Yes but Apple PAID Xerox for the rights to use their interface.
Microsoft just STEALS the idea, and then hires lots & lots & lots of lawyers to act as a shield to protect them from punishment by the original owner and/or the government. Even the U.S. has shown an inability to break-down that shield. Maybe the European Union will be more successful in their ongoing antitrust prosecution.
Microsoft's tactics remind me of RIAA, except with better whitewashing.
Please re-read my post. At no point did I say "not popular" = "crap". Those words never left my mouth. But thanks for the demonstration of what a Strawman Argument means. It's generally considered poor practice to argue against a scarecrow, and ignore the real human being with whom you are debating/discussing an idea. Good demo.
What I actually said is: Not everything is worthy of preservation. Like my and millions of other people's home movies languishing on VHS tape.
"And I'll steal your neighbor's Lexus and give it you for a free!"
"Uh.... e-yep... that's sound great! His Lexus is purdy. Where does I make me mark?" ---- And THIS is not a recipe for corruption? Bribing the voters with free stuff/money to buy votes?
Well a 50% reject rate of mentally-deficient voters is better than the current 0% reject rate.
Perhaps we could make it multiple 5-choice test. "What party does Obama belong to? Pick one." Then there'd only be a 20% chance of random correct guesses, and an 80% reject rate of people who are simply too stupid to be trusted with selecting the leader of the Republic.
>>>Someone can follow the adds, and not know the party and be a more informed voter than a party loyalist too.
There's something brown-and-smelly conglomerating around your statement. And there's some cattle standing nearby.
Sorry comrade, but I don't buy it. I don't buy the someone could be "informed" about complex issues like the economy, the role of the president, the purpose of the constitution/bill of rights, et cetera, and yet not be able to answer a simple yes/no question about if Obama is Republican. If you are "informed" about the former, then you should be equally informed about the latter too.
Obama's so-called "tax cuts" are actually an increase. This year I'm paying approximately $2000 more since Bush's budget has been phased-out. Obama will offer a $1400 decrease, which means I'm still paying $600 MORE than what I paid last year.
Of course, to be honest, since I paid $15,000 in income tax last year, that +/- 600 is not a big difference. I think it's ridiculous that we Americans pay enough taxmoney to buy a new car every, single, year. At least with a shiny-new car I can use it to get to work or pick-up chicks. What has the government done for ME, personally, that's worth 15 grand?
(And don't say roads; money for roads comes from gasoline tax, not income tax.) (Or SS or Medicare; that too is separate from income tax.)
As for the economy, I'm looking at Wall Street as a gigantic fire sale. Everything is 33%! Buy now! Save! The value of the stocks will eventually return to where they were circa 2015.
Also, I haven't "lost" anything. I bought SPY stocks at $10,000 and they rose to 15,000, then dropped to 10,000 again. So I lost nothing. I still have the same amount of money now as when I originally invested. And of course it will eventually climb back to 15,000 or beyond. I still have forty years until I retire (age 75); plenty of time.
It's probably more-efficient to let the IRS handle the rebates, rather than to have a separate Welfare department. That's the only good thing about Obama's proposal I can think of. Otherwise I reject the idea of income redistribution.
Well as somebody else has said in their signature:
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid your neighbors paychecks, and give you their money.
I'm pissed (no not drunk; angry). I TRIED ALL DAY to get the free serial number and the webserver refused to let me access it due to being overloaded.
Stupid bastards. I ought to sue them in court for false-advertising. If you say something is going to be free, then it should be free, and if a technical hiccup prevents you honoring your word, then you should extend the deadline until everybody has a chance to get the serial number.
Why should American advertisers subsidize the free shows for Europeans? For Example: It's not as if you can go buy Scott paper towels after you see the online ad, so why should Scott pay for European entertainment? That's why Scott and other advertisers strictly limit access to Americans-only.
And vice-versa. I can't watch BBC or other European shows online, because I can't buy European products.
