I agree completely that what we have today is far from the ideals of the Constitution, my point is that so was what they had then. As you said it men, are men.
I don't think revolution is the solution. What has revolution brought us that reform could not? We end up with the same institutions, the same corruption, just with a different set of leaders.
So although saying "they were founded to compete with Intel" is incorrect, the part about them not being able to whipe AMD off the map is still pretty true. Due to requirements by chip buyers like IBM and the US military there needs to be at least two chip makes not to mention that, apparently, AMD can legally license quite a bit from Intel keeping technology from becoming far too different, and if they leverage their monopoly too much they risk lawsuits like the kind they're facing now.
Learn something new everyday I guess.
Re:Remember that Censorship does exist at home too
on
Google's China Problem
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"Is there somewhere someone so inevitably dumb who doesn't know you bastards did it for the petrol? I'll stick to Europe."
To me at least this implies that somehow Europe is above making excuse to cover their asses when oil is concerned. I was merely illustrating that they're just as two-faced as the rest of the world, even if they wont admit it.
The rest of your comment I can't even reply to, because it's a collection of statements that lack "coherence". Coherence is what strings statements together into an "argument". I'll do my best anyway.
You know, the terrorist attack in Madrid?
Yes
What did they do?
The terrorists?(As implied by the fact that they're the only subject you've mentioned) They bombed trains.
Withdraw.
Oh you ment the Spanish, yes, they did, though they continue to fight a war with Basque that has been going for decades, pacifists they aren't. You're also apparently trying to make the point that backing down is what people should do, I'm sure you've got some harsh words for the U.K., and Japan, who depsite being victims of a terrorist strike and repeated kidnappings have not backed down.
You know 9/11?
Yep.
What did they do?
The Terrorists? The Spanish?
Invade.
I assume you mean Americans. Yes they did, your point? Even if we work on your assumption, the Iraqi war was 100% for oil, and just run with it. The American invasions convinced Libya to give up their weapons progran, fostered political reform in Sryria, overthrew the Taliban, who if nothing else are guilty of destroying the priceless history carved into the sides of the Afgan mountains, and topled the regime of Saddam Hussein. Whether it was worth its price in blood, and whther the governments of those nations with be able to solidfy and prosper is another story and up for debate, but regardless of motives no one can claim that it's been all bad.
I am just waiting for the next thing that happen to you and, man, am I going to laugh.
I don't see what I have to do with any of this, considering you don't know thing one about me other than that I'm aware that Germany and France, the largest opponents of the Invasion of Iraq were two of the three largest importers of Iraqi oil. Furthermore, why you would laugh at the suffering of anyone, me, Americans, hell the moon people, is beyond me.
What goes around, comes around.
Someone who laughes at the misfortune of others should take that to heart.
Re:Remember that Censorship does exist at home too
on
Google's China Problem
·
· Score: 1
And France and Germany weren't opposing the war just for "the petrol"?
Maybe you should check were all Iraq's oil used to go before you answer that, not to mention where it's going now, becasue it sure as hell isn't the US.
Re:Remember that Censorship does exist at home too
on
Google's China Problem
·
· Score: 1
There's actually a law against filming and photographing coffins in transit dating back to the first persion gulf war because those pictures may (and probably will) arrive in the US before the bodies and they don't want familes hearing their children died on CNN before they hear it in person.
The whole thing about people not being able to photograph their childrens coffins was played off like a big Bush Jr censorship issue by the left when he had absolutely nothing to do with it, although Cheney was mildly invovled back int he day.
Maybe I shouldn't tell you about how Alexander Hamilton and his banking buddies got rich buying up confederation currancy for pennies on the dollar and then passing laws that it would all be honored at full value.
Or how much of the revolution was just mob violence at anyone who tried to regulate the economy including the burning of multiple warehouses and private residences because they were involved in British attempts to regulate the illegal rum trade.
Or how Thomas Jefferson, contrary to what Swordfish would tell you, never actually executed a man for treason on the Whitehouse lawn, he did have a man accused of treason and basically run out of town using his political power simply because the two of them didn't get along.
If you want to go a little further down, Abraham Lincoln publicly stated that he had no intrest in slavery either way, it was none of his business. He engaged int eh civil war to hold together the Union and nothing else. His later decision to emancipate the slaves in the area under martial law was commendable, but it wasn't part of his agenda, nor was he able to emancipate the slaves in territory that had remained in the Union as it wasn't under his war-powers control.
