And who exactly will be taken to court? Tux? Who is going to foot the bill for Tux's defence?
I joke, but even if let's say Red Hat took up the challenge, the cost of a lengthy court case would drive them into the ground. MS has much more money to throw at top notch lawyers. If you haven't realized it yet, the US legal system is more about how much money you have to spend on defence and less about actual justice.
Do you need a 350hp Hemi engine in order to use your air conditioning, power steering, brakes, cruise control, radio, and power windows? Your analogy does not apply, sorry.
Turn off aero. Turn on "Windows Classic" desktop theme. You're good to go with 1GB of memory. Microsoft could tell you the same thing, but then the best features that they offer in this bloated release won't even be used (and it is these features MS is stressing based on print ads and commercials).
MS knows shineys sell software to Joe Sixpack, so they don't mind the extra memory it takes to run them all the time. However, I'd don't think vista needs 4 gigs of memory to run snappy with all the goodies turned off.
So who out there thinks there's some behind-the-scenes scheming between Microsoft and the major memory manufacturers? 4GB to run a friggin' OS? Puhleese...
You think you have it bad, I live in Detroit (in the 'burbs, but I frequent the actual city on a daily basis), and the cops couldn't care less about solving crimes here. My friend who does live in the city had her car stolen out from in front of her apartment. When she went down to the police station they laughed at her because she was so upset. They told her that she should expect to have at least one car stolen while living in the city. If there were more patrols, this might not even have happened in the first place.
Your nailed it right when you said "speed enforcement racket" because that is all it is. If the police were really out there to slow people down so less accidents happen, then they would:
a) have a very visible presence in traffic so that people could see that they are keeping tabs on it. Instead, they hide in the bushes so that drivers can't see them, and when people do see them they tend to slam on their breaks to slow down before they get checked. It can be argued that this causes way more accidents than speeding, but it is beside the point.
b) issue more points per violation on your license instead of a monetary fine. Don't you find it strange that the fines go up all the time, but the points you get per violation stay the same? If they wanted to slow people down, they'd start a "3 offenses and you get a suspended license" campaign.
Cops issue tickets to make money for the department, and thats the only reason. Case in point, in my home town during that midterm elections, we voted down giving the PD more funds to renovate their headquarters (the place is already pristine). The next day, they gave out a record number of speeding tickets.
Companies fire people all the time for addiction. Why else would they make you take drug tests pre-employment and sometimes during employment? If you are addicted to drugs and show up to work high, you're gonna get fired. Why should it be different if you're addicted to porn and look at it at work, on the company's computer?
Because you are using the company's resources, and that means you must follow their rules. If you use IBM's computer, and use their internet connection during time they are paying you to work, then they had every right to fire this guy if he was visiting porn sites. I'm sure there is an employee handbook detailing what is considered appropriate computer use at work. Every employer I've worked for has made it pretty explicit.
Its just like you can't use racial slurs, sexually charged language, and other offensive things at work. Someone could be walking by, see your porn on your workstation, and be offended.
Managers may have lost touch with the latest techno-babble, but they should not be berated because of it. They are obviously smart individuals who were neck deep in the technology of their time. When you are a manager, you have a reasonable level of expectation that your employees will be knowledgeable of the most current technology.
Many high level concepts such as requirements, design, group management, etc can be managed by people and they don't have to have intimate knowledge of the latest technology. I am not saying that management should not learn it, but they should expect their employees to be the experts.
Why is it that there are a lot of people in IT who are so snobbish "omg!!!@!!!.... you don't know about xyz technology, you made a mistake hahahhadjhaflkdjfs luser." Are other technical/engineering fields like this? (not a knock on the parent post, just askin' in general).
I think guild wars does a good job of focusing on skill rather than pure character level. Sure you gain more skills as you progress, but thats expected since you are learning your profession. What I like the most is that you can always find uses for those beginning, basic skills combined with your new ones.
I think this is the one thing that crpgs lack: the use of beginning skills in the late game. I hate it how a dagger is usually seen as a "starting weapon" and later on you upgrade to longswords and battle axes. I think modern crpgs should adopt a more complex character and combat system, where different weapons/skills are used based on the situation, not their base power. If you are going into war, choose the longsword. If you want to slice someone's throat, use the dagger.
When people switch price tags on items (lets say a tag from a $5 mousepad to a $50 logitech mouse), and the cashier is clueless on how much the items go for, the customer can still be prosecuted for shoplifting. It has happened.