>>>If I were to find a large quantity of drugs on the streets and turn it in to the police, would they need a warrant to look for fingerprints or other evidence of who owned the drugs >>>
No they'd just charge you for the crime (possession). Isn't Prohibition fun?
You can't hardwire a 6510 CPU, but you can dump the OS and use all 65535 bytes for your own purposes. That's how the people behind GEOS were able to make the Commodore 64 look-and-act like a Macintosh even though it was only 1/10th as expensive. They dumped Commodore OS and replaced it with a brand-new one.
IMHO software hacking is a lot more fun than hardware hacking.
That's something I don't understand. Why is it necessary to have all these memory-hogging "pretty" windows. I prefer to go with a clean interface. As one girl said after looking at my laptop "That looks boring". Yes true, but it runs like a speed demon and only uses 1/4 gig of RAM.
>>>user interface has clearly gleaned more than a little inspiration from the Mac OS X Dock
No surprise. Microsoft doesn't innovate; they let OTHER companies innovate and then copy the ideas. MS copied preemptive multitasking from the 1985 Commodore Amiga. They tried to do cooperative tasking but quickly realized that wouldn't work, so they switched to the preemptive model that Amiga used so expertly (and with only 256k of RAM).
Then they copied Windows 95 from the Classic Macintosh interface, including the dropdown Finder menu (relabeled Start) and the Trashbin (relabeled Recycle Bin).
They cloned the Netscape Browser, and stole market share by giving it away for free until Netscape was driven into near-bankruptcy.
And now, faced with diminishing interest in Vista, MS is once again pulling their bacon out of the frying pan by using that favorite schoolboy strategy - copy your neighbor. This time its Mac OS X.
I do. Having non-tracker searching might resurrect some of my current dead torrents. I hate being stuck at 80% forever, and there might be a seed somewhere out there just waiting to be discovered.
The main benefit I see from non-tracker searching is being able to resurrect "dead" files. Oftentimes I download things off Piratebay or Isohunt but there's no seeds, so I end-up deleting the data. Being able to search the internet for that "lost seed" could makes these files useful again.
My buzzword filter HIGHLIGHTS bullshit. "'content-centric approach to networking." is just another way of saying:
a) NBC, FOX, CW, et cetera will be in charge, rather than the individual.
b) The government will be in charge.
I am in favor of neither a Corporate Oligarchy nor a Government Daddy controlling my internet. I like the current model where anybody, anywhere may publish a website, even with something as simple as a Commodore 64. That's true distribution of power. (Power to the People.)
>>>The record companies are represented by large law firms with substantial resources,' while it is futile for self-represented defendants to resist. >>>
Just as the government is required to provide a free public defendant, the government should also be required to provide free court services (no filing fees) to the person being sued. In addition the accuser, whether they lose or voluntarily withdraw, should have to pay ALL lawyer fees of the defendant. That would discourage RIAA from suing innocents because RIAA would have to carry the burden of both sets of lawyers.
I'm not worried. With channels like TCM and AMC constantly replaying old movies, they will not fade away. Some of the more-obscure stuff will crumple to dust, but let's face it - most of it is crap. Why is it necessary to preserve some guy's home videos that he stored on VHS or Betamax tape? I cannot think of any reason.
The classic video games that I played on Atari, Commodore, and Amiga have been preserved through software emulation of the original hardware, so people are still enjoying that stuff even today. It has not disappeared and is unlikely to do so.
The only thing we need to worry about is the collapse of civilization, which does not seem likely. In the event that it does happen, printing stuff on paper would be the best way to preserve it.
>>>Wikipedia was slated by many to fail, and it did not.
It has ruined several persons live by printing false information in their Wiki-biographies. Now imagine if wikipedia had the power to kill..... all it takes is 50%+1 majority, and your life is gone. Simply because people don't like you.
You're probably scoffing at this point, but it happened to Socrates. He exercised his right of free speech, the Athens Democracy did not like his ideas, and so they voted by majority to execute him. Had Athens been a republic that protected free speech by a supreme over-arching law, then the government never could have touched him.
