Gates: Buys out your company if he perceives you as a threat. Your employees might be screwed but you're set for life.
Ballmer: Throws chairs out the window and shouts death threats "I'M GOING TO F$^@ING KILL YOU"
-
Gates: Works with developers in a cooperative fashion, making feature suggestions and helping architect back ends
Ballmer: has for years been trying to turn Microsoft into a cult, much like multi-level-marketing companies, what with his stomping around like an orangatan while chanting "developers developers developers" although he couldn't code his way through a batch file
-
Gates: is actually somewhat friendly and down to earth even though he's cutthroat in business
Welds are usually stronger than the structure being held together. If they are IMPROPERLY done that isn't the case, but that rings true for everything.
And, I want a pony. The thing is, if you don't pay for any content, content will no longer be produced because there is no incentive to do so.
Do you get paid to work? What if people were to take your product (OK, make copies of it), reducing your sales, leaving you with no money to provide for your family (or, if you're in your mom's basement, no money for doritos and mountain dew)?
The library is fine - perfectly ethical and moral. However, rampantly downloading stuff just because you don't want to pay for it is unethical and immoral, and you are in essence stealing.
Now, I did download "pirated" content off Thepiratebay.org the other night. I downloaded Saab WIS because it is no longer offered for sale to the public (it's the auto shop manuals and was sold very inexpensively). Because it is no longer available through official channels (and no Haynes manual is available for late-model Saabs), and my only option was counterfeit copies via feeBay, I elected to download it instead. However, I did try the proper channels first, and IMHO my need to maintain my car outweighs the need for no-longer-for-sale-to-non-dealers "IP" to be protected.
As one who use Napster in its heyday to download random stuff en masse (for example, I'd search for the letter A, download everything it found, etc) and then go through it and listen to a portion of each track, delete what I didn't like and move what I did into a "to buy" folder, then I went and bought CDs of what I wanted to keep. In the year or so I used Napster, I bought far more CDs than I did in the entire 13 years I owned CD players prior to then.
When the labels started suing their customer base, I quit using Napster, so they're happy. I also quit listening to pop radio and quit buying CDs for the most part. Since then, I've bought fewer than 10 CDs.
The labels lose. I still avoid pop radio. Oh, I've bought a track here and there through my iPhone but no substantial amounts.
I HAVE used thepiratebay for timeshifting purposes, for example, if I missed an Arrested Development episode (before it was cancelled, obviously) or any other show I watch, I'd grab it off The Pirate Bay. I'd watch it and delete it (for the record, I often do buy the shows on TV). I've also downloaded a few movies I wasn't sure I'd like, such as THX1138. I watched bits and pieces and bought the ones I liked. Why? I like having tangible product. I like the lack of DRM restrictions blocking my right of first sale to transfer ownership should I not want the movie or music any more. I also like the higher quality of the DVD or CD vs. h.264|xvid and MP3 rips
As long as the labels try to extinguish new technologies and screw the artist and customer alike, I'm simply not interested in what they have to offer.
Now, if that goes unenforced and people still murder people, add:
Don't murder people, with a weapon.
Now, if that goes unenforced and people still murder people, add:
Don't murder people, with a gun.
And ultimately:
Don't own a gun (which is unconsitutional, but bear with me)
etc.
Adding a new law changes nothing except punishes the innocent because the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. Because of a few pricks, it's going to be illegal to use a cellphone at all while driving (and I'll be damned if I break it to dial 911 - people can die because I won't break the law:-p). I use hands-free kits and if the call requires too much concentration (tech support, etc) I'll tell the person I need to call back. It's a matter of being responsible; I'm always mindful of my speed, where I am in respect to other drivers, and so forth. Also, I use a handheld GPS to navigate, and it's helped me tremendously since 2000 when I was able to throw out printed maps. I no longer have to fumble with street directories and drive slow (as in way under the limit) through city streets like so many people still do.
Why should I be punished because of a few assholes who use technology irresponsibility and who would already have been removed from the streets (losing driver's licenses) had reckless driving, right-of-way/yield, left-of-center, turn signal(indicator) and hindering the flow of traffic (and keep right) laws already been enforced. Right now I see those laws go unenforced by state police, but ZOMG god help you should you drive >7mph over the speed limit on the open highway outside of rush hour! (well, in many precincts and counties around here, >(10%+3mph) over)
MHO, if it has a real uninstall script - that really uninstalls the damned program without magic incantations and four downloads from the manufacturers web site - then it's mostly harmless and I don't care. I can't for the life of me figure out why these companies don't do that....