Most of the nation was settled with the horse in mind. Think of all of the major historical big cities: San Fransisco, Chicago, Detroit, New York, etc. etc. Now look at a map of major railways. You'll see that most major cities were connected by rail before they connected by road.
The automobile contributed to sprawl around major urban centers, but it did not contribute to the way the country was initially populated.
As an aside, for anyone interested, here is an interesting wikipedia article regarding population growth around major population centers.
While Amazon.com did make a mistake, the advertised price was buy one get one free. Even though the checkout stated $0.00, it can be argued that the customer agreed to pay for one of those boxed sets.
While many people have a problem with Amazon, I have had nothing but the best experiences dealing with them. Their customer service has been top notch the one time I have needed them, they ship fast, and they ship for free.
While it sucks that a mistake was made, I think these customers are being a bit greedy expecting to get "something for nothing." While Amazon represents the "big corporation" and people love to screw with big companies (and some probably deserve it), I think its morally wrong for people to expect to not have to pay for the merchandise received.
If someone steals your registered gun and murders someone with it, leaving the gun at the scene, guess who's going to be knocking on YOUR door... I'm not saying that a good lawyer couldn't get you out of it in court, but the fact is they will still drag you in as a suspect.
Same thing if you leave your wireless connection on unprotected and someone uses it for something illegal.
Not if you go to the library... how many people do you know that have a personal collection of encyclopedias in their household. Encarta doesn't count...
Typical/. The story I submitted yesterday was accepted, but has not appeared on either the front page or the sub-headings. Yet, we are already getting dupes of yesterdays stories....
Why is it not science? I think what is called "string theory" should probably be renamed "String hypothesis" since that is what it really is IMHO. A science means following the scientific method, and the ideas proposed in string theory make up the hypothesis, and now researchers need to focus on experiments that test the theory. If the observable findings agree with the hypothesis on a regular basis, then we can call it a theory.
But to call it "not science" is just ignorant. People used to laugh at individuals who thought the Earth was round you know..
Its not that $10 is breaking the bank, and its not even the fact that we are getting 2 hours of entertainment for that $10. Its the quality of entertainment. For one thing, I think everyone can agree that most movies aren't worth paying to see. The other thing is noisy rude people, sticky floors, tall people sitting in front of you (non-stadium theaters), etc etc.
For those who play video games, $40.00 for a game usually equals at least 15 hours of entertainment, which is roughly $2.50 an hour. Looking at it that way, a movie is still overpriced.
Actually, I never go to the theater. I know that doesn't mean other/.ers don't either, but all I'm saying is that I haven't been to a movie since star wars ep III, and neither have any of my friends.
The reason I did go to star wars is because of what you said: it was an experience. Standing in line with fellow star wars geeks, looking at the costumes, and being able to say "hey, I was there opening day." It was worth the $9.00 for the ticket.
For any other movie, the $9.00 is just not worth it. For most movies, there isn't a crazy obsessed fan base. It is simply normal people, who gab on their cell phones, kick the seat, talk through the movie... etc. No one dared talk through star wars, everyone was a true fan. Most other movies, they are just there for something to do.
Movie theaters are declining. In my area alone, most of the smaller theaters have gone under, or are converted to dollar shows. They are replaced by two main gigantic 30 screen cinemas. I have to believe that this consolidation is due to lack of demand for the theater experience.
I don't want to see the theater die for the simple fact that there are some movies, such as star wars, that I would want to see there. However, they either need to lower the outrageous ticket price or add more to the experience. My suggestion is to have theaters that are 21 and older. This way, the teenie-bopper problem is taken care of, and they can serve alcohol. This way they can lower ticket prices and more than make up for it in bar sales. Its a lot better than going to some local bar where they charge you a cover to see some crap local band play covers.
Because there is no physical product here, you are paying to copy some bits to your hard drive. This is what makes sales of digital content a fuzzy area. Usually you can only return an opened product if it is faulty. A digital download is never faulty. If you want to claim that you never listened to the song, how can the company tell, and how can they ensure that the file is deleted after you return it? You can't return software or music on physical media if it has been opened, why should it be any different for a download? I'd say most companies say that if you choose to download the file, it is considered "opened."
Except that every computer has IE installed. What is the average user going to do? Write walmart a nasty letter because firefox won't work on their site, or just click on the little blue "e" and copy the URL into internet explorer? You must remember that us techno-geeks don't make up a whole lot of marketshare. The average user is just going to use what works.
Slashdot Mirror
And who exactly will be taken to court? Tux? Who is going to foot the bill for Tux's defence?
