I think Mancusi (and LFX) would have done better to go into the details about their "migration to Linux" effort. There really wasn't a whole lot of substance to the interview to draw any meaningful conclusions about... well... anything.
I don't think Linux is ready for the mainstream desktop environment, specifically office functions. The desktop environment is still clunky whether you choose KDE or Gnome. It's improved incredibly, even over the last year or so. The pathetic (and sad) part of this effort to gain market share on the desktop means mimicking Microsoft® Windows. Perhaps the solution lies in finding a new and innovative way of handling the desktop. The status-quo is really starting to suck.
Now, instead of being annoyed by the counter-intuitiveness of a UI on Windows, I'm annoyed on both platforms.
If you use JavaScript to render content, you're going to have a really hard time getting indexed by the search engines. If you're an individual, not such a big deal. If you're a company... make sure you have an alternative to pure javascript so that the search engine robots can find the content.
Same goes for Flash...
I can't believe how many companies spent tens of thousands of dollars on a CMS package, or to a "web designer" that rendered them invisible to the search engines.
The article does recommend a fallback for unsupported browsers. Take this to heart, because "GoogleBot" is an unsupported browser.
You can't start the process when they become a teen. You start the process when they're very young. You can't wake up one day and realize your kids are out of control and expect to get any results.
We have been participative parents from day one. Both of us. We both have had full time jobs. We had to sacrifice the "what about me?! when do I get time for me?!" attitude to pull it off. We didn't decide to expand the family until we were in that frame of mind.
Being a parent (a mature adult who has the capacity to care for a child) begins LONG before conception. If you still have that "Me, me, me!" attitude, don't have kids. I realize some people have unplanned pregnancies. We waited until we were out of that selfish stage to have kids.
I should be more specific for those that come unhinged when they parse words they don't like. Our girls are not trust-worthy teens because we suddenly began being parents when they became teenagers. We have molded and shaped their minds since they were infants.
How's this for a great kid: My 18 year old wanted to get her lip pierced back when she was 16. She got angry and said, "when I'm 18, I can just get it done anyway." Entirely on her own, she's realized that she doesn't *need* to put a hole in her lip to express herself (you know, to express her individuality in exactly the same way as 10 million other teens).
And even so, how is this a raising thing? Kids are having sex, and parents can't stop them from that. How does it make any difference when it's some guy they met at school, planning over AIM and some guy on myspace who happens to be a sexual predator? Again, you don't know everything your child is up to (nor should you), and you never will.
My kids aren't. I don't have to stop them. Apparently they stopped themselves. I can only hope that will remain true once they've moved out -- I have great confidence that it will.
I know generally what my children are up to. More importantly, I know that specifically they have enough self-respect to not cross the line -- out of respect for themselves, and for my wife and I.
I have two teenage daughters. Both of them have MySpace accounts. Neither of them is meeting mysterious men online.
Those girls are my responsibility. I can't expect them to make sound judgements on their own. I also cannot expect the administrators of a site to take responsibility for others' actions. Here we have another case of putting the blame on the drug and not the user. Here's a tip for you parents that think a government agency should step in:
Stop watching T.V., and get to know your kids, and what they're into.
Stop relying on other people to raise your children.
Don't assume that everything is "okay" when your kids say it is.
Know what your kids up to. Ask questions.
Monitor what they do, and make them aware of it.
MySpace is a harmless thing when exposed to smart people. It's the uneducated, unmonitored, and neglected that seem to be the victims. I know everything my girls do on MySpace, and they know it. You should know where your kids are going, and where they're at whether it's a physical location, or a cyber location. I'm not going to have freedoms sacrificed because a select few haven't a clue what their children are up to.
It's easy to blame MySpace because it's hard to raise a child.
There was that one movie with that one guy that eats placentas... uhm... "Minority Report".
I already don't like when they read my credit card and say, "thank you Mr. Fragmentate." Actually, I don't really want them talking to me in a personal manner at all.
