There are ideas that cannot be easily expressed in Greek and ideas that cannot be easily expressed in Syriac. To me, this is (no offense) bullshit. People always say that you need different languages to express different ideas. That there just aren't the words in Language 1 to express the idea in Language 2. How can this be unless the people of Lang 1 are fundamentally different individuals than people of Lang 2 and, really, they're not. People have more or less the same basic emotions and senses. Since they have the same basic needs, they have the same basic environment. It isn't like a tree and a bacteria attempting to describe their worldviews to each other.
So a language doesn't have the word to describe that X. Well, it can (and many do) appropriate them. English speakers certainly knew the feeling of taking pleasure in the misfortune of others before the appropriation of schadenfreude. It's not like anyone says "I have no idea what feeling you're talking about". And, prior to the appropriation, one could use the clumsy "took pleasure in the misfortune of others" to describe it.
All used human languages should be 'turing complete' and therefore equally 'powerful' at expressing anything a human needs to express.
Actually, there's never a reason to use an apostrophe to pluralise. The prescriptively correct answers are 90s (well, technically '90s since you're eliminating letters) and CDs.
It's possible for there to be "not enough H1Bs" and "too many people hired" if the company simply hired more people outside of the US. Google has offices in Europe and Asia - perhaps they increased the staffing there because they couldn't get the people they wanted in the US.
1. Apple has no control over the non-DRMed version of AAC. AAC itself is entirely non-Apple proprietary.
2. Apple is pushing for companies to offer non-DRMed music files. These will play on any device which support AAC (again, something which has nothing to do with Apple).
To summarise: an iTunes Plus track ought to play on a Zune or my Nokia E65 without problem because they are non-DRMed, standard music files in a published format that the devices support.
I believe they don't actually pay a dentist to come there. Instead they allow a dentist to work onsite.
The dentist ends up with a guaranteed client base, and, who knows? Maybe waives patient copays or something.
You could argue that there is still a cost to the company in this situation given that the space of a dentist office is not available for normal employees to work but I suspect the company reaps a larger benefit in more efficient working where some percentage of people aren't taking time off to travel to dentists and back.
Why should HD search be an OS utility? OSes haven't ever really offered it until the last 10 years, maybe.
Besides, Google doesn't search your hard drive any more than MS or Apple is when you use Vista or Spotlight. They don't send data to Google about your files.
I hear the Katana sucks. I was at a bachelor party this weekend and a friend of mine who recently got one was complaining that it dials random phone numbers while closed in his pocket.
Me? I'm interested in the Nokia N95. That phone looks awesome.
It's not hard to figure out that if you wait 6 months, you can get a better computer at the same price from Dell/Apple/HP. People don't go whining nearly as much about that and computers can cost up to $3,000.
Meanwhile, you're slagging Nintendo for upgrading their $200 or less hardware every 2 years?
google complains that they can't hire anyone, yet they put offices in two places where lots of people won't live. NYC and California. Most people won't live in NYC or California because it's "too crowded" and "expensive". Can you think of any reason why those two things might be the case? Hint: It has to do with their populations.
Jobs' posting addresses that exact assertion saying that as a lock-in, it's ineffective:
Some have argued that once a consumer purchases a body of music from one of the proprietary music stores, they are forever locked into only using music players from that one company. Or, if they buy a specific player, they are locked into buying music only from that company's music store. Is this true? Let's look at the data for iPods and the iTunes store - they are the industry's most popular products and we have accurate data for them. Through the end of 2006, customers purchased a total of 90 million iPods and 2 billion songs from the iTunes store. On average, that's 22 songs purchased from the iTunes store for each iPod ever sold.
Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the open formats. Its hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked into the iTunes store to acquire their music. Whether he's lying or not is an exercise to the reader but that is an exact quote from the story.
There is no on/off control and the battery life sacrifices that result are dumped on the end user. Huh? Just hold down the play button and it shuts off.
The wrong part of your argument is that you haven't entered into a contract yet. The relevent wikipedia article is Invitation to Treat. The moment you ask "how much?", they invite you to offer them $N.
While this seems confusing and wrong, the most important part is:
A shop owner displaying their goods for sale is generally making an invitation to treat (Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists [1953] 1 QB 401). They are not obliged to sell the good to anyone who is willing to pay for them, even if additional signage such as "special offer" accompanies the display of the good. This distinction was legally relevant in Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394, where it was held that displaying a flicknife for sale in a shop did not contravene legislation which prohibited offering for sale such a weapon. The distinction also means that if a shop mistakenly displays a good for sale at a very low price it is not obliged to sell it for that amount [1].
