So as a newbie to this free software; open software paradigm:
- Can I use OpenOffice to create "Word formatted resumes" and forward them to potential employers? Or is this like when I used GEOSwrite, and nobody could read the file, except another Commodore 64 user?
It's not the FCC job to regulate anything other than over-the-air radio waves (public property). Software, not being radio, is private and NONE of the government's long-nosed business.
The solution I use is to not bother reading the policies, because I know the companies don't adhere to them. They just sell your info to whoever that want, and do whatever they please (similar to how Bush is eavesdropping on overseas Americans even though he promised he wouldn't). There's no point wasting my time reading a policy that is not enforced.
>>>Walmart employees can get disciplined for working during their breaks now...
Most stores have had that restriction for years. I got disciplined for working my break at JCPenney, and that was back in 1992! Don't blame the store; it's the government's fault that things are that way. The stores are merely trying to protect themselves form government punishment.
Back to topic:
- If Walmart sold DRM songs, and Walmart turns-off the DRM servers, those songs would be non-functional. - Walmart has an *obligation* to replace those broken songs with working songs (or get sued by angry consumers). - I'm sure any competent judge would recognize that basic fact, and throw-away any RIAA lawsuit as anti-consumer.
In fact if the judge was particularly intelligent, he'd probably remind RIAA that they have already been slapped once for restricting retailers' freedom of trade, forming an illegal cartel, and anti-consumer "CD price fixing", and that he and other judges are still watching RIAA very carefully to see if they become a repeat offender.
It's a shame. I'd love to hire UPS to do my local mail delivery. Maybe then my bills would end-up in MY mailbox, instead of somebody else's mailbox. (I know 18 Kimberly and 18 Denise Street are both girls names, but come on government postman. They're different streets!)
>>>There are few things that I have experienced the government doing better than a competitive private sector.
Yet another reason Bridgewater Telephone's lawsuit was silly. Surely they have enough competence to outcompete a bunch of gov't bureaucrats. The private company will probably run circles around the government's poor service.
He's on the Congress' Financial Services Committee. He didn't get there by being stupid. (shrug). And if you still don't like him, then I suggest you read Walter E. Williams work. He's an economics professor at George Mason University in D.C. and he's no dummy either:
I always find it amusing that pro-socialists think "he's a weirdo" is a persuasive argument. Sorry but that doesn't really sway me to your viewpoint.;-) Next time try a logical argument based on reason; I will listen to that. CONVINCE me that your viewpoint is the correct viewpoint. I won't listen to "he's a weirdo" non-arguments.
Those were the good old days, when computing was an adventure into unknown territories & unrealized possibilities. Nowadays it's more like a boring appliance (IMHO).
*
* (just joking; I looked more like Weesley Crusher on TNG - just a teenager.)
Do it anyway. It would be fun watching tiny RIAA try to sue billion-dollar Walmart.
In my view all Walmart would be doing is simply trading "broken items" with new working items. Just like trading a broken radio for a working radio. That's called good customer service, and Walmart would gain far more money from their happy customers, then they'd lose against a mosquito like RIAA.
Oh well! UPS and FedEx lose money every day competing against the government's postal service, and yet they both seem to be doing quite well. Instead of trying to use government to give Bridgewater Telephone a guaranteed monopoly, maybe they should take a page from UPS/FedEx and learn to compete.
>>>approximating the golden ratio, the database of similar faces is probably to stop it making really wierd faces
So the human brain is programmed with an "average face" that it considers normal, and if you deviate from the norm you are either slightly unattractive, or weird-faced, or worst-case: deformed. How boring evolution has made us - just going for the run-of-the-mill, average, ordinary faces.
Hey! You stole my joke! I was thinking exactly the same thing. (GIRL: "You don't look like your photo." ME: "Yeah well it's a few years old.")
It's interesting that the "sample photo" really did not change much. It basically just shrunk the vertical resolution, thereby making her look rounder-headed, and more like a teenager. I could do that on paint very easily.