You just know that eventually they'll always just know where you are. "Shame on you Mr. Fragmentate... an NC-7 movie? Tsk." I find it hilarious that a good portion of the people recently surveyed by my company about the "evils of browser cookies" were willing to have an implant in their body, but absolutely would not allow cookies.
I don't get it. A harmless text string implanted on your hard-drive that can track you quite anonymously (the net only knows what you tell it) and that you have direct access to; versus a device implanted in your body that you have absolutely no understanding of, or control over.
It's not THAT hard to whip out the driver's license or state-issued ID. I know they're not "secure" but this article isn't talking about security -- it's talking about convenience.
I just bought the game. Now I have to take it back. I would *never* buy a game that was for "Mature" audiences....
Seriously, let them rate it the equivalent of "XXX" -- It's simply a guide for when Jr. carries the box up to Mom in Best Buy and says, "Mommy! Mommy! I really want this game!" -- She can make a judgement of her own. Most stores carry all ESRB rating levels aside from "AO".
$50 saved again, thanks to over-reaction!
Other countries are claiming that the U.S. has mismanaged the internet. Which has led to broad speculation that the internet will splinter soon while those other countries work on their own "Internet."
If one were to judge our use (read: underuse) of the internet on the public level... well, that's just a whole new angle on our lack of efficacy in educating our own. Think about it, at $50/month for a typical broadband connection in this country it's cost-prohibitive for a large segment of the population to access the internet regulary. Sure, there's dialup, but the frustration involved in dialup could discourage an internet "newbie" from using it. Let us also not forget that many, many metro areas have horrible phone lines. Our infrastructure in the U.S. is sad when you consider the fact that we're still (for now) the largest economy in the world.
The best way to build your population up intellectually is through information. The undisputed king of information is the "Internet." Imagine all the eyes that could be opened. Mixed in, of course, with all the idiocy, smut, and exploitation...
But some locales are contemplating making wireless accessible to the general public. So there is a movement. It's just a shame that in the most mighty economy in the world the cost is still prohibitive for a good segment of its population.
Keep squeaking about it... perhaps the corporations will grease the wheel. But I doubt it. What we need is a brave provider to go for the quantity, and not the quality (I never thought I'd say that) -- in other words, make the pricing attractive for everyone.
What was done is that the normal distractions, which for this company was e-mail and instant messaging, were either banned outright, or controlled. In the case of e-mail, it was queued up and held, then released on the half-hour. So that was 2 interruptions from e-mail per hour, at most. The net result was actually a good thing, people actually got up and interacted with each other and kept it on-topic since everyone could hear the conversation. The caveat, of course, was if there was an immediate need. This was handled through the normal ticketing system, which was heavily monitored anyway. Obviously, executives were immune to these measures. They were permitted to be as distracted and distractive as they always have been.
Instant messaging was disallowed, except for IRC, which their IT department monitored. Each group had a channel, and since it's open source, private messaging was disabled. At first, there was much noise about all of this. But people adapted, and, according to the HR team, productivity clearly went up.
The problem is, this doesn't work for everyone. It doesn't work for all groups either.
A little creativity is still necessary.
This company claimed 16 hours a week was spent rifling through e-mail, and 8 hours a week using instant messaging. That left roughly 16 hours a week for these "worst offenders" of actual work. Not nearly an "Office Space" situation, but pretty bad nonetheless.
I remember when Amiga was talking about such an environment. Where the lines between appliances were blurred. They dubbed it Digital Convergence but never went very far with it.
The idea was that all of your devices serve a single purpose (they did in 1998, when this was published). But, Amiga had this vision that they'd develop a platform that could live on a TV, a computer, a mobile phone, even a PDA. You could watch TV on your phone. Or you could use your phone over the TV (huh?). Even better, your phone and your TV could be your computer.
The next ten years are definitely going to be interesting. Will Microsoft ever get this thing off the ground? Or will all of the litigation stifle it?
I realize what Microsoft is talking about is a bit different, at least on the surface. But if they have this portable "media OS" they can certainly take it to the next level -- the level of "Digital Convergence".
