Laid up in hospital? I read it, to quote the defendant, "have to go into hospital weekly" which, I'll grant you, isn't a fun fair, but isn't "laid up in hospital", either.
-I don't bring lawsuits against helpless people
-I wouldn't accept any client who wanted me to do that
Someone else asked if you would help someone bring a wrongful death case against someone who had cancer but was acquitted at trial due to third party malfeasance. At what point is one acceptable, at what point is it not?
-yes she is innocent, as anyone knows who RTFA
I beg your pardon? There is F*CK ALL in either article that shows that the accused is definitively innocent. "In hospital each week", "make $8.25 an hour". In the P2Pnet article she is quoted as saying "something that I didn't do". Well, shit, I guess if the defendent SAYS she didn't, she mustn't be, right? Come on, NYCL, you take the RIAA to task regularly for failing to read things. The other linked article says, ""I just want them to know that I have to go through enough stress in my life with my sickness and my family, and I don't think that they should go after people just because they want money for something that's not even fair to us," Ciara Sauro said." - I'm not sure how that is proof of innocence either.
-it is not really newsworthy that she is innocent because of the 40,000 people sued by the RIAA, probably 20,000 to 30,000 are innocent
To use a Wikipedia idiom, "[[cite]]"? Or is that just an estimate, pulled from the air?
-yes defendant's illness makes it harder for her to deal with the case and defend it
And it's easier for a multimillionare to deal with a case and defend it - not sure your point, unless its a wholesale change in the very fabric of the legal industry.
-yes it matters that she is sick and impoverished because being subjected to a lawsuit gives such people more anxiety and depression, and more severely impairs their health, than it would to someone who is healthy and has plenty of money
Please, Ray, for the benefit of those of us playing at home who may not have your superior moral knowledge and judgment, at what point should we wash our hands of legal recourse against a person for personal issues? Civil suits? Misdemeanors? Perhaps only felonies in the second or third degree. Perhaps a waiver for 'crimes' against intellectual/imaginary property? No waivers for crimes of moral turpitude? What kind of illnesses are we talking here? Blanket waivers for 3, 6, 12 months left to live? Maybe a 5year mortality rate of 50% or higher for cancer? Benign tumors? Maybe just a bad case of mono- that keeps you off work for six weeks but you get let go?
You've done some great work, Ray, but at least in my eyes, you're shooting yourself in the foot with some of your arguments above.
I hope you, and NYCL, aren't trying to claim that being a transplant candidate isn't a free pass. It certainly seems an appeal to sympathy. I am no fan of the RIAA, I think many of their actions are abhorrent, but I didn't read, either, that she was receiving medical treatment or similar that prevented a response. Seems callous, but there should be better arguments made than "but she needs a transplant for an illness"/"she's a single mom"/"he only has three months to live"/"her grandma just died".
NYCL, there are plenty of things to slap the RIAA about on. Don't go milking sympathy in the face of the (alleged) facts.
Rails definitely uses more CPU time. However, it can make development of some kinds of things much faster, and you can work at higher levels of abstraction in Ruby than PHP.
Wow, color me surprised, a framework for a language makes development faster than the raw language. It's a shame there aren'tframeworksavailableforPHP that could cut development time in a similar manner as Rails does for Ruby...
You are kidding. In the US, "simple nudity" of a child in a photograph is fine, but sexually suggestive posing, situation or similar is what makes something classified as child porn. There's a lot that can be done in the chasm between "nudity" and "penetration" that will get you in trouble.
Gah, I don't see what is so difficult to comprehend - the/software/ is tied to the purchase of a separate product,/hardware/, there's no way to get it without that purchase, other than by business decision. Tying has nothing to do with prevention of use of either product -after- purchase, it's the issue of purchase that's the problem.
Which is ironic, given that most Macbooks have lower display options than pretty much any other notebook out there - come on, 1440x900 on a 15.4" screen on a "Pro" laptop? The only way 'crisp' could be applied there is as a synonym for 'blocky sharp edges from visible pixels'. Bleh.