Generally, advertisements are invitations to treat, so the person advertising is not compelled to sell to every customer.
Just like in the case where a merchant is out of stock and is therefore not obligated to still somehow sell you the product, if the bus is completely full or out of service, the driver is not obligated to accept your money and allow you to ride.
"Mr Slattery called himself an iTunes customer who "was also forced to purchase an Apple iPod" if he wanted to take his music with him to listen to."
The fact that he can burn the music onto a CD easily permits him to "take his music with him to listen to".
Or are there not any portable CD players on the market?
Because he can burn a CD, he has no argument, IMO. I'm pretty certain that the # of portable MP3 players is dwarfed by the # of portable CD players out there.
Actually, although there are dire warnings about "Don't use your house phone jacks", I shut off my phone service, connected vonage's phone port to the wall and am able to use the phones. I imagine there would be a problem if the phone company was also using the jacks but since the service is disconnected, I've not had any problems in the past 9 months of using it in this way.
You entirely have the right to do whatever you like to *your* iPod. If Real provided their software as a firmware update or something to the iPod you have the right to change the firmware (this may cause you to lose your warranty with Apple but that's a separate issue). Apple cannot and will not try to sue you or stop you from using your iPod regardless of what you do with it (except maybe if you try and bludgeon an Apple employee with it). Apple is not infringing on your rights. Apple cannot demand you update your iPod to break Real's workaround but they can provide you incentives to have you change (upgrade your firmware and you get new capability X).
Real, OTOH, does not have a right to increase their profit by using Apple's intellectual property without a license. If Real wanted, they could come up with some system that sent un-DRMed files to the iPod and Apple would not have a problem nor a leg to stand on if they did. Instead they've decided to break Apple's system and use it.
I'll reiterate: *You* have a right to do whatever you want with your iPod. Real does *not* have the right to use another company's IP without the 1st company's agreement and Real had other options that would have allowed you to play their songs on an iPod but they chose this, potentially illegal method.
let me guess, you went to Barcelona, Paris, London, Amsterdam, Brussels, Copenhagen and the like (eg, the capitals of western Europe).
Actually, I heard he even went outside of London and found a number of English speakers.
The US (and the UK) has repeatedly adjusted the sizes of various units over the years (as has the metric system in defining the meter, second, etc).
At any rate, why doesn't the US simply redefine various units to match more evenly with standard metric units?
For example:
1 pound = 453.59 grams. Why not make 1 pound = 450 or, better, 500 grams. Then 1 lb = 1/2 kg. Easy to convert back and forth!
Similarly, everyone knows 1 meter ~= 1 yard. So redefine the foot to be 1/3 of a meter. Once again, it'd be easy to convert.
And last, 1 qt = 0.946 litres. So change it to be 1 litre. Then a 2 litre bottle of soda would be a 1/2 gallon.
After that, the unit names "ounce", "mile", "inch" become mnemonic terms. People would still use inches because it's more convenient to say than "1/36 of a meter".
Slashdot Mirror
So a language doesn't have the word to describe that X. Well, it can (and many do) appropriate them. English speakers certainly knew the feeling of taking pleasure in the misfortune of others before the appropriation of schadenfreude. It's not like anyone says "I have no idea what feeling you're talking about". And, prior to the appropriation, one could use the clumsy "took pleasure in the misfortune of others" to describe it.
All used human languages should be 'turing complete' and therefore equally 'powerful' at expressing anything a human needs to express.
Actually, there's never a reason to use an apostrophe to pluralise. The prescriptively correct answers are 90s (well, technically '90s since you're eliminating letters) and CDs.
It's possible for there to be "not enough H1Bs" and "too many people hired" if the company simply hired more people outside of the US. Google has offices in Europe and Asia - perhaps they increased the staffing there because they couldn't get the people they wanted in the US.
1. Apple has no control over the non-DRMed version of AAC. AAC itself is entirely non-Apple proprietary.
2. Apple is pushing for companies to offer non-DRMed music files. These will play on any device which support AAC (again, something which has nothing to do with Apple).
To summarise: an iTunes Plus track ought to play on a Zune or my Nokia E65 without problem because they are non-DRMed, standard music files in a published format that the devices support.
I believe they don't actually pay a dentist to come there. Instead they allow a dentist to work onsite.
The dentist ends up with a guaranteed client base, and, who knows? Maybe waives patient copays or something.
You could argue that there is still a cost to the company in this situation given that the space of a dentist office is not available for normal employees to work but I suspect the company reaps a larger benefit in more efficient working where some percentage of people aren't taking time off to travel to dentists and back.