All tools add value to the Linux desktop, but if it's not user-friendly none of that matters. To be able to say we have the exact same tools as Windows means nothing if those tools are frustrating to use. We recently began the process of ridding ourselves of certain proprietary software (primarily Microsoft products). It's been painful because after watching a Window-savvy person struggle with Linux I began to understand why Linux hasn't really kicked-in on the desktop yet.
I think the value of a single product is being overstated here. The Linux development community has to work on usability first, as well as product integration. There is a level of inconsistancy between applications that hampers Linux-desktop.
When I think back to the very early versions of Linux (1.0.xx) it's come a long long way. But no single product along the way has contributed any large amount. Primarily, it has been the work of the individuals that understand that, although we don't want a duplicate of Windows, we do want something that people making the switch can more easily slide into.
I am always excited when a new product is ported to Linux-desktop (simply X?). But let's keep things in perspective -- although Xara is quite "neat", it's not going to attract legions of people to Linux all of a sudden.
In truth, this may all help Mac OSX more than Linux...
My son is 10, and only because he's well-adjusted does he get to play some of the games he plays. He still doesn't get to watch anything he wants to on TV. And, yes, I do monitor it and use the simple-to-use tools provided by my cable company to ensure he does not watch those programs.
Certain TV programs, and games may desensitize kids, of that I'm sure. But, as a parent, that's my responsibility. That responsibility does not lie with the ESRB, MPAA, RIAA, or the government. It's mine, and mine alone.
If my son were to turn out the be a thug, it could only have happened because I wasn't paying attention.
...am I the only person who finds notions of pain and suffering odd in what is effectively non-reality? Can you intend to cause pain to something that, well, doesn't feel or perceive pain?
They can only be talking about that very fringe of society that lives vicariously through their in-game characters. I don't remember any of the kids around here (I have a 10yr. old) mistaking any of the gaming as "real." Yet, here they are discussing it as though we were talking about the torture and elimination of... pixels?
Clearly parents aren't responsible enough to make sure their kids aren't deranged, and that they do not feed their psychoses with violent video games.
The only solution is obvious, let a government entity dictate it for us! They've clearly demonstrated tremendous judgement, and organizational skills!
I own an HP camera, and HP PhotoSmart 7760 printer. Here's some real world data for you:
Photo Cartridge: $35
Black Cartridge: $20
Number of pictures printed: 68
That's just under a dollar per print. All prints were 4x6. At that rate, it's just cheaper to run up to the pharmacy and get them printed in duplicate. Yes, twice as many pictures and it's still less expensive.
This whole printing from home thing is probably a great thing for people that have to drive 40 miles to the nearest pharmacy, but for the rest of us... yay? The only good thing about printing at home, you ask?
Well, Paris and Paris can take all the nudies they want of each other and never have them leak to the press! That's easily worth $.80 a print!
Because it's all motivated by greed. It doesn't have to be much more complicated than this. To look for "other reasons" is moot. The RIAA will give you their 10 reasons, 9 of which you'd wipe off as rhetoric. The RIAA-haters will give you their 10 reasons why the RIAA is bad, and you'd wipe away 7 of those as rhetoric.
What remains is the one argument that motivates the RIAA: Profit.
For the anti-RIAA, the 3 arguments:
Paying for a song once is enough.
Having the freedom to "build your own" album is good.
The RIAA needs to adapt and be creative with something besides litigation.
Yes, I've over simplified this. But it gives you an idea of what a segement of both sides feels.
I've heard over and over, from various artists, that the distribution companies just want a product. In other words, they hear 2 or 3 songs they really like from an artist, they simply tell them, "Okay, give me 8 more songs to fill out the album. And it has to be done in 2 months." Deadlines on creativity yield the situation we have today... albums with 1 or 2 good songs, and 8 or 9 other things.
All I have to do is look at my own family (I have 47 cousins). Every single one of them is an iTunes, Rhapsody, or Yahoo! Music subscriber. And their number one reason for going that route is simple: They get the songs they want and can ignore the crappy filler.