US Bank will not allow you to pay a credit card from any account other than the checking account "linked" to that account, which means we have to write ourselves a check from our bank account to ourselves at US Bank, drive over, deposit it, wait three days (because they're also notoriously stingy on releasing funds on check deposits, despite the fact that of some 100+ checks deposited in our account over five years, not one has been returned), and then schedule the transfer.
Also having moved recently from Australia, I am amazed at the ass-backwardness of some things like that. I'm fairly sure too, that it's far more likely to be collusion, passive or otherwise, the number of things you can't pay with a credit card.
I'm also of the belief that there's a reason it takes so many steps to schedule a payment on most online account. You know, "Make Payment", "Select Amount", "Confirm" (hell, one of mine had a "Verify" after "Confirm"?!?) that I'm sure is largely designed to make you think you've confirmed your payment, and well, shit, what do you know, you didn't confirm it "enough", late fee and default APR for you, pal!
Or Toyota / Lexus Financial site... change from a recurring payment to one-times. If you can do that without being double charged at least once, I congratulate you. (For nowhere in the book is it written that the recurring option generates a scheduled payment several days out, and when you cancel recurring payments, if the scheduled payment is made, it'll not be canceled - note that I'm not talking about a payment in the "in process" sense, I'm talking about "calendar entry generated to make ACH transaction in 7 days time" scheduling). When changing jobs and pay schedules, we got burnt by this one twice before we realized what had happened (and don't even start me on how TFS actually tried to convince me it was in my best interest to just take the hit of the double lease payment and 'be ahead next month').
The tied product is not as clear-cut, I think, as it is made out to be. After all, is the tied product "an operating system", or "Mac OS X"? As they are not saying with their hardware, "must only be used with Apple-labeled operating systems", it is the software that is the tied product. In order to use the specified tied product, "Mac OS X", you MUST have and be using it on Apple-labeled hardware, then yes, absolutely is Apple restraining competition in the market for the tied product, "Mac OS X", by requiring the purchase of Apple hardware. If there is a way to demonstrate that the product "Mac OS X" can be legally used without the purchase of a separate product, "an Apple-labeled computer", I'd love to hear it, cause I'm not at all convinced by the fact that "Apple doesn't prevent you installing Linux" is an argument against tying. That would be tying the hardware to the software, when the issue is the tying of the software to the hardware.
I disagree with the GP... I trust Mark Russinovich enough to go with his judgment on "you need -a- page file, just that there's no magic formula for how much -you- need".
RAM fragmentation is generally snake oil, but is in any case intended not to allow 'better speed' for the obvious reasons you've mentioned, but to "attempt to make larger contiguous blocks of memory available to an app that requests it".
you can't really call what they are doing monopoly activity without doing some serious stretching of the imagination - as noted by PJ
Yes, you can. Yes, they have a small segment of the overall computer sales market, but "may only be used with Apple-branded hardware"? Anyone trying to claim that that is not tying by every definition is the one doing the serious stretching of the imagination. Claims that "OS X cost is subsidized by hardware sales", "reduced support cost by minimized configuration choices" are either by-products of the RDF in the latter case, or a misuse of some principles. A quote comes to mind, often used in reference to RIAA, et al, (and I'm going to paraphrase, please supply the correct / full quote if you know it):
There exists a curious belief in certain businesses that the law should be changed to support the failings of their business model, rather than their business model being changed to overcome its failings.
