Buffet routinely lobbied against the bailout legislation.
Buffet did lobby for bailouts of a different nature, in which the government would get voting stock in the companies they bailed out, there were clear stipulations on where money was spent (so it didn't go into pockets like his), and there was massive accountability.
When Buffet bailed out GE, he laid out such a framework and encouraged the government to follow suit. And while Buffet has a high personal worth because of stock he owns, he has always been know to live frugally, and is now giving away the massive bulk of his wealth.
However Buffet is a known conservative, so a liberally-slanted website is all but obligated to go on a character assassination for no good reason. (I'm neither Republican nor Democrat. I just hate lying. If anything, I support true liberalism, in which there is less government restriction period, and personal liberties are protected as much as possible).
First off, I've never received a dime for using the phrase content creator.
Common sense, legislation, and a free market govern what constitutes actual original content. A common two-word phrase that is used ubiquitously is not the same as a movie, a CD or a video game.
Poor analogies and hyperbole are only tools that you hope will obfuscate the issue. People who produce content that others digest deserve to get paid.
If you can find one example of anything I've ever said in my life where I said only certain types of content should be paid for, or that certain groups of content creators don't deserve compensation, I will concede my hyprocisy to you. But given that I've never suggested that in my life, I'm calling you a liar.
Anytime I've pirated personally, it was because I was young and didn't have the money to purchase the items I wanted. Never however did I claim that I was really entitled to do so, nor that the content creators didn't deserve to be paid. As I grew older, I was less and less comfortable with the practice. As I am both wiser and more wealthy, I believe in paying for what I consume.
I am especially concerned that some of the content creators I valued as a child are no longer producing content today due to lack of financial success, I am even more aware that if you don't financially support things you enjoy, they may disappear.
I have studied marketing and economics. I understand that need in a market determines overall value, but producing a product that people consume always produces some value. If there was zero value, the product would not be consumed.
So far the precedent seems to be that you have a fully downloaded copy, and then you need to then distribute it afterwards.
Last time I checked, the MPAA and RIAA haven't had success with their "making available" strategy. Judges seem to want proof they were going out of their way to distribute.
You don't pay millions for pirating a game or song for personal use. People who download aren't seen as creating the copy.
When you distribute copies, that is where the piracy technically occurs. People don't pay millions for downloading a game. The game shops that sell pirated copies of games for profit are being hit, because they are stealing income from the content creators. They deserve to be hit.
I'm not saying the MPAA, RIAA, etc. are using good tactics. They're breaking the law and acting like douche-bags. That does not however justify stealing someone else's work and then charging others for it.
First off, if you write a film script, you likely do get paid once. Say you get $500k for a script that turns into a $100 million dollar grossing movie. Most writers don't get "points" or residuals.
Conversely, if you built Disneyland, even though you built it once, you get reoccuring income from that investment.
Your analogy that people shouldn't pay for IP because you assume the creator of IP is getting rich for life is asinine.
Creators of content deserve the right to be paid for the work. End of story.
How much do you spend training staff to make the switch between Office 2003 and Office 2007, or the upcoming 2010?
Studies have shown that it is easier to switch from 2003 to OOo than to 2007.
OOo opens 2003 documents just fine, and handles most 2007 documents without too much trouble. It passes the grandma test, as literally I switched my mother to it, and she thought she was still on MS Office.
The BSA site and ads claim they can levy $250,000 fines per violation. I wonder now if that is only if you're a BSA member. And if by not paying the fine, you simply lose BSA-membership. Still, I'm sure you can sued by Microsoft or however.
Or, if you are in a position of relative authority (and not as afraid of getting canned) you can quote the $250,000 fines the BSA can assess PER VIOLATION and tell them it would greatly behoove themselves to switch to FOSS alternatives and cover their ass.
Instead of accsing the company of piracy (even if they're guilty), use another approach.
Say, I'm concerned that renewing future licenses will be very expensive. Say, the 1,000 copies of Winzip at $30 each is $30,000. 7-zip is a free alternative that actually works better, and will save the company $30,000 the new time those licenses need to be renewed. Alnd OpenOffice saves $400 per license over MS Office. OpenOffice comes with free PDF export functionality, which saves the $500 Acrobat license.
You may get approval to install free, legal alternatives and get rid of the pirated software. Even better, instead of being seen as the problem (the person who has a moral objection to their piracy), you'll be seen as a solution.
I did up the voltage to what Kingson recommended (2.1V or something like that) and still no luck. And I tried setting the 4 sticks to 800MHz, but that doesn't work.
Name one file system on the planet that is 100% guaranteed never to have an issue when the computer crashes.
