People who don't need tech support? All three of them? Wow, what a market! Even if you're tech savvy, are you really going to buy a product that likely has no support avenues if you get a broken one? Are you really going to be happy fixing that new device you paid for yourself?
A government should listen to the people and not mandate a standard that requires patent fees to be paid, sure, standardize it but don't mandate it whenever a viable alternative is available.
1. As for listening to the people, how many people care that there are patents on technologies related to TV? Not many outside of slashdot, I would wager.
2. What's the problem with patents being involved in government-mandated solutions? It's not like they are illegal. The government enforces patents because it considers them useful to innovation and the economy. Since patents are a government-run system, then why would there be any ideological problem with patents being involved in government? To say you can't have patents involved in government business would undermine the whole idea of patents. It would be like saying "we make the patent system available, but you shouldn't use it." A pretty odd message for government to send.
But what about the higher resolutions? Sure, it may manage 1080p, but as we see from this article, you'll need a new cable to go beyond that (or for longer cable lengths). I've also seen cables that are supposedly certified for 1.3, but causes problems when actually trying to use it with 1080p, has problems maintaining a connection.
So many people get this wrong. You can't "violate" Godwin's law. All you can do is demonstrate it. Godwin's law is as follows:
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
Therefore, making a comparison involving Nazis is not a violation of Godwin's law - it is exactly what Godwin's law predicts. It is an embodiment of the law, not a violation.
As I understand it, $0.00 apps will not be able to call the microtransaction API. That's why you will not be able to buy new books in the updated version of Amazon's Kindle app; you have to close it and open Safari.
That addresses one point, but not the other. Let's continue playing the hypothetical - say that the Kindle app is allowed to call the microtransaction API. Would Amazon allow people to buy books via iPhone microtransactions? I doubt it. So, if that were the case, then you couldn't say that microtransactions are the reason why you couldn't buy books through the Kindle app.
This is what you get when you take a movement based on an ideal and pervert it to try and take "market share" for a free product. You get more people using the product, but you lose the ideal in the process.
No, this is what happens when what you put in your license is different than your ideals. If your ideal is that everybody contributes and shares, then put a clause to that effect in the fucking license. That's just how it works. What court of law is going to read a contract that says one thing, and decide in your favor based on the argument "but that's not what I really meant by that contract"? It doesn't matter what you meant, or what your ideals are, it's what you put on paper that counts.
Depends on what you mean by "vigorous." If hunger was the only factor, then the food industry would simply consist of a few basic staples, perhaps combined into a bland mash and labeled "food."
But restaurants often have demands for food that go far beyond the simple satiating of hunger, and beyond what the typical consumer might buy on their own. They enable a diversity of gourmet and fresh food producers who might not be viable without restaurants.
Firefox with the proper extensions just makes the web better.
No it doesn't. The web is still just as bad as it was, you're just not seeing the badness. And, as argued upthread, adblockers have the potential to make the web worse because it makes site take even more extreme measures to shove ads in your face, and it removes the punishment of people not visiting the bad sites because of the badness. You're actually rewarding sites that put intrusive crap up.
Which implies that it is a one-size-fits-all solution, because who on slashdot doesn't already know of noscript? Obviously, noscript would already have been considered and rejected, so why mention it?
Cheap way: have the tattooist cross out the old number and write the new one. Expensive way: laser tattoo removal, followed by another tattoo. Either way builds character.
That doesn't make any sense. You said "That's why you can't buy new books in Amazon's Kindle app; you have to close it and open Safari."
The Kindle app is not yet available for iPhone 3.0 - so you must have been talking about the current iteration. And you cite the TOS regarding microtransactions as the reason that Amazon doesn't sell books via microtransactions. This is dubious. If Apple did allow Amazon to sell books via iPhone microtransactions, do you really think that Amazon would? I doubt they'd be inclined to hand Apple 30% of their book revenue.
Really, your post makes no sense on so many levels. Saying that the reason you currently can't buy books from the Kindle app has anything to do with a microtransaction feature that doesn't exist yet is pretty bizarre. Wouldn't it be a lot more logical and straightforward to conclude that Amazon doesn't sell the books this way, because they don't allow selling things via the iPhone apps?
I dunno, this "going outside" and "school" stuff is really scary. With modern technology, we can just put children in a fully-immersive Virtual Reality pod, where they belong.
Slashdot Mirror
Trademark infringement. You weren't thinking very hard if you couldn't come up with that obvious avenue.
People who don't need tech support? All three of them? Wow, what a market! Even if you're tech savvy, are you really going to buy a product that likely has no support avenues if you get a broken one? Are you really going to be happy fixing that new device you paid for yourself?
Unfortunatly, all he can do now is detect fake copies of Uwe Boll films...
Isn't that sentence somewhat redundant?
The husband was a tool...
I know he doesn't sound too smart, but there's no need to make personal insults.
This is all about Wall Street and not Main Street.
Is that you, Sarah Palin? Stop posting on slashdot, and get back home, woman! There's diapers to change and the snowmobiles need cleaning.
A government should listen to the people and not mandate a standard that requires patent fees to be paid, sure, standardize it but don't mandate it whenever a viable alternative is available.