It's one of three reasons:
1. The release engineer who coded the installer is clueless about the registry, about windows standards, and is a void.
2. They want to make it so difficult to uninstall that you decide to keep their scumware installed rather than go through the bother of removing it (or paying someone else to remove it)
3. Product management refuses to let the release engineer do things the right way (see below)
I've designed many installers, and I've inherited spaghetti-coded installer projects that had to be nearly completely rewritten (Installshield pro). I was always blocked by management from completely redesigning it but every time I had to add new functionality to a module I would completely rewrite and comment the code. The first release after I took on the project included fixes which made it clean up after itself on an uninstall (mostly hacks to work around code I wasn't allowed to rewrite). At one point I was so fed up with maintaining the shitty code that I wrote a whole new installer in Installshield Developer on my own home computer on my home time and brought it in and demoed it. I FINALLY won everyone over - except marketing, who put a stop to it. Why? Because "it's different" - the thing is, I made it compliant to Windows Logo program standards, had it self-repairing and everything. They (marketing) were so put off by the fact that it was different that they didn't care that it was modern and MORE marketable because the installer didn't look like it was for a 16 bit OS any more (keep in mind this was in 2001, and last I heard they were STILL using the same crappy old installer). So, I deleted the code. (justice was served though: months later they offshored development, I was let go, thank GOD - I was the only one they retained through the end of the year, and a few months later they gave me a generous offer to come back, and also asked if I happened to have the installer. I said hell no to coming back because it was DISGUSTING how they laid off all my friends the day before thanksgiving, and I also told them there is no way I am giving them work I did on my own equipment on my own time.)
Speaking of which I really miss release engineering. I really ought to go back to it.
The government should revoke that exclusive license, and let other companies to move-in. Imagine if the metal pipe under your street not only had Comcast, but also Cox, Time-Warner Cable, Charter, Apple TV
Except, if you had Apple TV, they would tell you that you had full unfettered access to all the channels and Firewire was never blocked. A few weeks after the point of purchase they would reneg without disclosing any such changes, push down a "recommended" firmware update, and then inform you that they would enable firewire outputs only for channels which explicitly worked out agreements with them, and then you have to pay an additional $20/month to get that functionality back. Their excuse would be "well, we really only intended those features for customers living in buttfuckistan. Sorry, you're SOL" and even the people living in Buttfuckistan wouldn't get the functionality back without hacking the AppleTV receiver. Parallel: removal of tethering on the iPhone and adding of a tiny footnote on their advertising.
Comcast: Would advertise unlimited on-demand services, except they would cut you off after the first 15 movies every month, because you are an "unreasonably heavy user" clogging up their networks. How DARE you take them up on their unlimited free on-demand offer? Parallel: their "unlimited" internet isn't so unlimited and never was, despite being advertised as such.
Cox: would advertise the world, offer the most HDTV content, but in reality offer maybe 2-3 HD channels. Parallel: their cable system is probably the most antiquated digital network on the planet. My parents have Cox cable and it is severely lacking in features, the navigation sucks, and the guide still doesn't have the little PIP screen at the top right that every other cable provider has - or at least they didn't earlier this year when I visited.
Open up some electronics sometime, or for that matter, dissect some batteries. What do they often use for insulation? Paper.
Heck, paper used to be used to insulate high voltage AC in appliances and homes.
It's not all that dangerous, especially for low-voltage use. For higher-current applications you probably want flame-retardant treatment on the paper to reduce the risk of combustion, but it really isn't a problem.
in Ontario it is now a ticketable offense to text, email, or navigate with your GPS [CC] while driving.
That makes sense. It is obviously much safer to navigate using a big printed street directory and drive erratically while you look back and forth between your street directory and street signs, stopping every few feet while you try to get your bearings. Yes, this legislation makes sense!
. . . and yes, I realize the article is about Ontario, Canada, however I am using my home as a point of reference since liberal nutjobs in my state (Taxachusetts) are pushing for similar laws)
I guess if taking your hands off the wheel is illegal, then turning on wipers and headlights and even shifting gears is now a ticketable offense. This law is idiotic.