I joke, but even if let's say Red Hat took up the challenge, the cost of a lengthy court case would drive them into the ground. MS has much more money to throw at top notch lawyers. If you haven't realized it yet, the US legal system is more about how much money you have to spend on defence and less about actual justice.
Do you need a 350hp Hemi engine in order to use your air conditioning, power steering, brakes, cruise control, radio, and power windows? Your analogy does not apply, sorry.
Turn off aero. Turn on "Windows Classic" desktop theme. You're good to go with 1GB of memory. Microsoft could tell you the same thing, but then the best features that they offer in this bloated release won't even be used (and it is these features MS is stressing based on print ads and commercials).
MS knows shineys sell software to Joe Sixpack, so they don't mind the extra memory it takes to run them all the time. However, I'd don't think vista needs 4 gigs of memory to run snappy with all the goodies turned off.
So who out there thinks there's some behind-the-scenes scheming between Microsoft and the major memory manufacturers? 4GB to run a friggin' OS? Puhleese...
You think you have it bad, I live in Detroit (in the 'burbs, but I frequent the actual city on a daily basis), and the cops couldn't care less about solving crimes here. My friend who does live in the city had her car stolen out from in front of her apartment. When she went down to the police station they laughed at her because she was so upset. They told her that she should expect to have at least one car stolen while living in the city. If there were more patrols, this might not even have happened in the first place.
Your nailed it right when you said "speed enforcement racket" because that is all it is. If the police were really out there to slow people down so less accidents happen, then they would:
a) have a very visible presence in traffic so that people could see that they are keeping tabs on it. Instead, they hide in the bushes so that drivers can't see them, and when people do see them they tend to slam on their breaks to slow down before they get checked. It can be argued that this causes way more accidents than speeding, but it is beside the point.
b) issue more points per violation on your license instead of a monetary fine. Don't you find it strange that the fines go up all the time, but the points you get per violation stay the same? If they wanted to slow people down, they'd start a "3 offenses and you get a suspended license" campaign.
Cops issue tickets to make money for the department, and thats the only reason. Case in point, in my home town during that midterm elections, we voted down giving the PD more funds to renovate their headquarters (the place is already pristine). The next day, they gave out a record number of speeding tickets.
Companies fire people all the time for addiction. Why else would they make you take drug tests pre-employment and sometimes during employment? If you are addicted to drugs and show up to work high, you're gonna get fired. Why should it be different if you're addicted to porn and look at it at work, on the company's computer?
Because you are using the company's resources, and that means you must follow their rules. If you use IBM's computer, and use their internet connection during time they are paying you to work, then they had every right to fire this guy if he was visiting porn sites. I'm sure there is an employee handbook detailing what is considered appropriate computer use at work. Every employer I've worked for has made it pretty explicit.
Its just like you can't use racial slurs, sexually charged language, and other offensive things at work. Someone could be walking by, see your porn on your workstation, and be offended.
Managers may have lost touch with the latest techno-babble, but they should not be berated because of it. They are obviously smart individuals who were neck deep in the technology of their time. When you are a manager, you have a reasonable level of expectation that your employees will be knowledgeable of the most current technology.
Many high level concepts such as requirements, design, group management, etc can be managed by people and they don't have to have intimate knowledge of the latest technology. I am not saying that management should not learn it, but they should expect their employees to be the experts.
Why is it that there are a lot of people in IT who are so snobbish "omg!!!@!!!.... you don't know about xyz technology, you made a mistake hahahhadjhaflkdjfs luser." Are other technical/engineering fields like this? (not a knock on the parent post, just askin' in general).
I think guild wars does a good job of focusing on skill rather than pure character level. Sure you gain more skills as you progress, but thats expected since you are learning your profession. What I like the most is that you can always find uses for those beginning, basic skills combined with your new ones.
I think this is the one thing that crpgs lack: the use of beginning skills in the late game. I hate it how a dagger is usually seen as a "starting weapon" and later on you upgrade to longswords and battle axes. I think modern crpgs should adopt a more complex character and combat system, where different weapons/skills are used based on the situation, not their base power. If you are going into war, choose the longsword. If you want to slice someone's throat, use the dagger.
I realize this. I was just saying that replying to the original wal-mart analogy saying it doesn't translate to online purchases.
When people switch price tags on items (lets say a tag from a $5 mousepad to a $50 logitech mouse), and the cashier is clueless on how much the items go for, the customer can still be prosecuted for shoplifting. It has happened.
Most of the nation was settled with the horse in mind. Think of all of the major historical big cities: San Fransisco, Chicago, Detroit, New York, etc. etc. Now look at a map of major railways. You'll see that most major cities were connected by rail before they connected by road.