I have the utmost of respect for the founders of our nation which I believe to be one if, if not the greatest in the world, but these men were far from saints and it's soemthing that people like to overlook.
Intel can't whipe AMD off the map, because then they would be a total monopoly and they'd get broken up like Bell. AMD was created soley to be Intel's competition and make sure there was still a "market" for processors. Or at least that's what I've been informed.
The Dell situation as last I heard is that every once in a while dell will threaten to introduce AMD and Intel gives them a price break, at the same time Intel says they'll stop giving that price break if Dell actually does use AMD. The second part is the illegal part, you can give all the volume discounts you like, but you can't penalize based on your customer also buying from other sources. Toy's 'r' Us got in big trouble for this a while back for trying to punish toy makers if Toy's 'r' Us wasn't going to be the sole distributer of a certain Toy by refusing to carry that model or that line at all.
You can do whatever you want to make yourself seem like a more attractive business partner, but you're not allowed to use your marketshare to strongarm other businesses into being an ugly option.
Yeah I'd look into that, because everyone I've ever received is from the city I live in, even though a great-uncle post leads me to beleive the actual facility is in the next town over.
That makes me want to find out if the actual shipping center is in Sun Prarie, because that would explain why they just have a P.O. in Madison and you're getting one day turnaround.
Then it must be on a case by case basis because my girlfriends dad is on a firstname basis with the netflix delivery guys in Madison, WI and they just pick up all of their envelopes in a big bin to go back to the processing facility. If you look at the time stamp on your account that they received it back you can can see when it was scanned, if it isn't from 6pm-4am the USPS probably didn't do it.
"You never agree to any EULA when purchasing software, at least I have never done so, and in the few cases were that might be so, it is never an agreement with the shop, which would be the one regulating the purchase anyway."
Exactly my point. It's not a contract with the clerk, and thus he cannot void the EULA by entering into a EULA with you governing your purchase of the softwere. It's two different agreements affecting three different parties.
" We need to be able to include everyone in this community.
Why?
Just that. Why? "
Obviously you're not one of the people who wants linux to become a mainstream desktop operating system either in the near future or ever for that matter?
No kidding, I was shocked when I read the headline, then I realized that everyone in my mothers office, at least 16 people, all women, probably play Bejeweled for two hours a day.
Got some time before work? Got a few minutes to spare? Maybe just no one's looking? Bejeweled!
I would disagree. Legally you don't own the software you've bought, only the right to lease the code from the maker for the purpose of temporary use. A retail clerk doesn't sell you the right to use that software, he sells you the means to access it. When you agree to the EULA you agree not only to have a disc with code on it, which is all the cleak has given you, but to be granter their permission to use that code. And until you have agreed all you've got is a disc and nothing more.
Ticketmaster doesn't sell you being at the concert, ticketmaster sells you a ticket to get in. Would you say that if a venue kicks you out that they've infringed on the contract that you made with ticketmaster to see the show? No, because although ticketmaster and you had an agreement, by entering the concert hall there are a whole other set of rules one must abide by, if you refused to go to a concert at Madison Square Garder because they would put an ink stamp on your hand or make you walk through a metal detector then your behavior is completely beyond ticketmasters realm of caring.
The EULA is an agreement between you and the software company, not you and the merchant that sold it to you. As I state in a sibling post:
"The shop that sells you software can't void the EULA of the software, they're in no way invovled in the agreement between you and the software company. Thus, as I said, the contract you make with the store has absolutely no bearing on your contract with the software company, making it logically impossible for you to negate a software EULA by having the retail clerk enter into an EULA with you."
The shop that sells you software can't void the EULA of the software, they're in no way invovled in the agreement between you and the software company. Thus, as I said, the contract you make with the store has absolutely no bearing on your contract with the software company, making it logically impossible for you to negate a software EULA by having the retail clerk enter into an EULA with you.
Oh no, I fully understand that. The point is if they're losing money with their business model they should either charge me more, or offer me less. Unfortunately they haven't and now it's strictly their problem that I'm running in the red. Interestingly enough, they're not losing money, they're filthy rich, because of the exact reasons you describe. Rather than offer better service in the hopes of gaining a satisfied, loyal customer who would be willing to pay more or get less, they're using the fact that they're the only cable company within 50 miles to gouge absolutely anyone and everyone.