Ext4, just like Ext3, is designed to safe guard against crash issues by implementing a journal.
The issue at hand was a KDE 4 bug in their little indexer that decided to scan your HDD and try to attach meta-data to the various files on your HDD. KDE 4 screwed the pooch. That doesn't make Ext4 unstable.
I've heard of others getting out of contracts that way. However, I never seem to notice them informing me. No doubt they bury it in small print hidden with the bill. I throw the bills out and just pay it automatically online.
The KDE 4 devs themselves admitted it was their fault for not using Fsync.
Any file they were opening and trying to create metadata for (any file they could with Strigi/Nepomuk) they were touching and fucking up.
The issue was the Strigi had a whole bunch of files in a state of flux at once during the crashes.
Again, KDE fucked up, and Ubuntu fucked up with bad packages that were causing crashes. KDE has since been fixed. No one had reported massive Ext4 file corruption who wasn't running that version of KDE 4.
And mark me as a foe all you want. You're one less idiot I have to deal with. However, all you have are initial reports from users who didn't know what the issue was. I'm going off the final resolution from the people who identified the issue, took credit, and fixed it. If you want to ignore that, then go right ahead.
Not to mention a part of the culprit is the fact that Ubuntu keeps shipping completely broken KDE packages. If they didn't ship broken packages, these crashes wouldn't have occured.
You're example is at the userland level of 3 separate full on file operations. That isn't the problem. The problem was with one file operation on a low level, and what happens with the journal.
KDE 4 wasn't following POSIX standards for writing to a HDD. Most file systems have delayed writes and caching at some level.
In an extreme sense, some were concerned that Ext4 could delay a write for up to a minute. It wasn't 30 minutes. The operation should still be in the journal. It should be recoverable.
And before you get all upset, you should realize that these delayed writes also exist in Ext2 and Ext3.
NTFS also supports OS-level write caching. Even worse, Windows Server will often enable it by default on top of a RAID controller having it's own level of write caching. So you can be told a file is written, when neither the OS actually sent the write to the RAID controller, and even if it did, the RAID controller hasn't actually performed the write yet.
Ext3 and Ext4 both support varying levels of journals. You make the decision of which journal behavior you want. Do you want faster performance, or do you want more piece of mind?
And since this discussion is in regards to openSUSE shipping with Ext4, openSUSE defaults to the safer ordered journaling mode.
However, feel free to talk about your ass, spread FUD and live in the stone age.
The last time I was on Verizon I went to get a new phone after having one for 3 years. They told me I wasn't eligible for a new phone, because my wife got one the year before. We had a shared family plan.
I found it in writing where it stipulated where we were both eligible for new phones every two years. They insisted that if I didn't get mine at the same time she got hers, then I missed my window. I was livid. I kept going back to the Verizon store (and waiting 30 minutes to talk to a person each time) and trying to talk to different people.
Eventually I said, I'll just pay my $150 cancellation fee, which is cheaper than paying full retail on a phone, since they wouldn't give me a new phone after two years.
They then said, I'd have to pay $350. They consider family plans two seperate lines. I'd pay $175 each. Funny how it is two lines for cancellation purposes, but one plan as far as getting new phones. The weird part is that I was convinced my cancellation fee was $150 when I signed the contract.
They explained that all prices and fees can be changed at any time during the contract, and that raised my cancellation fee over the life of the contract. I was pretty livid. I ended up waiting a few months and then jumping to AT&T. Now I have a phone that doesn't get signal in half the town, but I never want to go back to Verizon's service again.
Everytime a Verizon rep talks to me and tries to get me to switch, they insist they'd never pull a stunt where they wouldn't give me a phone, and yet in talking to two store managers, and calling the 1-800 number, that is exactly what they did to me.
The article is talking about smartphone termination fees, and then data charges per meg.
It should be noted that most new smartphones come with a mandatory unlimited data plan, so you wouldn't pay per meg of data.
However, the explanation for the mandatory data plan was that the phones needed extra subsidy. What is the explanation for the massive new cancellation fee then? I thought I already subsidized the cost with my normal monthly plan, and data plan.
Slashdot Mirror
That low-resolution BlackBerry in your pocket will suddenly be capable of producing high resolution images?
Uh-huh.
Nvidia also claims that simply by wiring money into their account, they can make you lose weight by doing nothing at all!
I hate articles filled with lies.
Buffet routinely lobbied against the bailout legislation.
Buffet did lobby for bailouts of a different nature, in which the government would get voting stock in the companies they bailed out, there were clear stipulations on where money was spent (so it didn't go into pockets like his), and there was massive accountability.