1. As for listening to the people, how many people care that there are patents on technologies related to TV? Not many outside of slashdot, I would wager.
2. What's the problem with patents being involved in government-mandated solutions? It's not like they are illegal. The government enforces patents because it considers them useful to innovation and the economy. Since patents are a government-run system, then why would there be any ideological problem with patents being involved in government? To say you can't have patents involved in government business would undermine the whole idea of patents. It would be like saying "we make the patent system available, but you shouldn't use it." A pretty odd message for government to send.
No, your experience of the web is better. That doesn't affect the web itself, any more than you closing your eyes causes the world to not exist.
But what about the higher resolutions? Sure, it may manage 1080p, but as we see from this article, you'll need a new cable to go beyond that (or for longer cable lengths). I've also seen cables that are supposedly certified for 1.3, but causes problems when actually trying to use it with 1080p, has problems maintaining a connection.
The camera has depth perception.
I don't think the camera can actually perceive anything. It's just a passive electronic device.
whaling about with your hands
By hunting large sea mammals with your hands? In your living room? That doesn't sound very plausible.
I really, really, really hope that a sweaty Steve Ballmer won't be the one demonstrating this technology on stage.
(since they have already violated Godwin's Law)
So many people get this wrong. You can't "violate" Godwin's law. All you can do is demonstrate it. Godwin's law is as follows:
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
Therefore, making a comparison involving Nazis is not a violation of Godwin's law - it is exactly what Godwin's law predicts. It is an embodiment of the law, not a violation.
As I understand it, $0.00 apps will not be able to call the microtransaction API. That's why you will not be able to buy new books in the updated version of Amazon's Kindle app; you have to close it and open Safari.
That addresses one point, but not the other. Let's continue playing the hypothetical - say that the Kindle app is allowed to call the microtransaction API. Would Amazon allow people to buy books via iPhone microtransactions? I doubt it. So, if that were the case, then you couldn't say that microtransactions are the reason why you couldn't buy books through the Kindle app.
over several Linux boxen
I'll call you an idiot, but only for using the word "boxen," not because of quitting your job. Why the hell would you use that (non) word?
This is what you get when you take a movement based on an ideal and pervert it to try and take "market share" for a free product. You get more people using the product, but you lose the ideal in the process.
No, this is what happens when what you put in your license is different than your ideals. If your ideal is that everybody contributes and shares, then put a clause to that effect in the fucking license. That's just how it works. What court of law is going to read a contract that says one thing, and decide in your favor based on the argument "but that's not what I really meant by that contract"? It doesn't matter what you meant, or what your ideals are, it's what you put on paper that counts.
Depends on what you mean by "vigorous." If hunger was the only factor, then the food industry would simply consist of a few basic staples, perhaps combined into a bland mash and labeled "food."
But restaurants often have demands for food that go far beyond the simple satiating of hunger, and beyond what the typical consumer might buy on their own. They enable a diversity of gourmet and fresh food producers who might not be viable without restaurants.
Firefox with the proper extensions just makes the web better.
No it doesn't. The web is still just as bad as it was, you're just not seeing the badness. And, as argued upthread, adblockers have the potential to make the web worse because it makes site take even more extreme measures to shove ads in your face, and it removes the punishment of people not visiting the bad sites because of the badness. You're actually rewarding sites that put intrusive crap up.
Which implies that it is a one-size-fits-all solution, because who on slashdot doesn't already know of noscript? Obviously, noscript would already have been considered and rejected, so why mention it?
Cheap way: have the tattooist cross out the old number and write the new one. Expensive way: laser tattoo removal, followed by another tattoo. Either way builds character.
but people aren't stupid
I beg to differ.
we don't like screens littered with advertisements
If that's the case, then why is America's #1 pastime sitting in front of screens littered with advertisements?
That doesn't make any sense. You said "That's why you can't buy new books in Amazon's Kindle app; you have to close it and open Safari."
The Kindle app is not yet available for iPhone 3.0 - so you must have been talking about the current iteration. And you cite the TOS regarding microtransactions as the reason that Amazon doesn't sell books via microtransactions. This is dubious. If Apple did allow Amazon to sell books via iPhone microtransactions, do you really think that Amazon would? I doubt they'd be inclined to hand Apple 30% of their book revenue.
Really, your post makes no sense on so many levels. Saying that the reason you currently can't buy books from the Kindle app has anything to do with a microtransaction feature that doesn't exist yet is pretty bizarre. Wouldn't it be a lot more logical and straightforward to conclude that Amazon doesn't sell the books this way, because they don't allow selling things via the iPhone apps?
I dunno, this "going outside" and "school" stuff is really scary. With modern technology, we can just put children in a fully-immersive Virtual Reality pod, where they belong.
Easiest way would be to it respond to a 'ping'.
But then, every time she passes by a duck-filled pond, the phone bill will skyrocket.
Migo is made to use Verizon's optional Chaperon service that lets parents track the phone in real time on their handset or PC.
Does it also help them misspell words?
No, you need to use a tattoo. A marker is too prone to smudging.