Doesn't that then dismiss the browser wars? MS aren't stopping Firefox (or NS back in the days) rendering HTML - its really just a matter of convenience of pulling down the software.
But then the onus is on the non-technical mom-and-pop types to become aware that they have options, not MS. Firefox (as the obvious browser example) is a free download and one can use it for free.
Look, its fairly straight forward. Typically speaking a song is about a MB per song - I believe thats what Apple uses and 95% of the population. But there is no hard limit because its a moving target and subject to a whole bunch of parameters. For instance if you were hitting the target during off hours then you'd probably be fine, whilst if you were hitting your target but at peak hours you'd probably get cut off.
I read that it was the most polluted sites in the world, not the developing world. But yes it was an article from a that focuses on "solutions for developing countries". I do agree I'd like to see some numbers that compare it against other nations.
Well, no not really, unless a Microsoftian is defined by their work on cp/m, vax, solaris, irix, mac os, osx, linux as well as windows. Now granted I'm currently am working XP and thus the typo. Lets just say I'm 'OS Zealot' agnostic.
Which is utterly meaningless. The point many people seem to be missing is that 'downloads' don't equate to trends whatsoever. Firefox is typically downloaded by geeks that go out looking for it. IE typically comes on a Windows CD. FF is probably downloaded many times for only a single usage and the opposite for installs (though would expect the former to be more common). For the typical Windows users they don't upgrade and get the latest and greatest if what they have works.
The only semi-valid statistic is usage stats from websites and even thats tainted at best. Depends on website, throughput of traffic, the demographics you want to attract\satisfy to your website, compatibility issues etc.
Quite agree, that was my first thought - its pathetic. Only when \. editors, \. readers (but not all) and article writers learn to grow and have a civil discussion about whats going on in the computer industry will MS (and other corporate) take notice of what you say.
This clearly looks like user error - from what I can tell he purposely turned on the "email check" feature (not the default setting) and didn't actually turn it to "airplane\aeroplane mode".
Having said that its become pretty tricky to remember all the functions\features\keys etc of all these devices. The old staple "rtfm" means to wade through a manual lined with key strokes for every situation and of course the UI is all somewhat different to each other be it phones, blackberrys, cameras, let alone the computer. My point is this, its user error, but its easily done.
What I'm concerned about here is why did he get a $5000 bill without authorizing it? A feature I suggest we see on these cellphones\iphones or even better, the carriers, is a $ amount (not minutes used) that just cuts off and if one hits it they have to opt in via some method to turn it back on - a simple pin would do. Alas I'm sure the carriers won't do this and I doubt the iPhone knows...so a law, much like the one to allow users to carry cellphone numbers across carriers, is in order.
I disagree - Jobs has set a precedent that Apple customers will now EXPECT - that he's prepared to give refunds in contradiction to Point 2 in his letter.
The initial price was set too high and he corrected that mistake but by giving the early adopters a refund (of sorts) he's wanting his cake too. He's binding himself to any future price decisions they make - he has to add the 'we have to bump the price up a bit to counteract a possible refund for early adopters' factor - thats not the sort of confidence Wall Street likes. The stock has taken quite a hit in the last 48 hours or so and hopefully the very people that developed the iPhone aren't the ones that will bear the brunt.
I seriously think this decision will come back to haunt him.
Way to sidestep. Your whole post is a rant about the evil that is M$ and all the evil its pushing in on the world. Yeah, that arguement is really socking it to 'em and will hold up in court.
Ethics is very subjective - what is ethical to you may not be to someone else. We create rules to define boundaries of common ethics. If those rules aren't tight enough blame the person who created them - especially if they're getting cash from it. Here's an alternative standpoint to what happened...the evil that is the governing committee don't want them to vote but are happy to take their money.
You hate Microsoft, we get it (I'm no big fan either). But please use reasoned arguements.
I agree in part - especially on the the ccmixter resource. But the trouble I have is not with the artists wanting to make money (you're absolutely right, they deserve it). My problem is with the consumers who don't want to pay for copyrighted material and so make freebie copies citing "I don't want my money to go to the RIAA", or, "its not stealing its copyright infringement". Utter bollox.
The bands that get in trouble by the RIAA want it both ways. They want to get found by some Music Scout (from an RIAA org), earn their millions and then think they can somehow give the music away...because I mean its theirs right? NO, the band signed a contract that gave rights away to the music IN EXCHANGE for money. You can't just claim rights of the music after you've earned your cash.