Am I an abuser? Sure. But their practice of buying up all the competitors certainly narrowed my list of targets.
What good is highspeed internet to my home if I can't use it
If all I used the internet for was checking my email and reading/. I'd be more than willing to do it at school or at work, or to leech off one of the wireless users in my building. If I loose the one upside to the deal I have now, which is basically unrestrained traffic to my home, why should I continue to pay for that priviledge?
I wish I still had the free time to keep enough things running that it was saturated all the time. It might make me feel better about paying $30 for access to C-Span.
I would say probably not, because the clerk is in no way a legal party to the contract existing between you and the software manufacturer and would logically be unable to impose legal responcibilities.
IANAL, but that's about how I'd see if going down. Unless of course the software was distributed by Besy Buy etc or, quite possibly, if you bought direct from the distributer such as through Steam.
I used to love Star Wars until I heard one of the key grips endorses slavery now I refuse to watch that abomination, and if anyones want to keep on watch that racist, intolerant, mocker of everything we've come to respect about the inherent dignity of humans than I hope they greeted in their nazi supremicist white power Forced-Labor-Topia! If they want to express their apprecitation on any community forum that isn't there own they better expect to have it deleted.
I'm sure I wont be the last to say it, but from my point of view it's completely uncalled for.
I pay $60 a month because I can't get DSL or naked cable, I'm going to use ever ounce of bandwidth I've paid for. Maybe if the cable monopoly in my town wasn't bending me over my computer desk I wouldn't feel so obligated to get my money's worth from them, but that's what this is really, I've paid for access to a certain amount of bandwidth and given that there were no provisions about the use of that bandwidth beyond what is described by federal law it's mine, mine, mine.
Yes they can change the ToS at any time, without warning, and they can also find themselves a new shill to collect money from. I wonder if they'd get the point when they day after that I cancel my contract.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree completely that what we have today is far from the ideals of the Constitution, my point is that so was what they had then. As you said it men, are men.
I don't think revolution is the solution. What has revolution brought us that reform could not? We end up with the same institutions, the same corruption, just with a different set of leaders.
Just something I picked up reading random things on /. over the years. But I did a little research in case you were curious about the history of AMD:
http://www.digital-daily.com/editorial/amd-history /
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD
So although saying "they were founded to compete with Intel" is incorrect, the part about them not being able to whipe AMD off the map is still pretty true. Due to requirements by chip buyers like IBM and the US military there needs to be at least two chip makes not to mention that, apparently, AMD can legally license quite a bit from Intel keeping technology from becoming far too different, and if they leverage their monopoly too much they risk lawsuits like the kind they're facing now.
Learn something new everyday I guess.
"Is there somewhere someone so inevitably dumb who doesn't know you bastards did it for the petrol? I'll stick to Europe."
To me at least this implies that somehow Europe is above making excuse to cover their asses when oil is concerned. I was merely illustrating that they're just as two-faced as the rest of the world, even if they wont admit it.
The rest of your comment I can't even reply to, because it's a collection of statements that lack "coherence". Coherence is what strings statements together into an "argument". I'll do my best anyway.
You know, the terrorist attack in Madrid?
Yes
What did they do?
The terrorists?(As implied by the fact that they're the only subject you've mentioned) They bombed trains.
Withdraw.
Oh you ment the Spanish, yes, they did, though they continue to fight a war with Basque that has been going for decades, pacifists they aren't. You're also apparently trying to make the point that backing down is what people should do, I'm sure you've got some harsh words for the U.K., and Japan, who depsite being victims of a terrorist strike and repeated kidnappings have not backed down.
You know 9/11?
Yep.
What did they do?
The Terrorists? The Spanish?
Invade.
I assume you mean Americans. Yes they did, your point? Even if we work on your assumption, the Iraqi war was 100% for oil, and just run with it. The American invasions convinced Libya to give up their weapons progran, fostered political reform in Sryria, overthrew the Taliban, who if nothing else are guilty of destroying the priceless history carved into the sides of the Afgan mountains, and topled the regime of Saddam Hussein. Whether it was worth its price in blood, and whther the governments of those nations with be able to solidfy and prosper is another story and up for debate, but regardless of motives no one can claim that it's been all bad.