anyone who's ever read a doctor's scrawl will know what I mean
Well, I admit that not all doctors write well, but much of this comes from people being unable to decipher the language of prescriptions. A doctor doesn't write:
Take two tablets under the tongue twice a day before meals until finished
Stop the presses, everyone, a real world expert, ravepunk, has spoken, and he is putting his foot DOWN. No-one in his company will be installing the beta of SP2 after his horrible experiences with the first SP beta, because he had to re-install machines to upgrade to SP1 fin... wait, what? You're the decision maker for a company in this regard, and you decided to place a beta service pack for something as fundamental as the operating system on actively in-use machines, and were shocked to find that there maybe have been changes between the beta and production release that couldn't easily be reverted? I'm not sure what's worse, the fact that you expect "upgrade path" trouble-free beta installs of an OS, or that perhaps you don't have a test machine/network/virtualization and felt compelled to install this on production machines, or that seemingly you think your actions played no responsibility in any of the above.
The average user (like say my mother this last weekend) cares a lot about paying a Norton subscription every year rather than running a system that doesn't have those problems. So she bought one of the new HP 10" netbooks and had me install Ubuntu Netbook Remix on it.
Wait, your MOTHER knew enough to ask you to install "Ubuntu Netbook Remix", but not enough to do it herself?!?
Or the previous job I had, where I oversaw a team that developed exclusively on Windows, and whose site we were responsible for saw eleven thousand dynamic page views on the home page alone.
Err, that should be 11,000 dynamic page views per second...
Most "web developers" may well use windows as their local client but no one worthy of the tag is developing web apps on their local machine.
Wow. Really? It's funny that later you talk about "the type of holier-than-thou uber-geek that puts everyone off", but you're pretty much as guilty of it as anyone else.
Because, y'know, I could have sworn that the software I'm watching being written, to be used by many thousands of end users and the general public, was largely written by people using Zend Studio for Eclipse on Windows boxes. Either that, or that "AJAX, three tier, fully OO, MVC, buzzword compliant" stuff isn't, in your mind, a "web app".
Or the previous job I had, where I oversaw a team that developed exclusively on Windows, and whose site we were responsible for saw eleven thousand dynamic page views on the home page alone.
And the reality is that it's easier to jack into a 95 Civic and hotwire it than it is to work the requisite time to make $4,000 to buy it second hand - I'm still not sure how exactly that makes it any more acceptable, even leaving aside arguments of "but it's not theft, just a copy", because the point was the analogy, not the object.
Not even remotely. I have pirated software and music before, but at least am intellectually honest enough to recognize it for what it is, not hiding behind some laughable veil of it as a "protest against authority/obedience" as painted by many here.
Yes, you have every right. And your choice is then to not take the offering. Not to break the law to get the offering without compensation, because you happen to disagree with the conditions attached to the offering. How laughable that people seem to think that it's acceptable to do this.
It also says "I think I am more important than you, and that what I want is more important than what you want, and I am willing to break the law to act on my self-centered desire".
If you don't agree with it, don't use it. Yes, you have every right to use ad-blocking technology, and he would have every right to do whatever it took within the realms of legality to detect that and block you from using HIS resource, which you apparently have no objection to actually using, but an objection to the owner gaining some recompense for his efforts. The phrase "self-centered prick" comes to mind.
Slashdot Mirror
Laid up in hospital? I read it, to quote the defendant, "have to go into hospital weekly" which, I'll grant you, isn't a fun fair, but isn't "laid up in hospital", either.
Someone else asked if you would help someone bring a wrongful death case against someone who had cancer but was acquitted at trial due to third party malfeasance. At what point is one acceptable, at what point is it not?
I beg your pardon? There is F*CK ALL in either article that shows that the accused is definitively innocent. "In hospital each week", "make $8.25 an hour". In the P2Pnet article she is quoted as saying "something that I didn't do". Well, shit, I guess if the defendent SAYS she didn't, she mustn't be, right? Come on, NYCL, you take the RIAA to task regularly for failing to read things. The other linked article says, ""I just want them to know that I have to go through enough stress in my life with my sickness and my family, and I don't think that they should go after people just because they want money for something that's not even fair to us," Ciara Sauro said." - I'm not sure how that is proof of innocence either.