Here in America, it's already illegal to engage in distracted driving. Here is what you can be cited for:
* driving over the posted limit, and in most places, >10mph under the posted limit
* changing lanes without signalling
* failure to yield when required
* "california stops"
* failure to maintain control of your vehicle (which includes drifting out of your marked lane)
* reckless driving
* tailgating
* hindering the flow of traffic
* driving "left of center" (although in many states you can drive left of center to pass in agricultural counties, even where passing zones are not marked. I once drive behind a very slow-moving truck carrying farm equipment for >20 miles because there were no marked passing zones and I didn't know it was legal)
* traveling in the breakdown lane (except where/when it's legal)
etc. etc.
Even though there are already laws on the books that can and should be enforced aggressively, liberals are pushing to ban texting, talking, changing the radio, and so forth. EVEN THOUGH THE LAWS THAT ALREADY COVER BAD DRIVING GO UNENFORCED!! More often than not, any time anyone says "there ought to be a law" there are probably already 5 laws on the books that can be more easily enforced to fix the problem. We already have FAR too many laws and probably need to repeal 95% of them.
Selling software to circumvent the protections built into the operating system or to purposely violate the software license may also get them into hot water.
How so? The DMCA expressly allows circumventing such methods for the purpose of interoperability. Installing OS X on alternative software is quite obviously interoperability.
No, when the movie producers advertise a movie DVD, they say "OWN IT TODAY" not "LICENSE IT TODAY"
You OWN that COPY of that movie, just like when you purchase a printed book, you OWN that book. It is not licensed at all. Don't buy into the brainwashing the MPAA would want you to believe.
Since the first sale doctrine applies to items such as DVDs, why can't blockbuster, netflix, etc. send a few employees to Best Buy, Sprawl Mart, etc. to purchase the DVDs and then they can rent those out? Since it's a product purchased off the shelf exactly like a book, there is nothing which can legally prevent their lending it out, renting it out, or even reselling it, as long as copyright is not violated.
Seriously, I'd like to know what can stop them from doing it. I know if I were an attorney with blockbuster or Netflix, I'd have my lawyers filing suit right now.
Amend the EULA with a post-it note stuck to the monitor reading "disregard all other contract provisions: "right of first sale and copyright laws apply." What software manufacturers are doing is presenting a contract which is revealed after opening the package (referring the user to a URL in a shrinkwrap package is ridiculous and unreasonable), and if you purchase it, open it,. read the EULA and disagree with it, you're SOL because the store will not issue you a refund for opened software. So, you could be stuck with expensive software you PURCHASED (NOT licensed; it is a commodity good, not a work for hire) with no recourse. So, always amend the EULA just as you would amend or modify any contract before you sign.
2) Creation of flimsy plastic bags that fucking fall apart so that you need twice as many to carry the same groceries followed by the removal of plastic bags with studier but still flawed and breakable "green" "enviro" bags which are now sold at large profit instead of being given away. Lets nickel and dime our customers to death in the name of the environment - but we couldn't possibly stop filling their mailboxes with dead tree junk mail. Fucking hypocrites!
I actually use those bags as trash bags in the bathrooms and bedrooms, and at the office. They are the perfect size for desk/sink/bed-side wastebaskets! I also use them for food waste that can't go down the garbage disposal (hard bones and such) so I can take the food waste out before the trashcan is full.
Otherwise, I try to remember to ask for paper bags, because they are renewable, paper also comes in handy, and also because I am helping thin out old-growth forests so that the forests will regenerate.:-)
I am no treehugger and see through it for the money-grab it is, with Al Gore's goal of founding new "carbon offset" markets (just like NYSE, NASDAQ, etc. for company shares) but I am into conservation because it benefits ME.
You don't see any act of violence against me if you poison my water, air, food etc? isn't that pollution? isn't that a violation of individual rights? I suggest you read up on Milton Friedman's work on the subject.
Please stop breathing; you are polluting our air with CO2
Ah yes, "the I don't have this and thus nobody else should have this green peace tree hugging idiot" crowd. I get annoyed by these people because they are hypocrites. They will be all nice, green and free love, UNTIL you touch something they happen to like.
You mean the NIMBY and BANANA types who mindlessly preach "green! Renewable!" chants but when some conservative comes along and wants to build a greener refinery, a greener natural gas depot, a solar farm, or even a wind farm, they cry foul and complain about the unsightliness of a facility, or the negative environmental impact it will have on the habitat of black mold or some lichen or algae or mice, or that some less-stupid birds might actually substantiate survival of the fitness by actually avoiding flying into windmills, resulting in the breeding of more intelligent birds than the ones who were not smart enough to avoid the moving objects?
