I thought one of the fundamental aspects of modern empirical science is that, unlike a religion, it is ALWAYS open to revision and dispute. That's the whole point of the scientific method. Whether there is a significant modern consensus or not, I think it goes against the core spirit of scientific inquiry to EVER say "This matter is settled and no future scientist may ever question it." That's the very kind of anti-empirical position the Creationists themselves take in presenting their religious take on science.
And I'm certainly glad for Einstein's sake that no one ever thought this way about Newtonian physics. "Sorry little German, the matter is settled. Stop being a Newton denier."
I'm pretty sure some of the bigger textbooks companies pay significant kickbacks to colleges and departments to require the latest editions their overpriced crap. Unless Apple is going to be offering similar kickbacks, I'm not holding my breath.
Re:Part of a money conflict within the King family
on
A Copyright Nightmare
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Part of a money conflict within the King family
on
A Copyright Nightmare
·
· Score: 5, Informative
This is just part of a larger, really nasty conflict which has been going on within the King family since Coretta King's death. While deaths should ideally bring families together, they probably more often tear them apart (as petty old grudges and sibling rivalries find new expression in the debate over disposition of the estate)--ESPECIALLY when money is involved.
In short Dexter King was sued by his sister Bernice and brother Martin Luther King III over Coretta King's estate after she died. Then he countersued. They later settled, but the copyright on those speeches was one of the most valuable financial assets they fought over in those lawsuits (which they divided up amongst the siblings). In short, the settlement requires that these speeches be treated as financial resources and treated as such.
Money and greed trumped morality as the vultures descended.
Israel has a very developed a very advanced cyberwarfare infrastructure, capable of both defensive and offensive attacks. And it's widely believed that they're the ones behind Stuxnet and other attempts at sabotaging Iran's nuclear program.
And that's just what they do in cyberspace. You get a LOT worse treatment from them if you happen to be an Iranian nuclear scientist.
Rest assured that Israel dishes it out at least as well as they get it. They're hardly innocent babes in the woods.
I can't imagine that's going to make the folk at Steam very happy.
I think Valve has the most to lose here. If people encounter DRM problems with these titles, they're probably going to blame Steam--not Ubisoft. Not sure why Valve would even agree to something which could really hurt their brand like that. The whole point of Steam was to avoid shit like this.
Movie reviewers are doing something similar now when studios refuse to screen a movie before it's released (usually the sign of an awful movie). Instead of just not reviewing it, they're hitting back by by highlighting the fact that the studio didn't offer advance screenings and reminding people that this is usually a bad sign.
At least we don't have to put up with too much of this activation DRM hassle on the console versions...for now anyway. Of course, consoles do tend to follow on the heels of PC developments. And you can bet Ubisoft and other developers would love nothing more than killing off the secondary and rental market for consoles the same way they've killed them off for the PC market. I don't look forward to a day when I start up and console game and it saying "Sorry, you need an internet connection to activate this game," or the day when I can't loan a game to a friend or sell it (or buy it) used.
I'm not a pirate, but I can definitely understand why some otherwise honest people might turn to it (in light of the way honest people get screwed these days).
Trust me, unless you are a die hard philosophical "open source or nothing" kind of guy, you're a lot better off spending a little money. Open source HTML/PHP editors are a goddamned mess. I've always gotten a lot better results (in that particular genre at least) by spending a little money.
Anyone who thinks a non-WYSIWYG editor is as efficient as a good WYSIWYG editor should try laying out a complex table in one sometime. Sure, WYSIWYG code isn't as clean as doing it by hand, but you can't beat it as a timesaver (when your boss wants it done yesterday and doesn't give a shit whether your code is clean as a whistle or not).
On this call (first 2 minutes) you can clearly hear Douglas identify himself as Google Kenya employee, state, and then reaffirm, that GKBO is working in collaboration with Mocality, and that we are helping them with GKBO, before trying to offer the business owner a website (and upsell them a domain name). Over the 11 minutes of the whole call he repeatedly states that Mocality is with, or under (!) Google.
If the allegations in this article are true, this is where they really cross the line. Harvesting a publicly available database and then contacting those businesses to sell them something is fine (though a little sleazy for a mainstream business like Google). But then trying to claim that you're working with that company when you're not is just plain fraud. It would be like some random insurance company calling people up and saying "Hi, we're working with your mortgage holder, Bank of Topeka, and would like to offer you a special insurance deal...in conjunction with Bank of Topeka."
In fact, Mocality found out about this whole scam when customers started calling them up and asking for support for their new websites (thinking Mocality were the ones who had sold them the sites). I guess it never occurred to Google that this would happen and that Mocality would want to know why.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought one of the fundamental aspects of modern empirical science is that, unlike a religion, it is ALWAYS open to revision and dispute. That's the whole point of the scientific method. Whether there is a significant modern consensus or not, I think it goes against the core spirit of scientific inquiry to EVER say "This matter is settled and no future scientist may ever question it." That's the very kind of anti-empirical position the Creationists themselves take in presenting their religious take on science.
And I'm certainly glad for Einstein's sake that no one ever thought this way about Newtonian physics. "Sorry little German, the matter is settled. Stop being a Newton denier."