Perhaps, but even free marketers (like myself) think there has to be *some* interference with the market. After all, you can't have Bill Gates ordering "hits" on Steve Jobs just to eliminate competition.;-)
Likewise you have to introduce legislation like the FDIC and Glass-Steagall to provide stabilization.
The end of that same article also provides evidence that the CRA *did* have negative consequences (especially in conjunction with the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).
"Economist Stan Liebowitz wrote in the New York Post that a strengthening of the CRA in the 1990s encouraged a loosening of lending standards throughout the banking industry.[47] In a commentary for CNN, Congressman Ron Paul, who serves on the United States House Committee on Financial Services, charged that the CRA with "forcing banks to lend to people who normally would be rejected as bad credit risks."[55] A Christian Science Monitor editorial also mentions the Community Reinvestment Act and the government-backed Fannie Mae as being laws responsible for pushing banks and mortgage brokers into granting easy credit and subprime loans to those who could not afford them.[56]
"In a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, Austrian school economist Russell Roberts wrote that the CRA subsidized low-income housing by pressuring banks to serve poor borrowers and poor regions of the country. Jeffrey A. Miron, a senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University, in an opinion piece for CNN, goes so far as to call for "getting rid" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as policies like the Community Reinvestment Act that "pressure banks into subprime lending."[57]"
Not so fast. The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was passed by the government to prevent EXACTLY this type of crisis from happening. It forbade banks from investing in stocks or other high-risk funds (like mortgage "securities"). The people living at that time knew the depression would never end as long as banks kept collapsing, so they passed these acts to restore stability & confidence.
It was repealed in 1999 by a near-unanimous Congress, and with the signature of William Jefferson Clinton.
So yes you can lay the blame on the government. Had they left the old Depression Law in effect, this entire mess could have been avoided. We'd still have a housing bubble burst, but the investment banks Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, et cetera would still be alive and well and doing business as usual. Americans would be confident that the banking system was stable & their savings safe.
The 1999 repeal of Glass-Steagall was a huge, huge mistake. And it's going to cost us dearly.
One of the first (perhaps the first) online virtual worlds was hosted by Quantum Link for the Commodore 64. Connections were made by modems with speeds from 0.3 to 2.4 kbit/s. Q-Link eventually renamed itself America Online, aka AOL.
"Q-Link's Habitat is a multi-participant online virtual environment. A cyberspace. Each participant ("player") uses a home computer (Commodore 64) as an intelligent, interactive client, communicating via modem and telephone over a commercial packet-switching network to a centralized, mainframe host system. The client software provides the user interface, generating a real-time animated display of what is going on..." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Link
Note that it says "animated". This wasn't some text-based BBS, but a fully-graphical interface similar to the world wide web, but with much lower resolution (320x200). .
>>>I can't think of two brands of car which are similar in function but not in trendiness...
The Civic HX and the Civic Hybrid are similar. Both get mid-40s in fuel economy, both have room for 5 and identical styling. But the Hybrid costs about $5000 more simply because it's "green", and "new technology," and all that other trendy crap.
Personally I'd rather go with the cheaper HX which will save me just as much gasoline, work just as well, and look just as good. It's also why I bought an Insignia for $10, not an Ipod for $100.
>>>Lying to your kids about brands?... But suggesting that they are this ignorant...
I never suggested that. If you re-read my post, it's clear my daughter was not fooled. ("But that's not a real ipod!" "No but it works exactly the same.";-) ) Clearly I was just joking with her, which is often a good way of dealing with kids. Defuse the tension.
>>>If you want "freedom" such as you espouse, go and live in the woods. It is not possible to have that in a civilised society.
It's not possible to have the freedom to choose? We must let government make all our decisions for us? Hmmm.