I hate treehuggers. I'm into conservation; that is, using resources wisely. It is a self-serving mentality. If I use CFLs, I offset some energy use so I can turn the thermostat up a bit more without raising my utility bill. I like fuel-efficient cars with turbochargers so I can drive economically when I want so I can drive more miles without spending more $$$, but still have performance on demand when I do feel like having fun. I like having a dog because as someone else mentioned, happiness IS a warm puppy. Conserving benefits ME because I save money, letting me spend it where I want.
The whole "green" thing is nothing more than a humanist religion. I don't force messianic judaism/christianity on others. I don't try to force you to do what I believe is right. I don't try to force bills through that would infringe on others' rights (in fact, I think government should have NO say in marriage whatsoever). Why should treehuggers try to force me to live in an Islamist-ideal society, that is. give up creature comforts like heat and electricity. give up eating meat (actually I literally can't survive without cholesterol sources, so I can't do a vegan diet - and in addition, I LIKE eating meat. It's natural to eat meat. I'll stop eating meat when treehuggers teach lions and tigers and polar bears and such to not eat other animals. Amimals are made of meat, therefore I eat them since I'm at the top of the food chain.).
Why should treehuggers like John Kerry or Al Gore criticize me for driving sportscars when they own SUVs they don't need. live in sprawling, wasteful mansions, and waste a lot of fuel in private jets? Where do they get off on trying to tell me I should change MY way of life? All those hypocrites do is purchase "carbon offsets" to be "green" and they sacrifice nothing. And here is the kicker: it's all about money. The whole "global warming" (now "global climate change") crap is purely propoganda to get carbon offset-trading markets into effect, where Al Gore & Co. will make a cut on every trade that goes through those markets. That is why they are pushing for strict regulation, and having businesses track their carbon usage and buy and sell carbon surpluses or deficits. It's all about the almighty dollar. I've been saying this from the beginning. Greed craves power, and money is power.
Unfortunately, brainless pot-smoking college students swallow it all hook, line, and sinker, not thinking for themselves, and not thinking logically. All you need to tell those morons is that it's "for the children" and they'll buy into it. Did you catch Obama's speech last week, basically saying that people who don't follow him are sheep and just do what they're told, but his disciples think for themselves? That was an extreme case of Orwellian doublespeak and doublethink. It's the mindless who cow down to him and obey and worship his every word. I think for myself and I saw through all of his bullshit from day 1.
Think for yourselves. Look at the facts, and don't mindlessly swallow the whole "green" bit. Be a conservationist because it suits your bottom l
I considered it to score a free Windows 7 "license" but selling my soul for free software just isn't worth it, especially for software I can buy for under $200
"However, they do not seem to have addressed the question of what happens to customers' access to purchased content if the Keychest service itself is discontinued."
Oh that's easy. The consumer can just purchase it again through any number of convenient venues.:)
No, telling people what they can and cannot do and can and cannot say is what's important in California. If it drains their wallets in the process, then so much the better.
Nvidia's only remaining market niche, as I see, is extremely high end graphics. Intel's and AMD's graphic offering, at the moment, lag Nvidia's, somewhat.
Somewhat?
When was the last time you saw an intel graphics card with dual DVI or dual HDMI along with an S-video output?
You might see VGA + HDMI on a notebook with integrated Intel video.
Multi-head video isn't high end any more. More and more Joe Sixpack types are discovering it and using it.
Ubuntu would be great solution for the enterprise. Basic email and office apps, what more do you need?
Aside from Quickbooks, AutoCAD, a true Exchange replacement with clients that work as well as Outlook, and easy central authentication and user management, not a heck of a lot.
Look: Linux is great but it is not the magical BFH. There are still critical components missing. On the groupware front, Scalix and Zimbra come really, really close (and face it, the administration of those is VASTLY superior to Exchange with 0 downtime achievable without redefining what "downtime" means) but the clients aren't there. Thunderbird+Lightning is a nightmare to configure, kmail/kontact is a pain in the neck to configure. vs. set up ONE account in Outlook and all email and calendars the user has are automagically configured.
Quickbooks does not have an acceptable Linux replacement, and neither does AutoCAD. I know that there are other (and superior) CAD packages available for Linux, but the ones that are truly superior cost a lot more, and the retraining costs are astronomical (and many architects will walk out if the UI or commands change at all). Heck, at one client, I can't get a civil engineer to upgrade from a Celeron Windows box to a Core 2 Quad. Why? He doesn't want to have to reconfigure his pens in AutoCAD and he doesn't want to use the profile save/restore option. His brother works at the same company and has tried to convince him that it'll save him time after just one day but he just won't budge.