When Buffet bailed out GE, he laid out such a framework and encouraged the government to follow suit. And while Buffet has a high personal worth because of stock he owns, he has always been know to live frugally, and is now giving away the massive bulk of his wealth.
However Buffet is a known conservative, so a liberally-slanted website is all but obligated to go on a character assassination for no good reason. (I'm neither Republican nor Democrat. I just hate lying. If anything, I support true liberalism, in which there is less government restriction period, and personal liberties are protected as much as possible).
You're an idiot or a troll. Take your pick.
First off, I've never received a dime for using the phrase content creator.
Common sense, legislation, and a free market govern what constitutes actual original content. A common two-word phrase that is used ubiquitously is not the same as a movie, a CD or a video game.
Poor analogies and hyperbole are only tools that you hope will obfuscate the issue. People who produce content that others digest deserve to get paid.
If you can find one example of anything I've ever said in my life where I said only certain types of content should be paid for, or that certain groups of content creators don't deserve compensation, I will concede my hyprocisy to you. But given that I've never suggested that in my life, I'm calling you a liar.
Anytime I've pirated personally, it was because I was young and didn't have the money to purchase the items I wanted. Never however did I claim that I was really entitled to do so, nor that the content creators didn't deserve to be paid. As I grew older, I was less and less comfortable with the practice. As I am both wiser and more wealthy, I believe in paying for what I consume.
I am especially concerned that some of the content creators I valued as a child are no longer producing content today due to lack of financial success, I am even more aware that if you don't financially support things you enjoy, they may disappear.
I have studied marketing and economics. I understand that need in a market determines overall value, but producing a product that people consume always produces some value. If there was zero value, the product would not be consumed.
It is a simple logic statement.
So far the precedent seems to be that you have a fully downloaded copy, and then you need to then distribute it afterwards.
Last time I checked, the MPAA and RIAA haven't had success with their "making available" strategy. Judges seem to want proof they were going out of their way to distribute.
Pure logic.
Creating a product that others use entitles you to get paid. You deserve the get paid.
How MUCH you get paid is set by market value.
I can't help that you're all upset by your moral/ethical values to the point that you can't comprehend the SIMPLEST of logical statements.
If you can't keep up, then don't bother posting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up863eQKGUI
That is a must-watch video.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act
It is criminal now.
You don't pay millions for pirating a game or song for personal use. People who download aren't seen as creating the copy.
When you distribute copies, that is where the piracy technically occurs. People don't pay millions for downloading a game. The game shops that sell pirated copies of games for profit are being hit, because they are stealing income from the content creators. They deserve to be hit.
I'm not saying the MPAA, RIAA, etc. are using good tactics. They're breaking the law and acting like douche-bags. That does not however justify stealing someone else's work and then charging others for it.
First off, if you write a film script, you likely do get paid once. Say you get $500k for a script that turns into a $100 million dollar grossing movie. Most writers don't get "points" or residuals.
Conversely, if you built Disneyland, even though you built it once, you get reoccuring income from that investment.
Your analogy that people shouldn't pay for IP because you assume the creator of IP is getting rich for life is asinine.
Creators of content deserve the right to be paid for the work. End of story.
Go-oo.org is Novell's fork of OpenOffice, which includes improved macro support.
How much do you spend training staff to make the switch between Office 2003 and Office 2007, or the upcoming 2010?
Studies have shown that it is easier to switch from 2003 to OOo than to 2007.
OOo opens 2003 documents just fine, and handles most 2007 documents without too much trouble. It passes the grandma test, as literally I switched my mother to it, and she thought she was still on MS Office.
The BSA site and ads claim they can levy $250,000 fines per violation. I wonder now if that is only if you're a BSA member. And if by not paying the fine, you simply lose BSA-membership. Still, I'm sure you can sued by Microsoft or however.
Or, if you are in a position of relative authority (and not as afraid of getting canned) you can quote the $250,000 fines the BSA can assess PER VIOLATION and tell them it would greatly behoove themselves to switch to FOSS alternatives and cover their ass.
Mod parent insightful.
Instead of accsing the company of piracy (even if they're guilty), use another approach.
Say, I'm concerned that renewing future licenses will be very expensive. Say, the 1,000 copies of Winzip at $30 each is $30,000. 7-zip is a free alternative that actually works better, and will save the company $30,000 the new time those licenses need to be renewed. Alnd OpenOffice saves $400 per license over MS Office. OpenOffice comes with free PDF export functionality, which saves the $500 Acrobat license.
You may get approval to install free, legal alternatives and get rid of the pirated software. Even better, instead of being seen as the problem (the person who has a moral objection to their piracy), you'll be seen as a solution.