The record companies have a problem with this structure. A song is only supposed to last as long as the media it's contained on. Once that media "wears out" you have to buy the song again. This is where most call BS. Once you've payed for a song, you were NOT buying the media, but a license to listen to that song -- to have your own personal copy of that song for your personal listening.
Now, in the digital age, we can keep full-quality copies of all of the songs we've paid for. There is no recurring incoming now. The record companies would prefer the jukebox approach where you pay for a song every single time you listen to it. If they happen to release the song again after remastering, remixing, or with another artist singing it, you pay again; this is fair.
Most companies are making their phones for the carriers. Which means out of the last 4 camera phones I've had, I've had to buy a service to get the pictures off. Yeah, I can buy some 3rd party hack to do the job, but these hacks would work so much better if the phone had been designed for my personal use. Instead, they're designed so the carriers can make more money.
So, they can make all the fancy phones they want, I've ceased buying them.
Now that I think about it, I'm probably the only one that cares...
HEADLINE: Cryosat ($160M) Disappears 90-Min. After Launch
Today, Environmentalists revealed their opinions of what occurred to the Cryosat satellite. They are confident that they now know, and can reproduce the conditions that led to the disappearance of Cryosat. Apparently global warming is to blame. The ship burned up from all of the friction caused by the particulates released by the refineries, and most modern conveniences. However, there is speculation that they were aiming for the hole in the ozone layer, and due to shrinkage of the hole it simply did not fit. Ed Begley Jr. was unavailable for comment. Mecha-Streisand will be called in to conduct the search for the wreckage, if any of it did not disintegrate in the acid layers of the atmosphere created by CFCs.
When questioned about the emissions of the satellite itself, an environmentalist spokesperson had this to say, "We are but a small segment of the population, we don't pollute as much as everyone else because there are so few of us. So, with all that pollutions savings we felt entitled to a bit of smog creation."
Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan postulated that this was all probably President Bush's fault.
What a clever way for Microsoft to cover their vulnerabilities!
Welcome to Microsoft Virus Agent: What you experienced was not a virus, but rather a test we ran to make sure your system was still secure. Please disregard the files with 0xDEADBEEF strewn about them.
Would you also like to enable Microsoft Firewall?
(with Microsoft Firewall you can further help us to hide the holes)
This is such a good idea! At least for this one, I hope Symantec wins.
Neither of them are terribly huge in the search market. Google is the clear winner there. So, let's say they do merge, they jump from 12% market share to... 12% market share?
The paranoid might see this as some sort of threat, I suppose. Perhaps you should look to Google if you want to fuel the flames of your paranoia. They have a pretty aggressive strategy for, well, just about everything. Multimedia, search, searching multimedia, desktop search, hell, I heard they're even coming out with BrainSearch so you can remember who that was you slept with last night.
As for the dialup market... it's dying off. And with so many locales having serious talks of wireless-for-everyone -- why, one taste of the difference between wireless and dialup will sell just about anyone.
Anyone that thinks this is a big deal as far as some monster being created is probably either distributing FUD, or open to buying it.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think Linux is ready for the mainstream desktop environment, specifically office functions. The desktop environment is still clunky whether you choose KDE or Gnome. It's improved incredibly, even over the last year or so. The pathetic (and sad) part of this effort to gain market share on the desktop means mimicking Microsoft® Windows. Perhaps the solution lies in finding a new and innovative way of handling the desktop. The status-quo is really starting to suck.
Now, instead of being annoyed by the counter-intuitiveness of a UI on Windows, I'm annoyed on both platforms.
Thank goodness for Enlightenment.
Same goes for Flash...
I can't believe how many companies spent tens of thousands of dollars on a CMS package, or to a "web designer" that rendered them invisible to the search engines.
The article does recommend a fallback for unsupported browsers. Take this to heart, because "GoogleBot" is an unsupported browser.