How is that different from the old Monarchies where government controlled everything? It appears you are advocating having Elected Kings and Elected Ministers run our lives (from school to healthcare to retirement), somewhat similar to the Heredity Kings/Ministers that existed prior to the Human Rights Revolutions of the 1700s. "They" acted like the all-knowing parents, while "we" were just the lowly serfs, expected to fall in line.
In 1776 my country revolted against that kind of tyranny. We chose to make the individual the sovereign (free to make his own choices and pursue his own happiness). If our society is headed in a direction where the individual can no longer run his own life, where some elected king in Washington tells you where to go for education, for health, for retirement..... then we have effectively given-up our individual sovereignty. That is moving backwards, not forward to the future.
>>>I know, as a resident of a so-called "socialist" country, that if I get a disease, then the state will take care of me until I die
Not the state. Your neighbors. You are sucking money out of your neighbors' wallets, and that makes you no better than a thief who steals in the night. Frankly I know I'm going to die. That is certain; no one is immortal. I would rather accept death, and die peacefully, than steal my neighbors' money.
To take my neighbors' money makes me no better than the Planatation Masters who stole labor from their slaves. I refuse to do that.
>>>Later, the credit issuers had problem with their credit and they slunk back to the congresscritters saying that they've fallen on hard times and need some help and time to work things out... >>>
Under Biden's bill, the credit companies would not be able to file bankruptcy. Instead they'd have to do a "chapter 7" and work-out a payment plan to pay ALL the money back. Unfortunately this bill doesn't apply to them, so they are free to "clean the slate" and start over.
They can do what we Consumers can not do. Thanks Mr. Biden. Thanks a lot.
>>>Could you (or anyone that thinks alike) please explain me the difference between paying a private health insurance and paying a universal system with your taxes?? >>>
Private is multiple choice amongst many providers. Government is monopoly. (THAT is my main complaint about this system - I prefer *freedom* of choice.)
Private is "pay your own bills". While some americans have insurance, other americans like myself prefer to pay cash. ----- Government is paying for your neighbor's healthcare, even if said neighbor was stupid and damaged his liver or his lungs with abusive behaviors (drinking, smoking). That's theft of YOUR money/labor to enrich just one person, and is comparable to how the slaves had their labor stolen in order to enrich the Master.
I think people should pay their OWN bills with their own money, not raid the wallets of their neighbors.
No. American Conservatism = Libertarianism with religious overtones. Its foundations go back to Thomas Jefferson (small government, laissez-faire economy).
>>>Why should you be able to start over with a clean slate?
(1) To avoid the current mess of home owners bailing-out & driving down the stock market.
(2) To punish companies that *knowingly* target loans to people who can't pay them back. These companies deserve to have their loans defaulted for targeting $6 an hour workers with $300,000 loans which they could never, ever repay. These companies need to learn to say "no" and if they don't, then the victims deserve a way to escape that kind of predatory lending.
(3) People who file bankruptcy have their debt wiped, but their slate is not truly clean. That bankruptcy record follows them for the rest of their lives.
(4) If somebody gets laid-off, why is it necessary to screw them to the wall?
(5) If corporations like Ford or GM or Lehman Brothers can file for bankruptcy & wipe their debt, why can't average citizens? That doesn't seem fair the rich can file, but the poor can not. The option should be open to all.
(6) To avoid the current mess of defaulted mortgages & falling stock prices.
Slashdot Mirror
So as a newbie to this free software; open software paradigm:
- Can I use OpenOffice to create "Word formatted resumes" and forward them to potential employers? Or is this like when I used GEOSwrite, and nobody could read the file, except another Commodore 64 user?
It's not the FCC job to regulate anything other than over-the-air radio waves (public property).
Software, not being radio, is private and NONE of the government's long-nosed business.
The solution I use is to not bother reading the policies, because I know the companies don't adhere to them. They just sell your info to whoever that want, and do whatever they please (similar to how Bush is eavesdropping on overseas Americans even though he promised he wouldn't). There's no point wasting my time reading a policy that is not enforced.
