Most people compare the HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray debate to Beta vs VHS, which is inaccurate. Before both formats, there wasn't an established mechanism for television video recording. This is more like DVD-Audio vs SACD, in which case both formats have barely survived, because CDs are fine for most people. And, as far as I know, there's no way (nor any point) to rip multichannel music to a portable media device.
For most people, the DVDs they have in their collection is going to be as good as they need, at least for a few more years.
You do know there's a difference between being outspoken about policies with which you disagree and calling for the murder of another human being, right?
Wrong again. It says that Wikipedia can't be held liable for the libel provided by one of the submitters. It does not provide protection for the person who authored the article.
Also, if you read the act itself, it's designed to control obscenity and pr0nography, libel is never mentioned in the act.
You're attempting to shift responsibility of speech to the audience, not the speaker. That's blatantly wrong. No one has a right to say exactly what they want, when they want, and how they want 100% of the time without consequence . If I yell "Bomb" in an airport, can I tell the federal agents that have my neck in a knot that I was just trying to get to the front of the line?
We have a duty to understand the effects of the speech we make. While I agree that anyone who reads a Wikipedia article should take it with a grain of salt, that doesn't mean that persons who intentionally provide misinformation should not be held accountable.
You're the only person responsible for the words and ideas you convey; to suggest you can't be held accountable for it is simply asinine.
How about posting the information of the "student who wishes to remain anonymous," but uses his blog to post whatever the hell he wants. Let's show him what free speech is really all about.
Neverminding the fact that the price of the entire console is cheaper than the "latest and greatest" video cards from either of the major manufacturers, typically.
You keep using that same 50% rate of return, but you don't specify what it's a percentage of, or where you get your source information.
If one of these stores only got 5 or 10 units, then whoopdee-freakin-do if they have a high percentage of returns. Also, given that there are three gamestops within a mile of each other near where I live, it wouldn't be unreasonable that a unit was purchased at one store, and then returned at another.
Unless you have hard numbers to justify your claims, 61% of your statistics and 13% are made-up.
once you're tired of playing the games it'll end up in the back of the closet, covered with hardened Cheeto grease, dust, a few dents from being kicked when things didn't go quite to plan in a game and utterly forgotten until Garage Sale Season
It's been my experience that cheetos tend to leave more of a powdery residue than a greasy one
Microsoft is under some crazy dellusion that this is some hook into the household which will bring more fish in.
We've never heard Sony make those claims!
For the most part, though, I agree. Let the fanboys buy in the first year. I'll wait till they drop below US$200
A few years ago, I had to do the same thing when I worked for a company headquartered in Nebraska. I lived in Nebraska, but I worked at a branch office in Carter Lake, IA. Had to pay taxes to both Nebraska and Iowa.
Actually, there were 21 named storms in 1933. From the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory's Hurricane Research Division:
During World War II, tropical cyclones were informally given women's names by US Army Air Corp and Navy meteorologists (after their girlfriends or wives) who were monitoring and forecasting tropical cyclones over the Pacific. From 1950 to 1952, tropical cyclones of the North Atlantic Ocean were identified by the phonetic alphabet (Able-Baker-Charlie-etc.), but in 1953 the US Weather Bureau switched to women's names. In 1979, the WMO and the US National Weather Service (NWS) switched to a list of names that also included men's names.
I think the first argument is entirely valid. If I'm going to Wikipedia to get information, I should expect a reasonable attempt at providing valid information.
A better analogy, however, might simply be, "Someone goes into the restaurant and orders fettucine alfredo, is given mac & cheese, and then is blissfully ignorant of the fact that the $12 meal was from an 89 cent box, and nowhere near what they actually ordered.
"In which case, said diner would then find out well after the fact that they did, indeed serve him macaroni and cheese, and are then told that if they wanted fettucine alfredo, they should first learn how to make it, and they can start a new job as the restaurant's head pasta chef. For free."
Slashdot Mirror
You are so right.
Most people compare the HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray debate to Beta vs VHS, which is inaccurate. Before both formats, there wasn't an established mechanism for television video recording. This is more like DVD-Audio vs SACD, in which case both formats have barely survived, because CDs are fine for most people. And, as far as I know, there's no way (nor any point) to rip multichannel music to a portable media device.
For most people, the DVDs they have in their collection is going to be as good as they need, at least for a few more years.
I'm pretty sure it was Frodo and Gollum
I believe you mean "linup."
You do know there's a difference between being outspoken about policies with which you disagree and calling for the murder of another human being, right?