And now I will define what that means: "A Tyranny of the Majority to squash the right of the Minority (or the individual) with a mere 50%+1 vote." EXAMPLE: The execution of Socrates by a majority vote in the Athens democracy. Why? Simply because they didn't like him.
Pass.
A Republic of Laws that defends the rights of the individual is the surest defense against an out-of control majority. In the U.S. Republic the execution of Socrates would have never happened, because the government would guarantee his right to jury trial in front of an impartial, his right to speak freely regardless of how ridiculous his idea sounded, and protected him from a Demos trying to kill him "just because we don't like him".
Precisely. You can't just dump documents onto the net. You have to sterilize them first to remove social security numbers or other personal information. That takes Labor and of course money to pay the labor.
If I were president I'd pressure the Telephone companies to upgrade all their lines to DSL capability. In this day-and-age there's no excuse for having someone still stuck at 56k access. The lines are already there; even the most-distant citizen has a clean enough line to handle 1 megabit/second access. If the companies whined about funding, I'd point to the "rural access fee" on everybody's bill and say, "You have the money right in front of you. Use that."
I would also push to have 3 or 4 cable companies serving every home. I want to see people have choice, so that if Comcast is crewing them with $100 a month bills, they can abandon ship and switch to the cheaper Time-Warner, Cox, or Verizon services.
And finally, I'd push for legislation that prevents NBC (and other companies) from bundling their Sci-Fi, USA, MSNBC, Bravo, Univision channels into a single package. Again, people should have a choice which channels they want, not be force-fed to take them all.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes.
Stealing other people's work is a very effective strategy to succeed in business without really trying. Look at Microsoft.
Yes but Apple PAID Xerox for the rights to use their interface.
Microsoft just STEALS the idea, and then hires lots & lots & lots of lawyers to act as a shield to protect them from punishment by the original owner and/or the government. Even the U.S. has shown an inability to break-down that shield. Maybe the European Union will be more successful in their ongoing antitrust prosecution.
Microsoft's tactics remind me of RIAA, except with better whitewashing.
>>>it doesn't cost you anything to host
Somebody has to pay the electric bill to keep the server running. Who does that?
Please re-read my post. At no point did I say "not popular" = "crap". Those words never left my mouth. But thanks for the demonstration of what a Strawman Argument means. It's generally considered poor practice to argue against a scarecrow, and ignore the real human being with whom you are debating/discussing an idea. Good demo.
What I actually said is: Not everything is worthy of preservation. Like my and millions of other people's home movies languishing on VHS tape.
"I'll give you a free home if you vote for me!"
"Duh... wha?"
"And I'll steal your neighbor's Lexus and give it you for a free!"
"Uh.... e-yep... that's sound great! His Lexus is purdy. Where does I make me mark?" ---- And THIS is not a recipe for corruption? Bribing the voters with free stuff/money to buy votes?
Well a 50% reject rate of mentally-deficient voters is better than the current 0% reject rate.
Perhaps we could make it multiple 5-choice test. "What party does Obama belong to? Pick one." Then there'd only be a 20% chance of random correct guesses, and an 80% reject rate of people who are simply too stupid to be trusted with selecting the leader of the Republic.
>>>Someone can follow the adds, and not know the party and be a more informed voter than a party loyalist too.
There's something brown-and-smelly conglomerating around your statement. And there's some cattle standing nearby.
Sorry comrade, but I don't buy it. I don't buy the someone could be "informed" about complex issues like the economy, the role of the president, the purpose of the constitution/bill of rights, et cetera, and yet not be able to answer a simple yes/no question about if Obama is Republican. If you are "informed" about the former, then you should be equally informed about the latter too.
P.P.S.
Obama's so-called "tax cuts" are actually an increase. This year I'm paying approximately $2000 more since Bush's budget has been phased-out. Obama will offer a $1400 decrease, which means I'm still paying $600 MORE than what I paid last year.