You can't start the process when they become a teen. You start the process when they're very young. You can't wake up one day and realize your kids are out of control and expect to get any results.
We have been participative parents from day one. Both of us. We both have had full time jobs. We had to sacrifice the "what about me?! when do I get time for me?!" attitude to pull it off. We didn't decide to expand the family until we were in that frame of mind.
Being a parent (a mature adult who has the capacity to care for a child) begins LONG before conception. If you still have that "Me, me, me!" attitude, don't have kids. I realize some people have unplanned pregnancies. We waited until we were out of that selfish stage to have kids.
I should be more specific for those that come unhinged when they parse words they don't like. Our girls are not trust-worthy teens because we suddenly began being parents when they became teenagers. We have molded and shaped their minds since they were infants.
How's this for a great kid: My 18 year old wanted to get her lip pierced back when she was 16. She got angry and said, "when I'm 18, I can just get it done anyway." Entirely on her own, she's realized that she doesn't *need* to put a hole in her lip to express herself (you know, to express her individuality in exactly the same way as 10 million other teens).
My kids aren't. I don't have to stop them. Apparently they stopped themselves. I can only hope that will remain true once they've moved out -- I have great confidence that it will.
I know generally what my children are up to. More importantly, I know that specifically they have enough self-respect to not cross the line -- out of respect for themselves, and for my wife and I.
I have two teenage daughters. Both of them have MySpace accounts. Neither of them is meeting mysterious men online.
Those girls are my responsibility. I can't expect them to make sound judgements on their own. I also cannot expect the administrators of a site to take responsibility for others' actions. Here we have another case of putting the blame on the drug and not the user. Here's a tip for you parents that think a government agency should step in:
MySpace is a harmless thing when exposed to smart people. It's the uneducated, unmonitored, and neglected that seem to be the victims. I know everything my girls do on MySpace, and they know it. You should know where your kids are going, and where they're at whether it's a physical location, or a cyber location. I'm not going to have freedoms sacrificed because a select few haven't a clue what their children are up to.
It's easy to blame MySpace because it's hard to raise a child.
I already don't like when they read my credit card and say, "thank you Mr. Fragmentate." Actually, I don't really want them talking to me in a personal manner at all.
You just know that eventually they'll always just know where you are. "Shame on you Mr. Fragmentate... an NC-7 movie? Tsk." I find it hilarious that a good portion of the people recently surveyed by my company about the "evils of browser cookies" were willing to have an implant in their body, but absolutely would not allow cookies.
I don't get it. A harmless text string implanted on your hard-drive that can track you quite anonymously (the net only knows what you tell it) and that you have direct access to; versus a device implanted in your body that you have absolutely no understanding of, or control over.
It's not THAT hard to whip out the driver's license or state-issued ID. I know they're not "secure" but this article isn't talking about security -- it's talking about convenience.
I just bought the game. Now I have to take it back. I would *never* buy a game that was for "Mature" audiences. ...
Seriously, let them rate it the equivalent of "XXX" -- It's simply a guide for when Jr. carries the box up to Mom in Best Buy and says, "Mommy! Mommy! I really want this game!" -- She can make a judgement of her own. Most stores carry all ESRB rating levels aside from "AO".
$50 saved again, thanks to over-reaction!
Did you read my post? ;)
Hmm. All has been completed. With this, I no longer need my wife.
I've seen some of the shows that the Brits watch... 2 inches is more than enough...
Other countries are claiming that the U.S. has mismanaged the internet. Which has led to broad speculation that the internet will splinter soon while those other countries work on their own "Internet."
If one were to judge our use (read: underuse) of the internet on the public level... well, that's just a whole new angle on our lack of efficacy in educating our own. Think about it, at $50/month for a typical broadband connection in this country it's cost-prohibitive for a large segment of the population to access the internet regulary. Sure, there's dialup, but the frustration involved in dialup could discourage an internet "newbie" from using it. Let us also not forget that many, many metro areas have horrible phone lines. Our infrastructure in the U.S. is sad when you consider the fact that we're still (for now) the largest economy in the world.