If it makes you feel better, you missed FP by about a minute.
Deceptive and disparaging odors?!
I like it!
Wrong again.
It says that Wikipedia can't be held liable for the libel provided by one of the submitters. It does not provide protection for the person who authored the article.
Also, if you read the act itself, it's designed to control obscenity and pr0nography, libel is never mentioned in the act.
You're attempting to shift responsibility of speech to the audience, not the speaker. That's blatantly wrong. No one has a right to say exactly what they want, when they want, and how they want 100% of the time without consequence . If I yell "Bomb" in an airport, can I tell the federal agents that have my neck in a knot that I was just trying to get to the front of the line?
We have a duty to understand the effects of the speech we make. While I agree that anyone who reads a Wikipedia article should take it with a grain of salt, that doesn't mean that persons who intentionally provide misinformation should not be held accountable.
You're the only person responsible for the words and ideas you convey; to suggest you can't be held accountable for it is simply asinine.
Libel isn't limited to ink and paper. Anything that is visibly disparaging of another can be considered libelous, versus slander, which is audible.
Actually, it might be considered libelous
Maybe if they required you to buy a refrigerator to get the Xbox360, but I hardly think that games and accessories are "unrelated."
How about posting the information of the "student who wishes to remain anonymous," but uses his blog to post whatever the hell he wants. Let's show him what free speech is really all about.
Neverminding the fact that the price of the entire console is cheaper than the "latest and greatest" video cards from either of the major manufacturers, typically.
I mean, stereotypically
What is it exactly that makes him "stereotypical," instead of just plain "typical?"
I don't have that kinda patience.
I ended up completely uninstalling, and removing all firefox directories
I can.
It tells me to edit options to allow software download, and there's no freaking option to edit that allows me to download software.
You keep using that same 50% rate of return, but you don't specify what it's a percentage of, or where you get your source information.
If one of these stores only got 5 or 10 units, then whoopdee-freakin-do if they have a high percentage of returns. Also, given that there are three gamestops within a mile of each other near where I live, it wouldn't be unreasonable that a unit was purchased at one store, and then returned at another.
Unless you have hard numbers to justify your claims, 61% of your statistics and 13% are made-up.
once you're tired of playing the games it'll end up in the back of the closet, covered with hardened Cheeto grease, dust, a few dents from being kicked when things didn't go quite to plan in a game and utterly forgotten until Garage Sale Season
It's been my experience that cheetos tend to leave more of a powdery residue than a greasy one
Microsoft is under some crazy dellusion that this is some hook into the household which will bring more fish in.
We've never heard Sony make those claims!
For the most part, though, I agree. Let the fanboys buy in the first year. I'll wait till they drop below US$200
If again, someone misses the joke.
That's because it's not accepted as a valid theory in most circles. I think most /.ers believe in Evolution anyway.
A few years ago, I had to do the same thing when I worked for a company headquartered in Nebraska. I lived in Nebraska, but I worked at a branch office in Carter Lake, IA. Had to pay taxes to both Nebraska and Iowa.
Bastages.
As it is, they're illegal practices will now be used to protect Rambus against the law.
I'm sure you mean to say "their," just as the submitter meant to say "there are" instead of what he/she used when typing...
They're = They are
Actually, there were 21 named storms in 1933. From the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory's Hurricane Research Division:
During World War II, tropical cyclones were informally given women's names by US Army Air Corp and Navy meteorologists (after their girlfriends or wives) who were monitoring and forecasting tropical cyclones over the Pacific. From 1950 to 1952, tropical cyclones of the North Atlantic Ocean were identified by the phonetic alphabet (Able-Baker-Charlie-etc.), but in 1953 the US Weather Bureau switched to women's names. In 1979, the WMO and the US National Weather Service (NWS) switched to a list of names that also included men's names.
I disagree.
I think the first argument is entirely valid. If I'm going to Wikipedia to get information, I should expect a reasonable attempt at providing valid information.
A better analogy, however, might simply be, "Someone goes into the restaurant and orders fettucine alfredo, is given mac & cheese, and then is blissfully ignorant of the fact that the $12 meal was from an 89 cent box, and nowhere near what they actually ordered.
"In which case, said diner would then find out well after the fact that they did, indeed serve him macaroni and cheese, and are then told that if they wanted fettucine alfredo, they should first learn how to make it, and they can start a new job as the restaurant's head pasta chef. For free."
That's been historically true of a lot of reference books. For example Samuel Johnson's Dictionary