I did up the voltage to what Kingson recommended (2.1V or something like that) and still no luck. And I tried setting the 4 sticks to 800MHz, but that doesn't work.
I can get 4 actual sticks of 800MHz to work.
Name one file system on the planet that is 100% guaranteed never to have an issue when the computer crashes.
Ext4, just like Ext3, is designed to safe guard against crash issues by implementing a journal.
The issue at hand was a KDE 4 bug in their little indexer that decided to scan your HDD and try to attach meta-data to the various files on your HDD. KDE 4 screwed the pooch. That doesn't make Ext4 unstable.
I've heard of others getting out of contracts that way. However, I never seem to notice them informing me. No doubt they bury it in small print hidden with the bill. I throw the bills out and just pay it automatically online.
The KDE 4 devs themselves admitted it was their fault for not using Fsync.
Any file they were opening and trying to create metadata for (any file they could with Strigi/Nepomuk) they were touching and fucking up.
The issue was the Strigi had a whole bunch of files in a state of flux at once during the crashes.
Again, KDE fucked up, and Ubuntu fucked up with bad packages that were causing crashes. KDE has since been fixed. No one had reported massive Ext4 file corruption who wasn't running that version of KDE 4.
And mark me as a foe all you want. You're one less idiot I have to deal with. However, all you have are initial reports from users who didn't know what the issue was. I'm going off the final resolution from the people who identified the issue, took credit, and fixed it. If you want to ignore that, then go right ahead.
That makes you the idiot.
Not to mention a part of the culprit is the fact that Ubuntu keeps shipping completely broken KDE packages. If they didn't ship broken packages, these crashes wouldn't have occured.
You're example is at the userland level of 3 separate full on file operations. That isn't the problem. The problem was with one file operation on a low level, and what happens with the journal.
You misunderstand.
KDE 4 wasn't following POSIX standards for writing to a HDD. Most file systems have delayed writes and caching at some level.
In an extreme sense, some were concerned that Ext4 could delay a write for up to a minute. It wasn't 30 minutes. The operation should still be in the journal. It should be recoverable.
And before you get all upset, you should realize that these delayed writes also exist in Ext2 and Ext3.
NTFS also supports OS-level write caching. Even worse, Windows Server will often enable it by default on top of a RAID controller having it's own level of write caching. So you can be told a file is written, when neither the OS actually sent the write to the RAID controller, and even if it did, the RAID controller hasn't actually performed the write yet.
Ext3 and Ext4 both support varying levels of journals. You make the decision of which journal behavior you want. Do you want faster performance, or do you want more piece of mind?
And since this discussion is in regards to openSUSE shipping with Ext4, openSUSE defaults to the safer ordered journaling mode.
However, feel free to talk about your ass, spread FUD and live in the stone age.
You're not any safer for it.
You get design flaws from time to time.
All I expect is a company to own up to them. You're right in that AMD isn't the only company to stonewall and deny a product flaw exists.
It still ticks me off though.
The last time I was on Verizon I went to get a new phone after having one for 3 years. They told me I wasn't eligible for a new phone, because my wife got one the year before. We had a shared family plan.
I found it in writing where it stipulated where we were both eligible for new phones every two years. They insisted that if I didn't get mine at the same time she got hers, then I missed my window. I was livid. I kept going back to the Verizon store (and waiting 30 minutes to talk to a person each time) and trying to talk to different people.
Eventually I said, I'll just pay my $150 cancellation fee, which is cheaper than paying full retail on a phone, since they wouldn't give me a new phone after two years.
They then said, I'd have to pay $350. They consider family plans two seperate lines. I'd pay $175 each. Funny how it is two lines for cancellation purposes, but one plan as far as getting new phones. The weird part is that I was convinced my cancellation fee was $150 when I signed the contract.
They explained that all prices and fees can be changed at any time during the contract, and that raised my cancellation fee over the life of the contract. I was pretty livid. I ended up waiting a few months and then jumping to AT&T. Now I have a phone that doesn't get signal in half the town, but I never want to go back to Verizon's service again.
Everytime a Verizon rep talks to me and tries to get me to switch, they insist they'd never pull a stunt where they wouldn't give me a phone, and yet in talking to two store managers, and calling the 1-800 number, that is exactly what they did to me.
The article is talking about smartphone termination fees, and then data charges per meg.
It should be noted that most new smartphones come with a mandatory unlimited data plan, so you wouldn't pay per meg of data.
However, the explanation for the mandatory data plan was that the phones needed extra subsidy. What is the explanation for the massive new cancellation fee then? I thought I already subsidized the cost with my normal monthly plan, and data plan.