I am just waiting for the next thing that happen to you and, man, am I going to laugh.
I don't see what I have to do with any of this, considering you don't know thing one about me other than that I'm aware that Germany and France, the largest opponents of the Invasion of Iraq were two of the three largest importers of Iraqi oil. Furthermore, why you would laugh at the suffering of anyone, me, Americans, hell the moon people, is beyond me.
What goes around, comes around.
Someone who laughes at the misfortune of others should take that to heart.
And France and Germany weren't opposing the war just for "the petrol"?
Maybe you should check were all Iraq's oil used to go before you answer that, not to mention where it's going now, becasue it sure as hell isn't the US.
There's actually a law against filming and photographing coffins in transit dating back to the first persion gulf war because those pictures may (and probably will) arrive in the US before the bodies and they don't want familes hearing their children died on CNN before they hear it in person.
The whole thing about people not being able to photograph their childrens coffins was played off like a big Bush Jr censorship issue by the left when he had absolutely nothing to do with it, although Cheney was mildly invovled back int he day.
Maybe I shouldn't tell you about how Alexander Hamilton and his banking buddies got rich buying up confederation currancy for pennies on the dollar and then passing laws that it would all be honored at full value.
Or how much of the revolution was just mob violence at anyone who tried to regulate the economy including the burning of multiple warehouses and private residences because they were involved in British attempts to regulate the illegal rum trade.
Or how Thomas Jefferson, contrary to what Swordfish would tell you, never actually executed a man for treason on the Whitehouse lawn, he did have a man accused of treason and basically run out of town using his political power simply because the two of them didn't get along.
If you want to go a little further down, Abraham Lincoln publicly stated that he had no intrest in slavery either way, it was none of his business. He engaged int eh civil war to hold together the Union and nothing else. His later decision to emancipate the slaves in the area under martial law was commendable, but it wasn't part of his agenda, nor was he able to emancipate the slaves in territory that had remained in the Union as it wasn't under his war-powers control. I have the utmost of respect for the founders of our nation which I believe to be one if, if not the greatest in the world, but these men were far from saints and it's soemthing that people like to overlook.
Intel can't whipe AMD off the map, because then they would be a total monopoly and they'd get broken up like Bell. AMD was created soley to be Intel's competition and make sure there was still a "market" for processors. Or at least that's what I've been informed.
The Dell situation as last I heard is that every once in a while dell will threaten to introduce AMD and Intel gives them a price break, at the same time Intel says they'll stop giving that price break if Dell actually does use AMD. The second part is the illegal part, you can give all the volume discounts you like, but you can't penalize based on your customer also buying from other sources. Toy's 'r' Us got in big trouble for this a while back for trying to punish toy makers if Toy's 'r' Us wasn't going to be the sole distributer of a certain Toy by refusing to carry that model or that line at all. You can do whatever you want to make yourself seem like a more attractive business partner, but you're not allowed to use your marketshare to strongarm other businesses into being an ugly option.
Yeah I'd look into that, because everyone I've ever received is from the city I live in, even though a great-uncle post leads me to beleive the actual facility is in the next town over.
That makes me want to find out if the actual shipping center is in Sun Prarie, because that would explain why they just have a P.O. in Madison and you're getting one day turnaround.
Then it must be on a case by case basis because my girlfriends dad is on a firstname basis with the netflix delivery guys in Madison, WI and they just pick up all of their envelopes in a big bin to go back to the processing facility. If you look at the time stamp on your account that they received it back you can can see when it was scanned, if it isn't from 6pm-4am the USPS probably didn't do it.
"You never agree to any EULA when purchasing software, at least I have never done so, and in the few cases were that might be so, it is never an agreement with the shop, which would be the one regulating the purchase anyway."
Exactly my point. It's not a contract with the clerk, and thus he cannot void the EULA by entering into a EULA with you governing your purchase of the softwere. It's two different agreements affecting three different parties.
" We need to be able to include everyone in this community.
Why?
Just that. Why? "
Obviously you're not one of the people who wants linux to become a mainstream desktop operating system either in the near future or ever for that matter?