Of course, to be honest, since I paid $15,000 in income tax last year, that +/- 600 is not a big difference. I think it's ridiculous that we Americans pay enough taxmoney to buy a new car every, single, year. At least with a shiny-new car I can use it to get to work or pick-up chicks. What has the government done for ME, personally, that's worth 15 grand?
(And don't say roads; money for roads comes from gasoline tax, not income tax.)
(Or SS or Medicare; that too is separate from income tax.)
P.S.
As for the economy, I'm looking at Wall Street as a gigantic fire sale. Everything is 33%! Buy now! Save! The value of the stocks will eventually return to where they were circa 2015.
Also, I haven't "lost" anything. I bought SPY stocks at $10,000 and they rose to 15,000, then dropped to 10,000 again. So I lost nothing. I still have the same amount of money now as when I originally invested. And of course it will eventually climb back to 15,000 or beyond. I still have forty years until I retire (age 75); plenty of time.
It's probably more-efficient to let the IRS handle the rebates, rather than to have a separate Welfare department. That's the only good thing about Obama's proposal I can think of. Otherwise I reject the idea of income redistribution.
Well as somebody else has said in their signature:
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid your neighbors paychecks, and give you their money.
P.S.
The solution of course is to download it off some pirate site. This greedy corporation advertised "free" and I'm going to get "free".
Alternatively I could buy the product, claim it was never received in the mail, and then do a credit card chargeback.
I'm pissed (no not drunk; angry). I TRIED ALL DAY to get the free serial number and the webserver refused to let me access it due to being overloaded.
Stupid bastards. I ought to sue them in court for false-advertising. If you say something is going to be free, then it should be free, and if a technical hiccup prevents you honoring your word, then you should extend the deadline until everybody has a chance to get the serial number.
As it should be.
Why should American advertisers subsidize the free shows for Europeans? For Example: It's not as if you can go buy Scott paper towels after you see the online ad, so why should Scott pay for European entertainment? That's why Scott and other advertisers strictly limit access to Americans-only.
And vice-versa. I can't watch BBC or other European shows online, because I can't buy European products.
>>>If I were to find a large quantity of drugs on the streets and turn it in to the police, would they need a warrant to look for fingerprints or other evidence of who owned the drugs
>>>
No they'd just charge you for the crime (possession). Isn't Prohibition fun?
You can't hardwire a 6510 CPU, but you can dump the OS and use all 65535 bytes for your own purposes. That's how the people behind GEOS were able to make the Commodore 64 look-and-act like a Macintosh even though it was only 1/10th as expensive. They dumped Commodore OS and replaced it with a brand-new one.
IMHO software hacking is a lot more fun than hardware hacking.
That's something I don't understand. Why is it necessary to have all these memory-hogging "pretty" windows. I prefer to go with a clean interface. As one girl said after looking at my laptop "That looks boring". Yes true, but it runs like a speed demon and only uses 1/4 gig of RAM.
>>>user interface has clearly gleaned more than a little inspiration from the Mac OS X Dock
No surprise. Microsoft doesn't innovate; they let OTHER companies innovate and then copy the ideas. MS copied preemptive multitasking from the 1985 Commodore Amiga. They tried to do cooperative tasking but quickly realized that wouldn't work, so they switched to the preemptive model that Amiga used so expertly (and with only 256k of RAM).
Then they copied Windows 95 from the Classic Macintosh interface, including the dropdown Finder menu (relabeled Start) and the Trashbin (relabeled Recycle Bin).
They cloned the Netscape Browser, and stole market share by giving it away for free until Netscape was driven into near-bankruptcy.
And now, faced with diminishing interest in Vista, MS is once again pulling their bacon out of the frying pan by using that favorite schoolboy strategy - copy your neighbor. This time its Mac OS X.
I do. Having non-tracker searching might resurrect some of my current dead torrents. I hate being stuck at 80% forever, and there might be a seed somewhere out there just waiting to be discovered.