I'm pretty sure some of the bigger textbooks companies pay significant kickbacks to colleges and departments to require the latest editions their overpriced crap. Unless Apple is going to be offering similar kickbacks, I'm not holding my breath.
Here is a pretty good article on the lawsuits.
This is just part of a larger, really nasty conflict which has been going on within the King family since Coretta King's death. While deaths should ideally bring families together, they probably more often tear them apart (as petty old grudges and sibling rivalries find new expression in the debate over disposition of the estate)--ESPECIALLY when money is involved.
In short Dexter King was sued by his sister Bernice and brother Martin Luther King III over Coretta King's estate after she died. Then he countersued. They later settled, but the copyright on those speeches was one of the most valuable financial assets they fought over in those lawsuits (which they divided up amongst the siblings). In short, the settlement requires that these speeches be treated as financial resources and treated as such.
Money and greed trumped morality as the vultures descended.
Saying something is a stereotype is not the same as saying it's never true. People often forget that.
If you think calling my ex-wives gold diggers is sexist, it's because you've clearly never met them.
Good luck trying to find a woman that doesn't care about money.
And if you do, please tell her that I'm looking for a new wife to help me support my first two.
Israel has a very developed a very advanced cyberwarfare infrastructure, capable of both defensive and offensive attacks. And it's widely believed that they're the ones behind Stuxnet and other attempts at sabotaging Iran's nuclear program.
And that's just what they do in cyberspace. You get a LOT worse treatment from them if you happen to be an Iranian nuclear scientist.
Rest assured that Israel dishes it out at least as well as they get it. They're hardly innocent babes in the woods.
I can't imagine that's going to make the folk at Steam very happy.
I think Valve has the most to lose here. If people encounter DRM problems with these titles, they're probably going to blame Steam--not Ubisoft. Not sure why Valve would even agree to something which could really hurt their brand like that. The whole point of Steam was to avoid shit like this.
Movie reviewers are doing something similar now when studios refuse to screen a movie before it's released (usually the sign of an awful movie). Instead of just not reviewing it, they're hitting back by by highlighting the fact that the studio didn't offer advance screenings and reminding people that this is usually a bad sign.
Except this DRM applies to Steam versions of these games as well.
At least we don't have to put up with too much of this activation DRM hassle on the console versions...for now anyway. Of course, consoles do tend to follow on the heels of PC developments. And you can bet Ubisoft and other developers would love nothing more than killing off the secondary and rental market for consoles the same way they've killed them off for the PC market. I don't look forward to a day when I start up and console game and it saying "Sorry, you need an internet connection to activate this game," or the day when I can't loan a game to a friend or sell it (or buy it) used.
I'm not a pirate, but I can definitely understand why some otherwise honest people might turn to it (in light of the way honest people get screwed these days).
Kompozer doesn't remotely compare to Dreamweaver and doesn't meet the OP's specifications.
Trust me, unless you are a die hard philosophical "open source or nothing" kind of guy, you're a lot better off spending a little money. Open source HTML/PHP editors are a goddamned mess. I've always gotten a lot better results (in that particular genre at least) by spending a little money.
Anyone who thinks a non-WYSIWYG editor is as efficient as a good WYSIWYG editor should try laying out a complex table in one sometime. Sure, WYSIWYG code isn't as clean as doing it by hand, but you can't beat it as a timesaver (when your boss wants it done yesterday and doesn't give a shit whether your code is clean as a whistle or not).
Not everyone has the luxury of a large, diversified staff. Some people have to wear a lot of different hats.
I have no idea if it helped
Did you include a big campaign donation with your letter? Because, if not, the answer to this question is "No."
Sons Of the Patriots Act
And, as such, people who don't support it are clearly on the side of the T E R R O R I S T S !!!
was...until they just change its name and quietly slip it through as a rider on some completely unrelated bill
FTFY
Apparently, so is this new strain of TB.
I was wondering why "Bob" kept coughing.
Why should the US be able to enforce its laws in the UK?
Because your Prime Minister is a lapdog.
hugely lopsided extradition treaty that was signed by Blair
In Blair's defense, he REALLY wanted that Snausage treat.
at the end of each shift they take it, count it, divide most of it up amongst themselves, and put it in their pockets
FTFY.
FTFA:
On this call (first 2 minutes) you can clearly hear Douglas identify himself as Google Kenya employee, state, and then reaffirm, that GKBO is working in collaboration with Mocality, and that we are helping them with GKBO, before trying to offer the business owner a website (and upsell them a domain name). Over the 11 minutes of the whole call he repeatedly states that Mocality is with, or under (!) Google.
If the allegations in this article are true, this is where they really cross the line. Harvesting a publicly available database and then contacting those businesses to sell them something is fine (though a little sleazy for a mainstream business like Google). But then trying to claim that you're working with that company when you're not is just plain fraud. It would be like some random insurance company calling people up and saying "Hi, we're working with your mortgage holder, Bank of Topeka, and would like to offer you a special insurance deal...in conjunction with Bank of Topeka."
In fact, Mocality found out about this whole scam when customers started calling them up and asking for support for their new websites (thinking Mocality were the ones who had sold them the sites). I guess it never occurred to Google that this would happen and that Mocality would want to know why.