Again, if this is not the case PLEASE cite - if the RIAA have sued an independent band that has put mp3s on a website I think the news would show up here.
But what did they violate that is so obvious? If they paid their dues and voted what rules did they break - none that I've heard of. Now, don't get me wrong I don't think its particularly a good way of doing things but one should blame the system.
Good post. I enjoy all the analogies that come out of the copyright debates...leaving back doors unlocked ad nauseum. But you've hit the nail on the head - the RIAA have the upper hand because the amount of traffic going through Kazaa and the other P2P programs is copyrighted material. The way to combat the RIAA and their arguement is to produce heaps of good copyleft material.
I dont understand why the BBC doesnt offer a tiered subscription approach. Everyone complains, especially me, about having to pay a license fee which is independent of how much service you recieve from the BBC. Offer a terestrial tv + basic web service license, a digital tv license and VOD license - or at least something similar. You pick the ones you want. Yes the devil is in the details but this concept of one price fits everyone is crazy - it worked when there were a couple of tv and radio channels 40 years ago but not now - hardly anyone uses 25% of all the services the bbc offers and so feel like they're overpaying.
And as one goes back in time the quality of that data decreases. We hear of temperature, flood level details ad nauseum from the 17th and 18th century - its not just how far back the recording is but how much error is inherent in how they recorded it.
thats exactly what I was thinking...how can you have 25 viruses and get anything other than 4%, 8%, 12% etc. The article refers to 6%, 61% and 89%...bizarre - I can only reason that they weighted the severity of each virus.
The slippery slope arguement is completely over used. There are scenarios in which it is valid but in this instance its a bolloxy point. The police are just automating an existing manual and lengthy process. If this ever continues down the slippery slope to an unconstitutional situation then thats the time to challenge it in court, but not before.
I would have a lot more sympathy if the ACLU showed some signs of common sense once in a while.
Immigration has shades of grey since its controlled by people who are understaffed. If he came in to work before then he shouldnt have been allowed (assuming the laws at the time needed work authorization for what he did). But I've been through the US immigration process and its full of what if's, who you talk to, arguements you put forward for your case. I hit one big snag at one point and the immigration officer told me that 2 wrongs dont make a right. Hes absolutely right.
First of its not obscure at all. Its an H1-B work visa - if anyone decided to *any* cursory check its all over the fucking place. Its very common knowledge and its ultimately his responsibility there. Just about every other country has similar sorts of work permits. Theres this thing, its called the internet. The information is readily at hand. If he got a work permit he'd be fine. And as the blurb says, he was contracted to do some work at\before the conference so hes not just there as an attendee.
Slashdot Mirror
And by the same token its not like you can't put Linux or download FF to replace MS too - thats the parents point.
Doesn't that then dismiss the browser wars? MS aren't stopping Firefox (or NS back in the days) rendering HTML - its really just a matter of convenience of pulling down the software.
But then the onus is on the non-technical mom-and-pop types to become aware that they have options, not MS. Firefox (as the obvious browser example) is a free download and one can use it for free.
Look, its fairly straight forward. Typically speaking a song is about a MB per song - I believe thats what Apple uses and 95% of the population. But there is no hard limit because its a moving target and subject to a whole bunch of parameters. For instance if you were hitting the target during off hours then you'd probably be fine, whilst if you were hitting your target but at peak hours you'd probably get cut off.
LA isn't exactly paradise on earth but if you think its bad for pollution you really need to see other other parts of the world.
I read that it was the most polluted sites in the world, not the developing world. But yes it was an article from a that focuses on "solutions for developing countries". I do agree I'd like to see some numbers that compare it against other nations.
Well, no not really, unless a Microsoftian is defined by their work on cp/m, vax, solaris, irix, mac os, osx, linux as well as windows. Now granted I'm currently am working XP and thus the typo. Lets just say I'm 'OS Zealot' agnostic.
Damn, damn, damn, foiled again....I mean, come over to the dark side, its not that bad - its all rather fun really.
The only semi-valid statistic is usage stats from websites and even thats tainted at best. Depends on website, throughput of traffic, the demographics you want to attract\satisfy to your website, compatibility issues etc.
Quite agree, that was my first thought - its pathetic. Only when \. editors, \. readers (but not all) and article writers learn to grow and have a civil discussion about whats going on in the computer industry will MS (and other corporate) take notice of what you say.
Having said that its become pretty tricky to remember all the functions\features\keys etc of all these devices. The old staple "rtfm" means to wade through a manual lined with key strokes for every situation and of course the UI is all somewhat different to each other be it phones, blackberrys, cameras, let alone the computer. My point is this, its user error, but its easily done.