>>>Walmart employees can get disciplined for working during their breaks now...
Most stores have had that restriction for years. I got disciplined for working my break at JCPenney, and that was back in 1992! Don't blame the store; it's the government's fault that things are that way. The stores are merely trying to protect themselves form government punishment.
Back to topic:
- If Walmart sold DRM songs, and Walmart turns-off the DRM servers, those songs would be non-functional.
- Walmart has an *obligation* to replace those broken songs with working songs (or get sued by angry consumers).
- I'm sure any competent judge would recognize that basic fact, and throw-away any RIAA lawsuit as anti-consumer.
In fact if the judge was particularly intelligent, he'd probably remind RIAA that they have already been slapped once for restricting retailers' freedom of trade, forming an illegal cartel, and anti-consumer "CD price fixing", and that he and other judges are still watching RIAA very carefully to see if they become a repeat offender.
It's a shame. I'd love to hire UPS to do my local mail delivery. Maybe then my bills would end-up in MY mailbox, instead of somebody else's mailbox. (I know 18 Kimberly and 18 Denise Street are both girls names, but come on government postman. They're different streets!)
>>>There are few things that I have experienced the government doing better than a competitive private sector.
Yet another reason Bridgewater Telephone's lawsuit was silly. Surely they have enough competence to outcompete a bunch of gov't bureaucrats. The private company will probably run circles around the government's poor service.
>>>"I'm going to take it and derive enjoyment from it, but it's not good so I won't pay for it."
If I derived enjoyment from it, then it's already on my DVD shelf.
If I did NOT derive enjoyment (crap like Buck Rogers), then I'm not buying it. Therefore I can estimate the total lost sales to Troy are around $0.00.
He's on the Congress' Financial Services Committee. He didn't get there by being stupid. (shrug). And if you still don't like him, then I suggest you read Walter E. Williams work. He's an economics professor at George Mason University in D.C. and he's no dummy either:
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew
BTW:
I always find it amusing that pro-socialists think "he's a weirdo" is a persuasive argument. Sorry but that doesn't really sway me to your viewpoint. ;-) Next time try a logical argument based on reason; I will listen to that. CONVINCE me that your viewpoint is the correct viewpoint. I won't listen to "he's a weirdo" non-arguments.
Nice photos! I like how those old magazines used direct camera shots of televisions. There was no such thing as a "screen dump" back then. Here's me in 1989: http://www.qlinklives.org/qlink-old/me1989.jpg * And here's the 1985-Commodore 64 version of "Miis" - http://www.fudco.com/chip/habitat.gif - I don't know what this is but it looks cool - http://www.gamasutra.com/db_area/images/feature/1991/c64_11.jpg
Those were the good old days, when computing was an adventure into unknown territories & unrealized possibilities. Nowadays it's more like a boring appliance (IMHO).
*
* (just joking; I looked more like Weesley Crusher on TNG - just a teenager.)
Do it anyway. It would be fun watching tiny RIAA try to sue billion-dollar Walmart.
In my view all Walmart would be doing is simply trading "broken items" with new working items. Just like trading a broken radio for a working radio. That's called good customer service, and Walmart would gain far more money from their happy customers, then they'd lose against a mosquito like RIAA.
Cry me a river.
They lost money.
Oh well! UPS and FedEx lose money every day competing against the government's postal service, and yet they both seem to be doing quite well. Instead of trying to use government to give Bridgewater Telephone a guaranteed monopoly, maybe they should take a page from UPS/FedEx and learn to compete.
We ought to try putting him through the image processor.
I suspect two thousand years have already performed a natural "beautification" progression as the image was passed artist-to-artist-to-artist.
>>>approximating the golden ratio, the database of similar faces is probably to stop it making really wierd faces
So the human brain is programmed with an "average face" that it considers normal, and if you deviate from the norm you are either slightly unattractive, or weird-faced, or worst-case: deformed. How boring evolution has made us - just going for the run-of-the-mill, average, ordinary faces.