You have personnel entrenched in one way of doing things. Getting them to change how they work is not always easy - even if the end result would be vastly superior.
Central authentication and management: it is achievable but it is fugly. Every distro does it a different way, and it ranges from acceptably easy to configure to a nightmare of editing poorly-documented.conf files and protocol stacks. That is a major problem one has to overcome in the Linux world, to get one or two consistent network authentication standards and administration tools and have the major Linux distros embrace those as standards.
Until then, Microsoft will reign supreme despite the security nightmare, "scheduled maintenance windows," WUA breaking installs, and unreasonable "licensing" costs.
Slashdot Mirror
Gates: Buys out your company if he perceives you as a threat. Your employees might be screwed but you're set for life.
Ballmer: Throws chairs out the window and shouts death threats "I'M GOING TO F$^@ING KILL YOU"
-
Gates: Works with developers in a cooperative fashion, making feature suggestions and helping architect back ends
Ballmer: has for years been trying to turn Microsoft into a cult, much like multi-level-marketing companies, what with his stomping around like an orangatan while chanting "developers developers developers" although he couldn't code his way through a batch file
-
Gates: is actually somewhat friendly and down to earth even though he's cutthroat in business
Ballmer: Douchebag to the core
Welds are usually stronger than the structure being held together. If they are IMPROPERLY done that isn't the case, but that rings true for everything.
And, I want a pony. The thing is, if you don't pay for any content, content will no longer be produced because there is no incentive to do so.
Do you get paid to work? What if people were to take your product (OK, make copies of it), reducing your sales, leaving you with no money to provide for your family (or, if you're in your mom's basement, no money for doritos and mountain dew)?
The library is fine - perfectly ethical and moral. However, rampantly downloading stuff just because you don't want to pay for it is unethical and immoral, and you are in essence stealing.
Now, I did download "pirated" content off Thepiratebay.org the other night. I downloaded Saab WIS because it is no longer offered for sale to the public (it's the auto shop manuals and was sold very inexpensively). Because it is no longer available through official channels (and no Haynes manual is available for late-model Saabs), and my only option was counterfeit copies via feeBay, I elected to download it instead. However, I did try the proper channels first, and IMHO my need to maintain my car outweighs the need for no-longer-for-sale-to-non-dealers "IP" to be protected.
As one who use Napster in its heyday to download random stuff en masse (for example, I'd search for the letter A, download everything it found, etc) and then go through it and listen to a portion of each track, delete what I didn't like and move what I did into a "to buy" folder, then I went and bought CDs of what I wanted to keep. In the year or so I used Napster, I bought far more CDs than I did in the entire 13 years I owned CD players prior to then.
When the labels started suing their customer base, I quit using Napster, so they're happy. I also quit listening to pop radio and quit buying CDs for the most part. Since then, I've bought fewer than 10 CDs.
The labels lose. I still avoid pop radio. Oh, I've bought a track here and there through my iPhone but no substantial amounts.
I HAVE used thepiratebay for timeshifting purposes, for example, if I missed an Arrested Development episode (before it was cancelled, obviously) or any other show I watch, I'd grab it off The Pirate Bay. I'd watch it and delete it (for the record, I often do buy the shows on TV). I've also downloaded a few movies I wasn't sure I'd like, such as THX1138. I watched bits and pieces and bought the ones I liked. Why? I like having tangible product. I like the lack of DRM restrictions blocking my right of first sale to transfer ownership should I not want the movie or music any more. I also like the higher quality of the DVD or CD vs. h.264|xvid and MP3 rips
As long as the labels try to extinguish new technologies and screw the artist and customer alike, I'm simply not interested in what they have to offer.
OK, let's look at it this way.
It's illegal to murder people. There's a law.
Now, if that goes unenforced and people still murder people, add:
Don't murder people, with a weapon.
Now, if that goes unenforced and people still murder people, add:
Don't murder people, with a gun.
And ultimately:
Don't own a gun (which is unconsitutional, but bear with me)
etc.
Adding a new law changes nothing except punishes the innocent because the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. Because of a few pricks, it's going to be illegal to use a cellphone at all while driving (and I'll be damned if I break it to dial 911 - people can die because I won't break the law :-p). I use hands-free kits and if the call requires too much concentration (tech support, etc) I'll tell the person I need to call back. It's a matter of being responsible; I'm always mindful of my speed, where I am in respect to other drivers, and so forth. Also, I use a handheld GPS to navigate, and it's helped me tremendously since 2000 when I was able to throw out printed maps. I no longer have to fumble with street directories and drive slow (as in way under the limit) through city streets like so many people still do.