The best way to build your population up intellectually is through information. The undisputed king of information is the "Internet." Imagine all the eyes that could be opened. Mixed in, of course, with all the idiocy, smut, and exploitation...
But some locales are contemplating making wireless accessible to the general public. So there is a movement. It's just a shame that in the most mighty economy in the world the cost is still prohibitive for a good segment of its population.
Keep squeaking about it... perhaps the corporations will grease the wheel. But I doubt it. What we need is a brave provider to go for the quantity, and not the quality (I never thought I'd say that) -- in other words, make the pricing attractive for everyone.
This was a clear problem for one company.
What was done is that the normal distractions, which for this company was e-mail and instant messaging, were either banned outright, or controlled. In the case of e-mail, it was queued up and held, then released on the half-hour. So that was 2 interruptions from e-mail per hour, at most. The net result was actually a good thing, people actually got up and interacted with each other and kept it on-topic since everyone could hear the conversation. The caveat, of course, was if there was an immediate need. This was handled through the normal ticketing system, which was heavily monitored anyway. Obviously, executives were immune to these measures. They were permitted to be as distracted and distractive as they always have been.
Instant messaging was disallowed, except for IRC, which their IT department monitored. Each group had a channel, and since it's open source, private messaging was disabled. At first, there was much noise about all of this. But people adapted, and, according to the HR team, productivity clearly went up.
The problem is, this doesn't work for everyone. It doesn't work for all groups either.
A little creativity is still necessary.
This company claimed 16 hours a week was spent rifling through e-mail, and 8 hours a week using instant messaging. That left roughly 16 hours a week for these "worst offenders" of actual work. Not nearly an "Office Space" situation, but pretty bad nonetheless.
Now that my kids have read this we can argue about, "But DAD, Slashdot says!"
I remember when Amiga was talking about such an environment. Where the lines between appliances were blurred. They dubbed it Digital Convergence but never went very far with it.
The idea was that all of your devices serve a single purpose (they did in 1998, when this was published). But, Amiga had this vision that they'd develop a platform that could live on a TV, a computer, a mobile phone, even a PDA. You could watch TV on your phone. Or you could use your phone over the TV (huh?). Even better, your phone and your TV could be your computer.
The next ten years are definitely going to be interesting. Will Microsoft ever get this thing off the ground? Or will all of the litigation stifle it?
I realize what Microsoft is talking about is a bit different, at least on the surface. But if they have this portable "media OS" they can certainly take it to the next level -- the level of "Digital Convergence".
First, read this this.
All tools add value to the Linux desktop, but if it's not user-friendly none of that matters. To be able to say we have the exact same tools as Windows means nothing if those tools are frustrating to use. We recently began the process of ridding ourselves of certain proprietary software (primarily Microsoft products). It's been painful because after watching a Window-savvy person struggle with Linux I began to understand why Linux hasn't really kicked-in on the desktop yet.
I think the value of a single product is being overstated here. The Linux development community has to work on usability first, as well as product integration. There is a level of inconsistancy between applications that hampers Linux-desktop.
When I think back to the very early versions of Linux (1.0.xx) it's come a long long way. But no single product along the way has contributed any large amount. Primarily, it has been the work of the individuals that understand that, although we don't want a duplicate of Windows, we do want something that people making the switch can more easily slide into.
I am always excited when a new product is ported to Linux-desktop (simply X?). But let's keep things in perspective -- although Xara is quite "neat", it's not going to attract legions of people to Linux all of a sudden.
In truth, this may all help Mac OSX more than Linux...
Sure, you can blame the TV, or the video games...
My son is 10, and only because he's well-adjusted does he get to play some of the games he plays. He still doesn't get to watch anything he wants to on TV. And, yes, I do monitor it and use the simple-to-use tools provided by my cable company to ensure he does not watch those programs.
Certain TV programs, and games may desensitize kids, of that I'm sure. But, as a parent, that's my responsibility. That responsibility does not lie with the ESRB, MPAA, RIAA, or the government. It's mine, and mine alone.