Hey! You stole my joke! I was thinking exactly the same thing. (GIRL: "You don't look like your photo." ME: "Yeah well it's a few years old.")
It's interesting that the "sample photo" really did not change much. It basically just shrunk the vertical resolution, thereby making her look rounder-headed, and more like a teenager. I could do that on paint very easily.
Perhaps, but even free marketers (like myself) think there has to be *some* interference with the market. After all, you can't have Bill Gates ordering "hits" on Steve Jobs just to eliminate competition. ;-)
Likewise you have to introduce legislation like the FDIC and Glass-Steagall to provide stabilization.
The end of that same article also provides evidence that the CRA *did* have negative consequences
(especially in conjunction with the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).
"Economist Stan Liebowitz wrote in the New York Post that a strengthening of the CRA in the 1990s encouraged a loosening of lending standards throughout the banking industry.[47] In a commentary for CNN, Congressman Ron Paul, who serves on the United States House Committee on Financial Services, charged that the CRA with "forcing banks to lend to people who normally would be rejected as bad credit risks."[55] A Christian Science Monitor editorial also mentions the Community Reinvestment Act and the government-backed Fannie Mae as being laws responsible for pushing banks and mortgage brokers into granting easy credit and subprime loans to those who could not afford them.[56]
"In a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, Austrian school economist Russell Roberts wrote that the CRA subsidized low-income housing by pressuring banks to serve poor borrowers and poor regions of the country. Jeffrey A. Miron, a senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University, in an opinion piece for CNN, goes so far as to call for "getting rid" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as policies like the Community Reinvestment Act that "pressure banks into subprime lending."[57]"
Not so fast. The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was passed by the government to prevent EXACTLY this type of crisis from happening. It forbade banks from investing in stocks or other high-risk funds (like mortgage "securities"). The people living at that time knew the depression would never end as long as banks kept collapsing, so they passed these acts to restore stability & confidence.
It was repealed in 1999 by a near-unanimous Congress, and with the signature of William Jefferson Clinton.
So yes you can lay the blame on the government. Had they left the old Depression Law in effect, this entire mess could have been avoided. We'd still have a housing bubble burst, but the investment banks Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, et cetera would still be alive and well and doing business as usual. Americans would be confident that the banking system was stable & their savings safe.
The 1999 repeal of Glass-Steagall was a huge, huge mistake.
And it's going to cost us dearly.
Trivia:
One of the first (perhaps the first) online virtual worlds was hosted by Quantum Link for the Commodore 64. Connections were made by modems with speeds from 0.3 to 2.4 kbit/s. Q-Link eventually renamed itself America Online, aka AOL.
"Q-Link's Habitat is a multi-participant online virtual environment. A cyberspace. Each participant ("player") uses a home computer (Commodore 64) as an intelligent, interactive client, communicating via modem and telephone over a commercial packet-switching network to a centralized, mainframe host system. The client software provides the user interface, generating a real-time animated display of what is going on..." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Link
Note that it says "animated". This wasn't some text-based BBS, but a fully-graphical interface similar to the world wide web, but with much lower resolution (320x200).
.
>>>I can't think of two brands of car which are similar in function but not in trendiness...
The Civic HX and the Civic Hybrid are similar. Both get mid-40s in fuel economy, both have room for 5 and identical styling. But the Hybrid costs about $5000 more simply because it's "green", and "new technology," and all that other trendy crap.
Personally I'd rather go with the cheaper HX which will save me just as much gasoline, work just as well, and look just as good. It's also why I bought an Insignia for $10, not an Ipod for $100.
>>>Lying to your kids about brands? ... But suggesting that they are this ignorant...
I never suggested that. If you re-read my post, it's clear my daughter was not fooled. ("But that's not a real ipod!" "No but it works exactly the same." ;-) ) Clearly I was just joking with her, which is often a good way of dealing with kids. Defuse the tension.
