For a corporation to do that, two conditions must be met first:
1) there must exist a government 2) that government must be corrupt
That doesn't make logical sense. Corporations could easily exist without government. And without government, what is to stop corporations depriving you of your life, liberty, or property?
Without any government at all, let's say as happens in some parts of Africa, no corporations exist.
What? How does that make any sense? Why is the existence of corporations dependent on the existence of government?
If however, I make a guarantee (foolishly perhaps) to help you finish your house in a certain time period then whether or not I eat and sleep is no longer of any interest to you. I made the guarantee, therefore you expect me to stick by it, to the exclusion of all else. I still make my best effort to eat and sleep.
If that is the most you can give, then that is your best effort. Logically, it is impossible to give more than your best. So, calling something that is less than your best effort your "best effort" is disingenuous.
It should have been obvious that they would never assimilate, and that is exactly what causes racial conflicts. They need to all be sent back to their home countries.
Yeah, we should listen to an overt racist on how to deal with racial conflict.
It may seem counter-intuitive to those have never been in uninhabited areas, but a large caliber handgun is useful in case you are caught by surprise by wolves, boar, or bear.
Uninhabited areas? If there are such animals there, isn't the area inhabited by wolves, boar, or bear?
Same thing with the mail. Regular mail is "best effort". We'll do our best effort with the current resources to deliver your letter ASAP. Priority mail, OTOH, means dedicated resources to get certain subset of letter to their destinations within an allocated time.
But if it was their best effort, they would be devoting all the resources they had, just like "priority mail."
The traffic that is best effort will be delivered if possible (in the face of congestion), but it might be dropped, best effort is weaker than guaranteed priority.
That doesn't make any sense. If they are really making their best effort, it would be the same as guaranteed priority.
No, they locally cache the content providers data so that you don't have the round-trip of getting it over the "real" internet
How do you locally cache content that is "live" or "streaming"? I think you are naively overlooking what they actually plan to do here, which is throttle content from non-partner websites.
"Best effort" in networking terminology is the priority given to traffic that isn't specifically prioritised or limited. There's nothing wrong with what he's saying.
Except for the fact that it doesn't make any sense. How can it be the "best effort" if something can be prioritised ahead of it?
Just because "networking terminology" is stupid, doesn't mean we have to accept it at face value.
This is the case for any software modified in the last 20-30 years, including properly licensed H.264. Unless you have specific ones to point to, it doesn't hold any weight. Anything could be patented, singling out VP8 without concrete proof is absurd.
I'm not singling out anything. Any software or technology that may have patents applicable to it is "patent-encumbered." That includes H.264.
It holds plenty of weight. The patent system is very real, and enforced by law. The only "patent-unencumbered" product is one which every single aspect of it has been released to the public domain.
To the best of my knowledge "perpetual" and "irrevocable" are used in legal with their layman's definitions
The problem is that Google doesn't have the power to back up those terms. They may say this, but their "perpetual" and "irrevocable" license may be overturned at any time by a lawsuit. Google is not above the law.
There are patents covering parts VP8, they are royalty free to use to implement VP8 to anyone and thus it isn't encumbered.
That doesn't mean there aren't parts of VP8 which infringe on patents held by other companies. VP8's patents being licensed royalty-free doesn't make VP8 unencumbered. The status of these patents could change at any time.
Re:Didn't know there was a Comic Code
on
Comics Code Dead
·
· Score: 1
On the other hand, without the censorship, every television show would be some kind of cheaply produced reality porn show. No one would bother even trying to tell a good story to get ratings...
Yeah, the censorship is really stopping them from doing that.
Re:The "Comic Code" never had any "teeth".
on
Comics Code Dead
·
· Score: 1
The comic book - like the pulp fiction magazine (Think Astounding, Black Mask, Wierd Tales,etc.) - was driven close to extinction by television and the 25 cent paperback book.
To make an analogy, my putting on a pair of handcuffs while you hold a gun to my head does not make me a willing participant of captivity.
Say what? If you're putting on handcuffs at your own whim, then you are doing that willingly. The person holding the gun would have to be ordering you to do so for it to be forced. But your statement doesn't say that, it reads like somebody just happens to be holding a gun to your head at the same time. Hell, without further clarification, you may have asked that person to hold a gun to your head while you handcuff yourself. Perhaps as some sort of erotic kick.
Let's M$ charge an entire months wage in the US and see what happens
People will stop using it? I wouldn't predict a massive surge in piracy, as businesses would immediately dump it for either Linux or MacOS, with consumers following. It would rapidly fall in marketshare and eventually bankrupt Microsoft.
It's not like anybody needs to run Windows anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
For a corporation to do that, two conditions must be met first:
1) there must exist a government
2) that government must be corrupt
That doesn't make logical sense. Corporations could easily exist without government. And without government, what is to stop corporations depriving you of your life, liberty, or property?
Without any government at all, let's say as happens in some parts of Africa, no corporations exist.
What? How does that make any sense? Why is the existence of corporations dependent on the existence of government?
Google has done its level best to make Ballmer sweat.
That really doesn't take any effort. I think he wakes up sweating, regardless of what anybody else does.
Corporation as a construct are intended to behave in psychopathic manors.
Is a psychopathic manor some kind of elaborate crazy house?