To use a Wikipedia idiom, "[[cite]]"? Or is that just an estimate, pulled from the air?
And it's easier for a multimillionare to deal with a case and defend it - not sure your point, unless its a wholesale change in the very fabric of the legal industry.
Please, Ray, for the benefit of those of us playing at home who may not have your superior moral knowledge and judgment, at what point should we wash our hands of legal recourse against a person for personal issues? Civil suits? Misdemeanors? Perhaps only felonies in the second or third degree. Perhaps a waiver for 'crimes' against intellectual/imaginary property? No waivers for crimes of moral turpitude? What kind of illnesses are we talking here? Blanket waivers for 3, 6, 12 months left to live? Maybe a 5year mortality rate of 50% or higher for cancer? Benign tumors? Maybe just a bad case of mono- that keeps you off work for six weeks but you get let go?
You've done some great work, Ray, but at least in my eyes, you're shooting yourself in the foot with some of your arguments above.
NYCL, there are plenty of things to slap the RIAA about on. Don't go milking sympathy in the face of the (alleged) facts.
Wow, color me surprised, a framework for a language makes development faster than the raw language. It's a shame there aren't frameworks available for PHP that could cut development time in a similar manner as Rails does for Ruby...
You are kidding. In the US, "simple nudity" of a child in a photograph is fine, but sexually suggestive posing, situation or similar is what makes something classified as child porn. There's a lot that can be done in the chasm between "nudity" and "penetration" that will get you in trouble.
Gah, I don't see what is so difficult to comprehend - the /software/ is tied to the purchase of a separate product, /hardware/, there's no way to get it without that purchase, other than by business decision. Tying has nothing to do with prevention of use of either product -after- purchase, it's the issue of purchase that's the problem.
Which is ironic, given that most Macbooks have lower display options than pretty much any other notebook out there - come on, 1440x900 on a 15.4" screen on a "Pro" laptop? The only way 'crisp' could be applied there is as a synonym for 'blocky sharp edges from visible pixels'. Bleh.
Actually, you might be on to something there - I have heard my wife and her mother theorizing on that possibility before, too.
Also having moved recently from Australia, I am amazed at the ass-backwardness of some things like that. I'm fairly sure too, that it's far more likely to be collusion, passive or otherwise, the number of things you can't pay with a credit card.
I'm also of the belief that there's a reason it takes so many steps to schedule a payment on most online account. You know, "Make Payment", "Select Amount", "Confirm" (hell, one of mine had a "Verify" after "Confirm"?!?) that I'm sure is largely designed to make you think you've confirmed your payment, and well, shit, what do you know, you didn't confirm it "enough", late fee and default APR for you, pal!
Or Toyota / Lexus Financial site... change from a recurring payment to one-times. If you can do that without being double charged at least once, I congratulate you. (For nowhere in the book is it written that the recurring option generates a scheduled payment several days out, and when you cancel recurring payments, if the scheduled payment is made, it'll not be canceled - note that I'm not talking about a payment in the "in process" sense, I'm talking about "calendar entry generated to make ACH transaction in 7 days time" scheduling). When changing jobs and pay schedules, we got burnt by this one twice before we realized what had happened (and don't even start me on how TFS actually tried to convince me it was in my best interest to just take the hit of the double lease payment and 'be ahead next month').
(rant over)
The tied product is not as clear-cut, I think, as it is made out to be. After all, is the tied product "an operating system", or "Mac OS X"? As they are not saying with their hardware, "must only be used with Apple-labeled operating systems", it is the software that is the tied product. In order to use the specified tied product, "Mac OS X", you MUST have and be using it on Apple-labeled hardware, then yes, absolutely is Apple restraining competition in the market for the tied product, "Mac OS X", by requiring the purchase of Apple hardware. If there is a way to demonstrate that the product "Mac OS X" can be legally used without the purchase of a separate product, "an Apple-labeled computer", I'd love to hear it, cause I'm not at all convinced by the fact that "Apple doesn't prevent you installing Linux" is an argument against tying. That would be tying the hardware to the software, when the issue is the tying of the software to the hardware.