No kidding, I was shocked when I read the headline, then I realized that everyone in my mothers office, at least 16 people, all women, probably play Bejeweled for two hours a day.
Got some time before work? Got a few minutes to spare? Maybe just no one's looking? Bejeweled!
I would disagree. Legally you don't own the software you've bought, only the right to lease the code from the maker for the purpose of temporary use. A retail clerk doesn't sell you the right to use that software, he sells you the means to access it. When you agree to the EULA you agree not only to have a disc with code on it, which is all the cleak has given you, but to be granter their permission to use that code. And until you have agreed all you've got is a disc and nothing more.
Ticketmaster doesn't sell you being at the concert, ticketmaster sells you a ticket to get in. Would you say that if a venue kicks you out that they've infringed on the contract that you made with ticketmaster to see the show? No, because although ticketmaster and you had an agreement, by entering the concert hall there are a whole other set of rules one must abide by, if you refused to go to a concert at Madison Square Garder because they would put an ink stamp on your hand or make you walk through a metal detector then your behavior is completely beyond ticketmasters realm of caring.
The EULA is an agreement between you and the software company, not you and the merchant that sold it to you. As I state in a sibling post: "The shop that sells you software can't void the EULA of the software, they're in no way invovled in the agreement between you and the software company. Thus, as I said, the contract you make with the store has absolutely no bearing on your contract with the software company, making it logically impossible for you to negate a software EULA by having the retail clerk enter into an EULA with you."
The shop that sells you software can't void the EULA of the software, they're in no way invovled in the agreement between you and the software company. Thus, as I said, the contract you make with the store has absolutely no bearing on your contract with the software company, making it logically impossible for you to negate a software EULA by having the retail clerk enter into an EULA with you.
Oh no, I fully understand that. The point is if they're losing money with their business model they should either charge me more, or offer me less. Unfortunately they haven't and now it's strictly their problem that I'm running in the red. Interestingly enough, they're not losing money, they're filthy rich, because of the exact reasons you describe. Rather than offer better service in the hopes of gaining a satisfied, loyal customer who would be willing to pay more or get less, they're using the fact that they're the only cable company within 50 miles to gouge absolutely anyone and everyone.
Am I an abuser? Sure. But their practice of buying up all the competitors certainly narrowed my list of targets.
What good is highspeed internet to my home if I can't use it
/. I'd be more than willing to do it at school or at work, or to leech off one of the wireless users in my building. If I loose the one upside to the deal I have now, which is basically unrestrained traffic to my home, why should I continue to pay for that priviledge?
If all I used the internet for was checking my email and reading
If it were feasable to do so I'd mod you up for actually telling me something new.
I thought "the 'pedia" was just the next invention from the people brought us "boxen."
I wish I still had the free time to keep enough things running that it was saturated all the time. It might make me feel better about paying $30 for access to C-Span.
I would say probably not, because the clerk is in no way a legal party to the contract existing between you and the software manufacturer and would logically be unable to impose legal responcibilities. IANAL, but that's about how I'd see if going down. Unless of course the software was distributed by Besy Buy etc or, quite possibly, if you bought direct from the distributer such as through Steam.
I used to love Star Wars until I heard one of the key grips endorses slavery now I refuse to watch that abomination, and if anyones want to keep on watch that racist, intolerant, mocker of everything we've come to respect about the inherent dignity of humans than I hope they greeted in their nazi supremicist white power Forced-Labor-Topia! If they want to express their apprecitation on any community forum that isn't there own they better expect to have it deleted.
Just a side note, "the 'pedia" is ten characters, "wikipedia" is only nine.
Does is really sound that much cooler?
I'm sure I wont be the last to say it, but from my point of view it's completely uncalled for. I pay $60 a month because I can't get DSL or naked cable, I'm going to use ever ounce of bandwidth I've paid for. Maybe if the cable monopoly in my town wasn't bending me over my computer desk I wouldn't feel so obligated to get my money's worth from them, but that's what this is really, I've paid for access to a certain amount of bandwidth and given that there were no provisions about the use of that bandwidth beyond what is described by federal law it's mine, mine, mine.
Yes they can change the ToS at any time, without warning, and they can also find themselves a new shill to collect money from. I wonder if they'd get the point when they day after that I cancel my contract.