If my son were to turn out the be a thug, it could only have happened because I wasn't paying attention.
Clearly parents aren't responsible enough to make sure their kids aren't deranged, and that they do not feed their psychoses with violent video games.
The only solution is obvious, let a government entity dictate it for us! They've clearly demonstrated tremendous judgement, and organizational skills!
My wife cures me with one word...
alimony...
I own an HP camera, and HP PhotoSmart 7760 printer. Here's some real world data for you:
Photo Cartridge: $35
Black Cartridge: $20
Number of pictures printed: 68
That's just under a dollar per print. All prints were 4x6. At that rate, it's just cheaper to run up to the pharmacy and get them printed in duplicate. Yes, twice as many pictures and it's still less expensive.
This whole printing from home thing is probably a great thing for people that have to drive 40 miles to the nearest pharmacy, but for the rest of us... yay? The only good thing about printing at home, you ask?
Well, Paris and Paris can take all the nudies they want of each other and never have them leak to the press! That's easily worth $.80 a print!
What remains is the one argument that motivates the RIAA: Profit.
For the anti-RIAA, the 3 arguments:
Yes, I've over simplified this. But it gives you an idea of what a segement of both sides feels.
I've heard over and over, from various artists, that the distribution companies just want a product. In other words, they hear 2 or 3 songs they really like from an artist, they simply tell them, "Okay, give me 8 more songs to fill out the album. And it has to be done in 2 months." Deadlines on creativity yield the situation we have today... albums with 1 or 2 good songs, and 8 or 9 other things.
All I have to do is look at my own family (I have 47 cousins). Every single one of them is an iTunes, Rhapsody, or Yahoo! Music subscriber. And their number one reason for going that route is simple: They get the songs they want and can ignore the crappy filler.
The record companies have a problem with this structure. A song is only supposed to last as long as the media it's contained on. Once that media "wears out" you have to buy the song again. This is where most call BS. Once you've payed for a song, you were NOT buying the media, but a license to listen to that song -- to have your own personal copy of that song for your personal listening.
Now, in the digital age, we can keep full-quality copies of all of the songs we've paid for. There is no recurring incoming now. The record companies would prefer the jukebox approach where you pay for a song every single time you listen to it. If they happen to release the song again after remastering, remixing, or with another artist singing it, you pay again; this is fair.
Subject says it all.
Most companies are making their phones for the carriers. Which means out of the last 4 camera phones I've had, I've had to buy a service to get the pictures off. Yeah, I can buy some 3rd party hack to do the job, but these hacks would work so much better if the phone had been designed for my personal use. Instead, they're designed so the carriers can make more money.
So, they can make all the fancy phones they want, I've ceased buying them.
Now that I think about it, I'm probably the only one that cares...
Unintentional.
Will I get troll-modded again?
This is such a good idea! At least for this one, I hope Symantec wins.
Neither of them are terribly huge in the search market. Google is the clear winner there. So, let's say they do merge, they jump from 12% market share to... 12% market share?
The paranoid might see this as some sort of threat, I suppose. Perhaps you should look to Google if you want to fuel the flames of your paranoia. They have a pretty aggressive strategy for, well, just about everything. Multimedia, search, searching multimedia, desktop search, hell, I heard they're even coming out with BrainSearch so you can remember who that was you slept with last night.
As for the dialup market... it's dying off. And with so many locales having serious talks of wireless-for-everyone -- why, one taste of the difference between wireless and dialup will sell just about anyone.
Anyone that thinks this is a big deal as far as some monster being created is probably either distributing FUD, or open to buying it.
"Neuticles -- artificial replacement testicles for dogs, which are available in three sizes, and three degrees of firmness."
Okay, the size thing I can understand... It's the degrees of firmness I'm having trouble with.
"for electrically monitoring the activity of a brain cell in a locust while that locust was watching selected highlights from the movie 'Star Wars.'"
If it was Episode I - III, that poor locust didn't have much left after this experiment.