The automobile contributed to sprawl around major urban centers, but it did not contribute to the way the country was initially populated.
As an aside, for anyone interested, here is an interesting wikipedia article regarding population growth around major population centers.
While Amazon.com did make a mistake, the advertised price was buy one get one free. Even though the checkout stated $0.00, it can be argued that the customer agreed to pay for one of those boxed sets.
While many people have a problem with Amazon, I have had nothing but the best experiences dealing with them. Their customer service has been top notch the one time I have needed them, they ship fast, and they ship for free.
While it sucks that a mistake was made, I think these customers are being a bit greedy expecting to get "something for nothing." While Amazon represents the "big corporation" and people love to screw with big companies (and some probably deserve it), I think its morally wrong for people to expect to not have to pay for the merchandise received.
If someone steals your registered gun and murders someone with it, leaving the gun at the scene, guess who's going to be knocking on YOUR door... I'm not saying that a good lawyer couldn't get you out of it in court, but the fact is they will still drag you in as a suspect.
Same thing if you leave your wireless connection on unprotected and someone uses it for something illegal.
Not if you go to the library... how many people do you know that have a personal collection of encyclopedias in their household. Encarta doesn't count...
Typical /. The story I submitted yesterday was accepted, but has not appeared on either the front page or the sub-headings. Yet, we are already getting dupes of yesterdays stories....
Why is it not science? I think what is called "string theory" should probably be renamed "String hypothesis" since that is what it really is IMHO. A science means following the scientific method, and the ideas proposed in string theory make up the hypothesis, and now researchers need to focus on experiments that test the theory. If the observable findings agree with the hypothesis on a regular basis, then we can call it a theory.
But to call it "not science" is just ignorant. People used to laugh at individuals who thought the Earth was round you know..
Its not that $10 is breaking the bank, and its not even the fact that we are getting 2 hours of entertainment for that $10. Its the quality of entertainment. For one thing, I think everyone can agree that most movies aren't worth paying to see. The other thing is noisy rude people, sticky floors, tall people sitting in front of you (non-stadium theaters), etc etc.
For those who play video games, $40.00 for a game usually equals at least 15 hours of entertainment, which is roughly $2.50 an hour. Looking at it that way, a movie is still overpriced.
Some like E. coli are so useful that we even enthusiastically encourage (Yoplait anyone?).
Where do you buy yogurt, the public restroom???
When has that ever stopped US??!!?? ;)
Actually, I never go to the theater. I know that doesn't mean other /.ers don't either, but all I'm saying is that I haven't been to a movie since star wars ep III, and neither have any of my friends.
The reason I did go to star wars is because of what you said: it was an experience. Standing in line with fellow star wars geeks, looking at the costumes, and being able to say "hey, I was there opening day." It was worth the $9.00 for the ticket.
For any other movie, the $9.00 is just not worth it. For most movies, there isn't a crazy obsessed fan base. It is simply normal people, who gab on their cell phones, kick the seat, talk through the movie... etc. No one dared talk through star wars, everyone was a true fan. Most other movies, they are just there for something to do.
Movie theaters are declining. In my area alone, most of the smaller theaters have gone under, or are converted to dollar shows. They are replaced by two main gigantic 30 screen cinemas. I have to believe that this consolidation is due to lack of demand for the theater experience.
I don't want to see the theater die for the simple fact that there are some movies, such as star wars, that I would want to see there. However, they either need to lower the outrageous ticket price or add more to the experience. My suggestion is to have theaters that are 21 and older. This way, the teenie-bopper problem is taken care of, and they can serve alcohol. This way they can lower ticket prices and more than make up for it in bar sales. Its a lot better than going to some local bar where they charge you a cover to see some crap local band play covers.
Thanks, you've allowed me to realize that hot coffee coming out of my nose hurts.... too funny
Because there is no physical product here, you are paying to copy some bits to your hard drive. This is what makes sales of digital content a fuzzy area. Usually you can only return an opened product if it is faulty. A digital download is never faulty. If you want to claim that you never listened to the song, how can the company tell, and how can they ensure that the file is deleted after you return it? You can't return software or music on physical media if it has been opened, why should it be any different for a download? I'd say most companies say that if you choose to download the file, it is considered "opened."
Except that every computer has IE installed. What is the average user going to do? Write walmart a nasty letter because firefox won't work on their site, or just click on the little blue "e" and copy the URL into internet explorer? You must remember that us techno-geeks don't make up a whole lot of marketshare. The average user is just going to use what works.