RAM fragmentation is generally snake oil, but is in any case intended not to allow 'better speed' for the obvious reasons you've mentioned, but to "attempt to make larger contiguous blocks of memory available to an app that requests it".
Yes, you can. Yes, they have a small segment of the overall computer sales market, but "may only be used with Apple-branded hardware"? Anyone trying to claim that that is not tying by every definition is the one doing the serious stretching of the imagination. Claims that "OS X cost is subsidized by hardware sales", "reduced support cost by minimized configuration choices" are either by-products of the RDF in the latter case, or a misuse of some principles. A quote comes to mind, often used in reference to RIAA, et al, (and I'm going to paraphrase, please supply the correct / full quote if you know it):
Well, I admit that not all doctors write well, but much of this comes from people being unable to decipher the language of prescriptions. A doctor doesn't write:
They write:
Stop the presses, everyone, a real world expert, ravepunk, has spoken, and he is putting his foot DOWN. No-one in his company will be installing the beta of SP2 after his horrible experiences with the first SP beta, because he had to re-install machines to upgrade to SP1 fin... wait, what? You're the decision maker for a company in this regard, and you decided to place a beta service pack for something as fundamental as the operating system on actively in-use machines, and were shocked to find that there maybe have been changes between the beta and production release that couldn't easily be reverted? I'm not sure what's worse, the fact that you expect "upgrade path" trouble-free beta installs of an OS, or that perhaps you don't have a test machine/network/virtualization and felt compelled to install this on production machines, or that seemingly you think your actions played no responsibility in any of the above.
Wait, your MOTHER knew enough to ask you to install "Ubuntu Netbook Remix", but not enough to do it herself?!?
Err, that should be 11,000 dynamic page views per second...
Wow. Really? It's funny that later you talk about "the type of holier-than-thou uber-geek that puts everyone off", but you're pretty much as guilty of it as anyone else.
Because, y'know, I could have sworn that the software I'm watching being written, to be used by many thousands of end users and the general public, was largely written by people using Zend Studio for Eclipse on Windows boxes. Either that, or that "AJAX, three tier, fully OO, MVC, buzzword compliant" stuff isn't, in your mind, a "web app".
Or the previous job I had, where I oversaw a team that developed exclusively on Windows, and whose site we were responsible for saw eleven thousand dynamic page views on the home page alone.
But hey, like you say, 'not worthy of the tag'.
And the reality is that it's easier to jack into a 95 Civic and hotwire it than it is to work the requisite time to make $4,000 to buy it second hand - I'm still not sure how exactly that makes it any more acceptable, even leaving aside arguments of "but it's not theft, just a copy", because the point was the analogy, not the object.
Not even remotely. I have pirated software and music before, but at least am intellectually honest enough to recognize it for what it is, not hiding behind some laughable veil of it as a "protest against authority/obedience" as painted by many here.
Yes, you have every right. And your choice is then to not take the offering. Not to break the law to get the offering without compensation, because you happen to disagree with the conditions attached to the offering. How laughable that people seem to think that it's acceptable to do this.
It also says "I think I am more important than you, and that what I want is more important than what you want, and I am willing to break the law to act on my self-centered desire".
Oh no! No Television Man has become an audiophile! :D
Absolutely, they have admitted that. They're now airing the ad with the disclaimer "Sequences sped up".
If you don't agree with it, don't use it. Yes, you have every right to use ad-blocking technology, and he would have every right to do whatever it took within the realms of legality to detect that and block you from using HIS resource, which you apparently have no objection to actually using, but an objection to the owner gaining some recompense for his efforts. The phrase "self-centered prick" comes to mind.
Hell, in the US, the most they have to boast with is the times they use, gasp "white meat chicken"!