Why should HD search be an OS utility? OSes haven't ever really offered it until the last 10 years, maybe.
Besides, Google doesn't search your hard drive any more than MS or Apple is when you use Vista or Spotlight. They don't send data to Google about your files.
I hear the Katana sucks. I was at a bachelor party this weekend and a friend of mine who recently got one was complaining that it dials random phone numbers while closed in his pocket. Me? I'm interested in the Nokia N95. That phone looks awesome.
;)
Dude, have you ever bought a computer?
It's not hard to figure out that if you wait 6 months, you can get a better computer at the same price from Dell/Apple/HP. People don't go whining nearly as much about that and computers can cost up to $3,000.
Meanwhile, you're slagging Nintendo for upgrading their $200 or less hardware every 2 years?
Long before Apple existed? Apple was incorporated on 1 April 1976. Microsoft was incorporated (just) less than a year prior.
Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the open formats. Its hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked into the iTunes store to acquire their music. Whether he's lying or not is an exercise to the reader but that is an exact quote from the story.
The MBP weighs about a pound less than the Inspiron. This is one reason it costs more. *shrug*
It's amazing how individualistic everyone shows they are by using the term "sheeple".
"Mr Slattery called himself an iTunes customer who "was also forced to purchase an Apple iPod" if he wanted to take his music with him to listen to."
The fact that he can burn the music onto a CD easily permits him to "take his music with him to listen to".
Or are there not any portable CD players on the market?
Because he can burn a CD, he has no argument, IMO. I'm pretty certain that the # of portable MP3 players is dwarfed by the # of portable CD players out there.
Actually, although there are dire warnings about "Don't use your house phone jacks", I shut off my phone service, connected vonage's phone port to the wall and am able to use the phones. I imagine there would be a problem if the phone company was also using the jacks but since the service is disconnected, I've not had any problems in the past 9 months of using it in this way.
You entirely have the right to do whatever you like to *your* iPod. If Real provided their software as a firmware update or something to the iPod you have the right to change the firmware (this may cause you to lose your warranty with Apple but that's a separate issue). Apple cannot and will not try to sue you or stop you from using your iPod regardless of what you do with it (except maybe if you try and bludgeon an Apple employee with it). Apple is not infringing on your rights. Apple cannot demand you update your iPod to break Real's workaround but they can provide you incentives to have you change (upgrade your firmware and you get new capability X).
Real, OTOH, does not have a right to increase their profit by using Apple's intellectual property without a license. If Real wanted, they could come up with some system that sent un-DRMed files to the iPod and Apple would not have a problem nor a leg to stand on if they did. Instead they've decided to break Apple's system and use it.
I'll reiterate: *You* have a right to do whatever you want with your iPod. Real does *not* have the right to use another company's IP without the 1st company's agreement and Real had other options that would have allowed you to play their songs on an iPod but they chose this, potentially illegal method.
Perhaps their hardware uses to open standards but their software doesn't?
Apple won't license their OS to be resold by another hardware manufacturer nor will they license their ROM code.
There are a few custom ASICs and things in Macs but not that many and could probably be reproduced.
Besides, why would it make sense for Apple, a hardware manufacturer, to make it easy for others to duplicate their hardware?
let me guess, you went to Barcelona, Paris, London, Amsterdam, Brussels, Copenhagen and the like (eg, the capitals of western Europe). Actually, I heard he even went outside of London and found a number of English speakers.
Clearly they fall out after they die.
Since when are Microsoft *or* SCO innocent parties to anything?
Well, if you assume they had at least 8 GB of mp3s on their iPods, that means it'd only be 10GB of free space. Therefore, they use them 50 times. :)
The US (and the UK) has repeatedly adjusted the sizes of various units over the years (as has the metric system in defining the meter, second, etc).
At any rate, why doesn't the US simply redefine various units to match more evenly with standard metric units?
For example:
1 pound = 453.59 grams. Why not make 1 pound = 450 or, better, 500 grams. Then 1 lb = 1/2 kg. Easy to convert back and forth!
Similarly, everyone knows 1 meter ~= 1 yard. So redefine the foot to be 1/3 of a meter. Once again, it'd be easy to convert.
And last, 1 qt = 0.946 litres. So change it to be 1 litre. Then a 2 litre bottle of soda would be a 1/2 gallon.
After that, the unit names "ounce", "mile", "inch" become mnemonic terms. People would still use inches because it's more convenient to say than "1/36 of a meter".