Why should I be punished because of a few assholes who use technology irresponsibility and who would already have been removed from the streets (losing driver's licenses) had reckless driving, right-of-way/yield, left-of-center, turn signal(indicator) and hindering the flow of traffic (and keep right) laws already been enforced. Right now I see those laws go unenforced by state police, but ZOMG god help you should you drive >7mph over the speed limit on the open highway outside of rush hour! (well, in many precincts and counties around here, >(10%+3mph) over)
It's one of three reasons:
1. The release engineer who coded the installer is clueless about the registry, about windows standards, and is a void.
2. They want to make it so difficult to uninstall that you decide to keep their scumware installed rather than go through the bother of removing it (or paying someone else to remove it)
3. Product management refuses to let the release engineer do things the right way (see below)
I've designed many installers, and I've inherited spaghetti-coded installer projects that had to be nearly completely rewritten (Installshield pro). I was always blocked by management from completely redesigning it but every time I had to add new functionality to a module I would completely rewrite and comment the code. The first release after I took on the project included fixes which made it clean up after itself on an uninstall (mostly hacks to work around code I wasn't allowed to rewrite). At one point I was so fed up with maintaining the shitty code that I wrote a whole new installer in Installshield Developer on my own home computer on my home time and brought it in and demoed it. I FINALLY won everyone over - except marketing, who put a stop to it. Why? Because "it's different" - the thing is, I made it compliant to Windows Logo program standards, had it self-repairing and everything. They (marketing) were so put off by the fact that it was different that they didn't care that it was modern and MORE marketable because the installer didn't look like it was for a 16 bit OS any more (keep in mind this was in 2001, and last I heard they were STILL using the same crappy old installer). So, I deleted the code. (justice was served though: months later they offshored development, I was let go, thank GOD - I was the only one they retained through the end of the year, and a few months later they gave me a generous offer to come back, and also asked if I happened to have the installer. I said hell no to coming back because it was DISGUSTING how they laid off all my friends the day before thanksgiving, and I also told them there is no way I am giving them work I did on my own equipment on my own time.)
Speaking of which I really miss release engineering. I really ought to go back to it.
Except, if you had Apple TV, they would tell you that you had full unfettered access to all the channels and Firewire was never blocked. A few weeks after the point of purchase they would reneg without disclosing any such changes, push down a "recommended" firmware update, and then inform you that they would enable firewire outputs only for channels which explicitly worked out agreements with them, and then you have to pay an additional $20/month to get that functionality back. Their excuse would be "well, we really only intended those features for customers living in buttfuckistan. Sorry, you're SOL" and even the people living in Buttfuckistan wouldn't get the functionality back without hacking the AppleTV receiver. Parallel: removal of tethering on the iPhone and adding of a tiny footnote on their advertising.
Comcast: Would advertise unlimited on-demand services, except they would cut you off after the first 15 movies every month, because you are an "unreasonably heavy user" clogging up their networks. How DARE you take them up on their unlimited free on-demand offer? Parallel: their "unlimited" internet isn't so unlimited and never was, despite being advertised as such.
Cox: would advertise the world, offer the most HDTV content, but in reality offer maybe 2-3 HD channels. Parallel: their cable system is probably the most antiquated digital network on the planet. My parents have Cox cable and it is severely lacking in features, the navigation sucks, and the guide still doesn't have the little PIP screen at the top right that every other cable provider has - or at least they didn't earlier this year when I visited.
Open up some electronics sometime, or for that matter, dissect some batteries. What do they often use for insulation? Paper.
Heck, paper used to be used to insulate high voltage AC in appliances and homes.
It's not all that dangerous, especially for low-voltage use. For higher-current applications you probably want flame-retardant treatment on the paper to reduce the risk of combustion, but it really isn't a problem.
Did you even read my post? There are laws which already cover the issues. They are simply not being enforced.
That makes sense. It is obviously much safer to navigate using a big printed street directory and drive erratically while you look back and forth between your street directory and street signs, stopping every few feet while you try to get your bearings. Yes, this legislation makes sense!
. . . and yes, I realize the article is about Ontario, Canada, however I am using my home as a point of reference since liberal nutjobs in my state (Taxachusetts) are pushing for similar laws)
I guess if taking your hands off the wheel is illegal, then turning on wipers and headlights and even shifting gears is now a ticketable offense. This law is idiotic.
