want to step up to take the time to keep track of the articles. The problem that I have with it involves the web-based articles, and how many of them are deleted because apparently the web isn't real and items need notoriety outside of the web to be considered articles, and how many times it's done by people who agree with this point of view. Right now I put more trust in getting information out of Encyclopedia Dramatica, Uncyclopedia, or Urban Dictionary than I do out of Wikipedia-- it may be biased, it may be written with an eye towards the satirical or humourous, but it's usually more information than Wikipedia has, if it exists at all on Wikipedia.
So in the end, you have the articles on information that barely serves as a starting point of things in the quote-unquote "real world", and little-to-no information on everything that you'd actually go to Wikipedia for. Way to go.
...but I think some caution is warranted if you're going to claim people disagree with the Word of God because they interpret it differently than you do...I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I'm claiming that Mormons disagree with the Word of God; it's more the fact that they disagree with (insert Christian sect here)'s interpretation of the Word of God. I'm an atheist and hardly a theologian, so I'm hardly qualified to say who's right or wrong when it comes to interpretations there.
As for the Revelations bit, whether or not it's divinely inspired or belongs in the bible may be up for debate, but no religion as a whole is (I think) going to be very happy with another sect coming in and saying "Well, we have this other book that adds a lot to your bible...and replaces a few bits...oh, yeah, and this other book is really the way your religion was meant to be. You just read it wrong." It seems like with most other offshoots of Christianity are just over translation, rather than adding their own hefty expansions to it.
I guess the real debate here is how far you can get from the basis of Christianity, or even what that basis is. I could create my own religion that completely rewrites the bible, merges it with Scientology, and say I believe that Christ is the second coming of Xenu, does that make it Christianity?
I love how you turn an argument about the validity of Mormonism as a Christian establishment into a talk about how nice Mormons are.
As to why people don't take Mormonism seriously...well, two reasons. Everyone who's not a Christian sees the history of your church from Joe Smith on and says "Holy crap, who could fall for that? Gold plates from the ground that no one else was allowed to see? An angel named Moroni? I can't make this stuff up!" And everyone else who believes in the Bible and not the Book of Mormon takes a look at Revelation 22:18 and says "Hey! Saying that we 'misinterpreted' parts of the Bible and adding to it via the Book of Mormon is exactly what John said to look out for!"
Now I'll follow this up with a statement that I live in SLC, and know some pretty kick-ass Mormons. I'm not trying to harp on them, but really, there's enough of a schism to warrent debate about the status of Christianity. "We agree with the word of God except in the places where we disagree with him" doesn't seem, to me, to be a horridly valid argument.
You're not going to sell porn to people who aren't looking for it. And a TLD makes it easier to find, how is it a bad idea again?
I'm actually kind of irritated; I got my key for guildwars off of ebay. New key with no characters on it, cheaper than buying it from the store, and I didn't have to wait for a package with a CD just for the sake of having a CD (I had downloaded the client whilst browsing ebay for the key). It was quick, it was easy, and I actually used eBay for the first time in 2 years. And now they're disallowing it. They get the thumbs-down from me for this, imo.
No, they put a chokehold on the website to shut down a single page. If it makes you feel any better, we can change the analogy to arresting a household of 10 because 1 person did something wrong.
Fixed.
The same rationalization some sheriff had for wanting to put CC cameras into people's houses.
2 - Reinstall windows when you find the default image is borked. 3 - Return Dell to Best Buy when reinstalling windows breaks the Dell hardware. 4 - Realize that by reinstalling windows you apparently broke the service contract and you'll have to fix it yourself. 5 - ??? 6 - Install Linux anyways.
I would be able to tell from some of the pixels and having seen quite a few shops in my time.
Speaking of which, I think my Copypasta archive just got a new entry.
You're missing one major point. This isn't a link to the other site. This is a link to material on the other person's site. Sounds mild, but I believe the more heard-of term is hotlinking. It's saying is illegal. Which makes sense. What the other side had a problem with is the fact that people were viewing their material, at the cost of their bandwidth, without their ads on their site being viewed. Before, it was just a really asshole thing to do. Now it seems to be plain illegal.
Shun the nonbeliever. Shuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuun.
Wow, who'd've thunk? I have that same password for my briefcase and my PIN number!
Yes, and I can run SNES roms with ZSNES on my computer too. That doesn't mean that Microsoft made it. The crux of the matter is that Microsoft tried to program in this inane backward compatibility into the operating system itself. He was commenting on the "mind-numbingly complicated" bit because that's what MS did (tried to do?) without making it a separate application. There's no debate about the fact that there's better DOS emulators out there.
That's what the database is, yes, but not how it gets the information out of the database. If you look at the linked Wikipedia article, it says that the retrieval method is "fuzzy"-- that, alone, makes the grabbing of items out of the database patentable. Not that I'm saying what Gracenote did was right, nor am I saying that the database itself is patentable; but it seems that in that idea, at least, they have the right to patent it. Even if you could get them to turn ownership of the database over, they wouldn't be compelled to turn over the method in which they compare and retrieve items out of said database.
Wall of Text crits you for 300k. You die.
499 of which are rule variations of solitare.
Granted, but Sony can't slip advertisements for it's MP3 player into MSN Messanger, or the first (and sometimes only) homepage users see at a freshly installed Windows installation.
For the sake of my sanity, I'm going to assume he's saying that tongue-in-cheek.
There's a difference between "bottle marked with an unknown language that you might be able translate" and "a bottle that sometimes has a poison label, sometimes a not-poison label, and sometimes no label, depending on what time of day it is and what bottle it's sitting next to".
I can just hear the advertisements: "Bose Noise-canceling headphones: For when you don't want to hear your roommate's laptop exploding!" I think it has potential.