What I'm concerned about here is why did he get a $5000 bill without authorizing it? A feature I suggest we see on these cellphones\iphones or even better, the carriers, is a $ amount (not minutes used) that just cuts off and if one hits it they have to opt in via some method to turn it back on - a simple pin would do. Alas I'm sure the carriers won't do this and I doubt the iPhone knows...so a law, much like the one to allow users to carry cellphone numbers across carriers, is in order.
The initial price was set too high and he corrected that mistake but by giving the early adopters a refund (of sorts) he's wanting his cake too. He's binding himself to any future price decisions they make - he has to add the 'we have to bump the price up a bit to counteract a possible refund for early adopters' factor - thats not the sort of confidence Wall Street likes. The stock has taken quite a hit in the last 48 hours or so and hopefully the very people that developed the iPhone aren't the ones that will bear the brunt.
I seriously think this decision will come back to haunt him.
Ethics is very subjective - what is ethical to you may not be to someone else. We create rules to define boundaries of common ethics. If those rules aren't tight enough blame the person who created them - especially if they're getting cash from it. Here's an alternative standpoint to what happened...the evil that is the governing committee don't want them to vote but are happy to take their money.
You hate Microsoft, we get it (I'm no big fan either). But please use reasoned arguements.
I agree in part - especially on the the ccmixter resource. But the trouble I have is not with the artists wanting to make money (you're absolutely right, they deserve it). My problem is with the consumers who don't want to pay for copyrighted material and so make freebie copies citing "I don't want my money to go to the RIAA", or, "its not stealing its copyright infringement". Utter bollox.
The bands that get in trouble by the RIAA want it both ways. They want to get found by some Music Scout (from an RIAA org), earn their millions and then think they can somehow give the music away...because I mean its theirs right? NO, the band signed a contract that gave rights away to the music IN EXCHANGE for money. You can't just claim rights of the music after you've earned your cash.
Again, if this is not the case PLEASE cite - if the RIAA have sued an independent band that has put mp3s on a website I think the news would show up here.
But what did they violate that is so obvious? If they paid their dues and voted what rules did they break - none that I've heard of. Now, don't get me wrong I don't think its particularly a good way of doing things but one should blame the system.
Well in this instance at least he cites an example (WGA) for his logic which is more than can be said for your comment.
Good post. I enjoy all the analogies that come out of the copyright debates...leaving back doors unlocked ad nauseum. But you've hit the nail on the head - the RIAA have the upper hand because the amount of traffic going through Kazaa and the other P2P programs is copyrighted material. The way to combat the RIAA and their arguement is to produce heaps of good copyleft material.
I dont understand why the BBC doesnt offer a tiered subscription approach. Everyone complains, especially me, about having to pay a license fee which is independent of how much service you recieve from the BBC. Offer a terestrial tv + basic web service license, a digital tv license and VOD license - or at least something similar. You pick the ones you want. Yes the devil is in the details but this concept of one price fits everyone is crazy - it worked when there were a couple of tv and radio channels 40 years ago but not now - hardly anyone uses 25% of all the services the bbc offers and so feel like they're overpaying.
And as one goes back in time the quality of that data decreases. We hear of temperature, flood level details ad nauseum from the 17th and 18th century - its not just how far back the recording is but how much error is inherent in how they recorded it.
thats exactly what I was thinking...how can you have 25 viruses and get anything other than 4%, 8%, 12% etc. The article refers to 6%, 61% and 89%...bizarre - I can only reason that they weighted the severity of each virus.
I would have a lot more sympathy if the ACLU showed some signs of common sense once in a while.
Immigration has shades of grey since its controlled by people who are understaffed. If he came in to work before then he shouldnt have been allowed (assuming the laws at the time needed work authorization for what he did). But I've been through the US immigration process and its full of what if's, who you talk to, arguements you put forward for your case. I hit one big snag at one point and the immigration officer told me that 2 wrongs dont make a right. Hes absolutely right.
What an awesome attitute. Way to keep Linux away from the masses and keep them using Windows.
First of its not obscure at all. Its an H1-B work visa - if anyone decided to *any* cursory check its all over the fucking place. Its very common knowledge and its ultimately his responsibility there. Just about every other country has similar sorts of work permits. Theres this thing, its called the internet. The information is readily at hand. If he got a work permit he'd be fine. And as the blurb says, he was contracted to do some work at\before the conference so hes not just there as an attendee.