>>>If you want "freedom" such as you espouse, go and live in the woods. It is not possible to have that in a civilised society.
It's not possible to have the freedom to choose?
We must let government make all our decisions for us?
Hmmm.
How is that different from the old Monarchies where government controlled everything? It appears you are advocating having Elected Kings and Elected Ministers run our lives (from school to healthcare to retirement), somewhat similar to the Heredity Kings/Ministers that existed prior to the Human Rights Revolutions of the 1700s. "They" acted like the all-knowing parents, while "we" were just the lowly serfs, expected to fall in line.
In 1776 my country revolted against that kind of tyranny. We chose to make the individual the sovereign (free to make his own choices and pursue his own happiness). If our society is headed in a direction where the individual can no longer run his own life, where some elected king in Washington tells you where to go for education, for health, for retirement..... then we have effectively given-up our individual sovereignty. That is moving backwards, not forward to the future.
>>>I know, as a resident of a so-called "socialist" country, that if I get a disease, then the state will take care of me until I die
Not the state. Your neighbors. You are sucking money out of your neighbors' wallets, and that makes you no better than a thief who steals in the night. Frankly I know I'm going to die. That is certain; no one is immortal. I would rather accept death, and die peacefully, than steal my neighbors' money.
To take my neighbors' money makes me no better than the Planatation Masters who stole labor from their slaves. I refuse to do that.
P.S.
>>>Later, the credit issuers had problem with their credit and they slunk back to the congresscritters saying that they've fallen on hard times and need some help and time to work things out...
>>>
Under Biden's bill, the credit companies would not be able to file bankruptcy. Instead they'd have to do a "chapter 7" and work-out a payment plan to pay ALL the money back. Unfortunately this bill doesn't apply to them, so they are free to "clean the slate" and start over.
They can do what we Consumers can not do. Thanks Mr. Biden. Thanks a lot.
>>>Could you (or anyone that thinks alike) please explain me the difference between paying a private health insurance and paying a universal system with your taxes??
>>>
Private is multiple choice amongst many providers.
Government is monopoly. (THAT is my main complaint about this system - I prefer *freedom* of choice.)
Private is "pay your own bills". While some americans have insurance, other americans like myself prefer to pay cash. ----- Government is paying for your neighbor's healthcare, even if said neighbor was stupid and damaged his liver or his lungs with abusive behaviors (drinking, smoking). That's theft of YOUR money/labor to enrich just one person, and is comparable to how the slaves had their labor stolen in order to enrich the Master.
I think people should pay their OWN bills with their own money, not raid the wallets of their neighbors.
>>>"Conservatism == fascism"
No. American Conservatism = Libertarianism with religious overtones. Its foundations go back to Thomas Jefferson (small government, laissez-faire economy).
+2 to Duradin.
And here's an article worth reading. It was very predictive of what would eventually happen: "Bankruptcy Bill Preys on Consumers; Endangers Economy" (2005) - http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_act01.html
>>>Why should you be able to start over with a clean slate?
(1) To avoid the current mess of home owners bailing-out & driving down the stock market.
(2) To punish companies that *knowingly* target loans to people who can't pay them back. These companies deserve to have their loans defaulted for targeting $6 an hour workers with $300,000 loans which they could never, ever repay. These companies need to learn to say "no" and if they don't, then the victims deserve a way to escape that kind of predatory lending.
(3) People who file bankruptcy have their debt wiped, but their slate is not truly clean. That bankruptcy record follows them for the rest of their lives.
(4) If somebody gets laid-off, why is it necessary to screw them to the wall?
(5) If corporations like Ford or GM or Lehman Brothers can file for bankruptcy & wipe their debt, why can't average citizens? That doesn't seem fair the rich can file, but the poor can not. The option should be open to all.
(6) To avoid the current mess of defaulted mortgages & falling stock prices.