Here in America, it's already illegal to engage in distracted driving. Here is what you can be cited for:
* driving over the posted limit, and in most places, >10mph under the posted limit
* changing lanes without signalling
* failure to yield when required
* "california stops"
* failure to maintain control of your vehicle (which includes drifting out of your marked lane)
* reckless driving
* tailgating
* hindering the flow of traffic
* driving "left of center" (although in many states you can drive left of center to pass in agricultural counties, even where passing zones are not marked. I once drive behind a very slow-moving truck carrying farm equipment for >20 miles because there were no marked passing zones and I didn't know it was legal)
* traveling in the breakdown lane (except where/when it's legal)
etc. etc.
Even though there are already laws on the books that can and should be enforced aggressively, liberals are pushing to ban texting, talking, changing the radio, and so forth. EVEN THOUGH THE LAWS THAT ALREADY COVER BAD DRIVING GO UNENFORCED!! More often than not, any time anyone says "there ought to be a law" there are probably already 5 laws on the books that can be more easily enforced to fix the problem. We already have FAR too many laws and probably need to repeal 95% of them.
How so? The DMCA expressly allows circumventing such methods for the purpose of interoperability. Installing OS X on alternative software is quite obviously interoperability.
No, when the movie producers advertise a movie DVD, they say "OWN IT TODAY" not "LICENSE IT TODAY"
You OWN that COPY of that movie, just like when you purchase a printed book, you OWN that book. It is not licensed at all. Don't buy into the brainwashing the MPAA would want you to believe.
know if I were an attorney with blockbuster or Netflix /s/attorney/executive/
Sorry. Hit submit too soon. :(
Since the first sale doctrine applies to items such as DVDs, why can't blockbuster, netflix, etc. send a few employees to Best Buy, Sprawl Mart, etc. to purchase the DVDs and then they can rent those out? Since it's a product purchased off the shelf exactly like a book, there is nothing which can legally prevent their lending it out, renting it out, or even reselling it, as long as copyright is not violated.
Seriously, I'd like to know what can stop them from doing it. I know if I were an attorney with blockbuster or Netflix, I'd have my lawyers filing suit right now.
Amend the EULA with a post-it note stuck to the monitor reading "disregard all other contract provisions: "right of first sale and copyright laws apply." What software manufacturers are doing is presenting a contract which is revealed after opening the package (referring the user to a URL in a shrinkwrap package is ridiculous and unreasonable), and if you purchase it, open it,. read the EULA and disagree with it, you're SOL because the store will not issue you a refund for opened software. So, you could be stuck with expensive software you PURCHASED (NOT licensed; it is a commodity good, not a work for hire) with no recourse. So, always amend the EULA just as you would amend or modify any contract before you sign.
I actually use those bags as trash bags in the bathrooms and bedrooms, and at the office. They are the perfect size for desk/sink/bed-side wastebaskets! I also use them for food waste that can't go down the garbage disposal (hard bones and such) so I can take the food waste out before the trashcan is full. Otherwise, I try to remember to ask for paper bags, because they are renewable, paper also comes in handy, and also because I am helping thin out old-growth forests so that the forests will regenerate. :-)
I am no treehugger and see through it for the money-grab it is, with Al Gore's goal of founding new "carbon offset" markets (just like NYSE, NASDAQ, etc. for company shares) but I am into conservation because it benefits ME.
Please stop breathing; you are polluting our air with CO2
You mean the NIMBY and BANANA types who mindlessly preach "green! Renewable!" chants but when some conservative comes along and wants to build a greener refinery, a greener natural gas depot, a solar farm, or even a wind farm, they cry foul and complain about the unsightliness of a facility, or the negative environmental impact it will have on the habitat of black mold or some lichen or algae or mice, or that some less-stupid birds might actually substantiate survival of the fitness by actually avoiding flying into windmills, resulting in the breeding of more intelligent birds than the ones who were not smart enough to avoid the moving objects?
I hate treehuggers. I'm into conservation; that is, using resources wisely. It is a self-serving mentality. If I use CFLs, I offset some energy use so I can turn the thermostat up a bit more without raising my utility bill. I like fuel-efficient cars with turbochargers so I can drive economically when I want so I can drive more miles without spending more $$$, but still have performance on demand when I do feel like having fun. I like having a dog because as someone else mentioned, happiness IS a warm puppy. Conserving benefits ME because I save money, letting me spend it where I want.