The main benefit I see from non-tracker searching is being able to resurrect "dead" files. Oftentimes I download things off Piratebay or Isohunt but there's no seeds, so I end-up deleting the data. Being able to search the internet for that "lost seed" could makes these files useful again.
My buzzword filter HIGHLIGHTS bullshit. "'content-centric approach to networking." is just another way of saying:
a) NBC, FOX, CW, et cetera will be in charge, rather than the individual.
b) The government will be in charge.
I am in favor of neither a Corporate Oligarchy nor a Government Daddy controlling my internet. I like the current model where anybody, anywhere may publish a website, even with something as simple as a Commodore 64. That's true distribution of power. (Power to the People.)
>>>The record companies are represented by large law firms with substantial resources,' while it is futile for self-represented defendants to resist.
>>>
Just as the government is required to provide a free public defendant, the government should also be required to provide free court services (no filing fees) to the person being sued. In addition the accuser, whether they lose or voluntarily withdraw, should have to pay ALL lawyer fees of the defendant. That would discourage RIAA from suing innocents because RIAA would have to carry the burden of both sets of lawyers.
Go watch GATTACA.
The explains why you should not allow anyone to see your genetic code.
I'm not worried. With channels like TCM and AMC constantly replaying old movies, they will not fade away. Some of the more-obscure stuff will crumple to dust, but let's face it - most of it is crap. Why is it necessary to preserve some guy's home videos that he stored on VHS or Betamax tape? I cannot think of any reason.
The classic video games that I played on Atari, Commodore, and Amiga have been preserved through software emulation of the original hardware, so people are still enjoying that stuff even today. It has not disappeared and is unlikely to do so.
The only thing we need to worry about is the collapse of civilization, which does not seem likely. In the event that it does happen, printing stuff on paper would be the best way to preserve it.
>>>Wikipedia was slated by many to fail, and it did not.
It has ruined several persons live by printing false information in their Wiki-biographies. Now imagine if wikipedia had the power to kill..... all it takes is 50%+1 majority, and your life is gone. Simply because people don't like you.
You're probably scoffing at this point, but it happened to Socrates. He exercised his right of free speech, the Athens Democracy did not like his ideas, and so they voted by majority to execute him. Had Athens been a republic that protected free speech by a supreme over-arching law, then the government never could have touched him.
>>>direct democracy
And now I will define what that means: "A Tyranny of the Majority to squash the right of the Minority (or the individual) with a mere 50%+1 vote." EXAMPLE: The execution of Socrates by a majority vote in the Athens democracy. Why? Simply because they didn't like him.
Pass.
A Republic of Laws that defends the rights of the individual is the surest defense against an out-of control majority. In the U.S. Republic the execution of Socrates would have never happened, because the government would guarantee his right to jury trial in front of an impartial, his right to speak freely regardless of how ridiculous his idea sounded, and protected him from a Demos trying to kill him "just because we don't like him".
Precisely. You can't just dump documents onto the net. You have to sterilize them first to remove social security numbers or other personal information. That takes Labor and of course money to pay the labor.
If I were president I'd pressure the Telephone companies to upgrade all their lines to DSL capability. In this day-and-age there's no excuse for having someone still stuck at 56k access. The lines are already there; even the most-distant citizen has a clean enough line to handle 1 megabit/second access. If the companies whined about funding, I'd point to the "rural access fee" on everybody's bill and say, "You have the money right in front of you. Use that."
I would also push to have 3 or 4 cable companies serving every home. I want to see people have choice, so that if Comcast is crewing them with $100 a month bills, they can abandon ship and switch to the cheaper Time-Warner, Cox, or Verizon services.
And finally, I'd push for legislation that prevents NBC (and other companies) from bundling their Sci-Fi, USA, MSNBC, Bravo, Univision channels into a single package. Again, people should have a choice which channels they want, not be force-fed to take them all.