If however, I make a guarantee (foolishly perhaps) to help you finish your house in a certain time period then whether or not I eat and sleep is no longer of any interest to you. I made the guarantee, therefore you expect me to stick by it, to the exclusion of all else. I still make my best effort to eat and sleep.
If that is the most you can give, then that is your best effort. Logically, it is impossible to give more than your best. So, calling something that is less than your best effort your "best effort" is disingenuous.
Priority traffic gets priority (well duh), such as VoIP.
So, that would be their best effort, then?
It should have been obvious that they would never assimilate, and that is exactly what causes racial conflicts. They need to all be sent back to their home countries.
Yeah, we should listen to an overt racist on how to deal with racial conflict.
It may seem counter-intuitive to those have never been in uninhabited areas, but a large caliber handgun is useful in case you are caught by surprise by wolves, boar, or bear.
Uninhabited areas? If there are such animals there, isn't the area inhabited by wolves, boar, or bear?
This should be on an episode of mythbusters.
Yeah, they'll be sure to set the record straight, use strict scientific procedures, and not muddy the waters at all.
I quickly noticed about 1/4th of them
One quartereth?
Green lasers are often used for stargazing...
If by "stargazing" you mean Kenny Loggins concerts at the local planetarium.
Same thing with the mail. Regular mail is "best effort". We'll do our best effort with the current resources to deliver your letter ASAP.
Priority mail, OTOH, means dedicated resources to get certain subset of letter to their destinations within an allocated time.
But if it was their best effort, they would be devoting all the resources they had, just like "priority mail."
The traffic that is best effort will be delivered if possible (in the face of congestion), but it might be dropped, best effort is weaker than guaranteed priority.
That doesn't make any sense. If they are really making their best effort, it would be the same as guaranteed priority.
No, they locally cache the content providers data so that you don't have the round-trip of getting it over the "real" internet
How do you locally cache content that is "live" or "streaming"? I think you are naively overlooking what they actually plan to do here, which is throttle content from non-partner websites.
"Best effort" in networking terminology is the priority given to traffic that isn't specifically prioritised or limited. There's nothing wrong with what he's saying.
Except for the fact that it doesn't make any sense. How can it be the "best effort" if something can be prioritised ahead of it?
Just because "networking terminology" is stupid, doesn't mean we have to accept it at face value.
This is the case for any software modified in the last 20-30 years, including properly licensed H.264. Unless you have specific ones to point to, it doesn't hold any weight. Anything could be patented, singling out VP8 without concrete proof is absurd.
I'm not singling out anything. Any software or technology that may have patents applicable to it is "patent-encumbered." That includes H.264.
It holds plenty of weight. The patent system is very real, and enforced by law. The only "patent-unencumbered" product is one which every single aspect of it has been released to the public domain.
To the best of my knowledge "perpetual" and "irrevocable" are used in legal with their layman's definitions
The problem is that Google doesn't have the power to back up those terms. They may say this, but their "perpetual" and "irrevocable" license may be overturned at any time by a lawsuit. Google is not above the law.
Show me two horses that can make toast.
How about a muffin?
There are patents covering parts VP8, they are royalty free to use to implement VP8 to anyone and thus it isn't encumbered.
That doesn't mean there aren't parts of VP8 which infringe on patents held by other companies. VP8's patents being licensed royalty-free doesn't make VP8 unencumbered. The status of these patents could change at any time.
On the other hand, without the censorship, every television show would be some kind of cheaply produced reality porn show. No one would bother even trying to tell a good story to get ratings...
Yeah, the censorship is really stopping them from doing that.
The comic book - like the pulp fiction magazine (Think Astounding, Black Mask, Wierd Tales,etc.) - was driven close to extinction by television and the 25 cent paperback book.
... and nothing of value was (almost) lost.
To make an analogy, my putting on a pair of handcuffs while you hold a gun to my head does not make me a willing participant of captivity.
Say what? If you're putting on handcuffs at your own whim, then you are doing that willingly. The person holding the gun would have to be ordering you to do so for it to be forced. But your statement doesn't say that, it reads like somebody just happens to be holding a gun to your head at the same time. Hell, without further clarification, you may have asked that person to hold a gun to your head while you handcuff yourself. Perhaps as some sort of erotic kick.
Yep, that was the one:
http://videosift.com/video/The-MPAA-Pirates-a-Movie
From the linked article:
"They say that the privacy of the raters themselves might have been violated by Dick."
Tee-hee.
Bedknobs and Broomsticks.
That's fucking disgusting. Get out of here with your pornographic filth.
Let's M$ charge an entire months wage in the US and see what happens
People will stop using it? I wouldn't predict a massive surge in piracy, as businesses would immediately dump it for either Linux or MacOS, with consumers following. It would rapidly fall in marketshare and eventually bankrupt Microsoft.
It's not like anybody needs to run Windows anymore.
Do not equate copyright infringement to stealing, these two are different.
Indeed, but how does the argument "it costs money" justify copyright infringement?
I wonder what would you do, if Windows cost $5000 per copy.
Use something else? Personally, I can easily afford to buy Windows, but I chose not to. Why would I want to use such a terrible OS?
.... as they seek to counteract the growing hardware and software dominance of IBM and Oracle.
Shouldn't that be "... the increasing irrelevance of IBM and Oracle?"