The whole "green" thing is nothing more than a humanist religion. I don't force messianic judaism/christianity on others. I don't try to force you to do what I believe is right. I don't try to force bills through that would infringe on others' rights (in fact, I think government should have NO say in marriage whatsoever). Why should treehuggers try to force me to live in an Islamist-ideal society, that is. give up creature comforts like heat and electricity. give up eating meat (actually I literally can't survive without cholesterol sources, so I can't do a vegan diet - and in addition, I LIKE eating meat. It's natural to eat meat. I'll stop eating meat when treehuggers teach lions and tigers and polar bears and such to not eat other animals. Amimals are made of meat, therefore I eat them since I'm at the top of the food chain.).
Why should treehuggers like John Kerry or Al Gore criticize me for driving sportscars when they own SUVs they don't need. live in sprawling, wasteful mansions, and waste a lot of fuel in private jets? Where do they get off on trying to tell me I should change MY way of life? All those hypocrites do is purchase "carbon offsets" to be "green" and they sacrifice nothing. And here is the kicker: it's all about money. The whole "global warming" (now "global climate change") crap is purely propoganda to get carbon offset-trading markets into effect, where Al Gore & Co. will make a cut on every trade that goes through those markets. That is why they are pushing for strict regulation, and having businesses track their carbon usage and buy and sell carbon surpluses or deficits. It's all about the almighty dollar. I've been saying this from the beginning. Greed craves power, and money is power.
Unfortunately, brainless pot-smoking college students swallow it all hook, line, and sinker, not thinking for themselves, and not thinking logically. All you need to tell those morons is that it's "for the children" and they'll buy into it. Did you catch Obama's speech last week, basically saying that people who don't follow him are sheep and just do what they're told, but his disciples think for themselves? That was an extreme case of Orwellian doublespeak and doublethink. It's the mindless who cow down to him and obey and worship his every word. I think for myself and I saw through all of his bullshit from day 1.
Think for yourselves. Look at the facts, and don't mindlessly swallow the whole "green" bit. Be a conservationist because it suits your bottom l
I considered it to score a free Windows 7 "license" but selling my soul for free software just isn't worth it, especially for software I can buy for under $200
"However, they do not seem to have addressed the question of what happens to customers' access to purchased content if the Keychest service itself is discontinued."
Oh that's easy. The consumer can just purchase it again through any number of convenient venues. :)
No, telling people what they can and cannot do and can and cannot say is what's important in California. If it drains their wallets in the process, then so much the better.
Somewhat?
When was the last time you saw an intel graphics card with dual DVI or dual HDMI along with an S-video output?
You might see VGA + HDMI on a notebook with integrated Intel video.
Multi-head video isn't high end any more. More and more Joe Sixpack types are discovering it and using it.
Aside from Quickbooks, AutoCAD, a true Exchange replacement with clients that work as well as Outlook, and easy central authentication and user management, not a heck of a lot.
Look: Linux is great but it is not the magical BFH. There are still critical components missing. On the groupware front, Scalix and Zimbra come really, really close (and face it, the administration of those is VASTLY superior to Exchange with 0 downtime achievable without redefining what "downtime" means) but the clients aren't there. Thunderbird+Lightning is a nightmare to configure, kmail/kontact is a pain in the neck to configure. vs. set up ONE account in Outlook and all email and calendars the user has are automagically configured.
Quickbooks does not have an acceptable Linux replacement, and neither does AutoCAD. I know that there are other (and superior) CAD packages available for Linux, but the ones that are truly superior cost a lot more, and the retraining costs are astronomical (and many architects will walk out if the UI or commands change at all). Heck, at one client, I can't get a civil engineer to upgrade from a Celeron Windows box to a Core 2 Quad. Why? He doesn't want to have to reconfigure his pens in AutoCAD and he doesn't want to use the profile save/restore option. His brother works at the same company and has tried to convince him that it'll save him time after just one day but he just won't budge.
You have personnel entrenched in one way of doing things. Getting them to change how they work is not always easy - even if the end result would be vastly superior.
Central authentication and management: it is achievable but it is fugly. Every distro does it a different way, and it ranges from acceptably easy to configure to a nightmare of editing poorly-documented .conf files and protocol stacks. That is a major problem one has to overcome in the Linux world, to get one or two consistent network authentication standards and administration tools and have the major Linux distros embrace those as standards.
Until then, Microsoft will reign supreme despite the security nightmare, "scheduled maintenance windows," WUA breaking installs, and unreasonable "licensing" costs.