Two years ago, if you used more than 1 Gig in a month, the Telkom monopoly would cut you off with a nasty note saying you were "abusing" the internet(?).
Now I note that the cap is now around 3 Gig and that 1 Gig is considered okay.
As TFA said, "fair" usage is increasing as the popularity of bandwidth-intensive activities like viewing live video and music increases.
Bush has essentially given you a loan which will have to be paid back (with interest) by higher taxes in the future.
Fiendishly Clever!
Bush and his successors can continue to spend safe in the knowledge that any other party who takes over from them will have to foot the bill for their profligacy!
Hence the Republicans will continue their reputation as tax-cuttin' big spenders while the 'Dems will have to raise taxes and cut spending and thus incur the unpopularity that will ensure that the Republicans regain office if ever deposed.
At some time, however, the Republicans will be unable to spend their way back into the hearts of the American Public.
Will Bush care? He probably figures that he won't be around to care.
But at that point the good ole US of A will be fsked.
When I first went to the UK, it amazed me that people actually paid the cover price for that rag, but having lived in the country for over 20 years and seen the British people at close quarters during that time, it makes sense now.
The BBC, on the other hand, I do regard as an august and impartial institution and I use news.bbc.co.uk as my first port of call on the net.
No wonder successive UK Governments have tried to dismantle it.
But travel to Zimbabwe and ask Government supporters about rigged elections.
They will tell you that they used tactics not unlike those used in American elections.
The point is that Bush has not only eroded democracy in America, but he has undermined democracy throughout the world.
Now you may be a home-lovin', God-fearin', all-american redneck (by which I mean a Republican supporter regardless of the colour of your neck or your religious affiliation), who believes that Bush won those elections fair and square. But the perception in places like Zimbabwe is that George W. Bush used the very same tactics that Robert Gabriel Mugabe currently uses to cow his people into toeing the line.
Personally, whether Bush used underhand tactics to win the elections is neither here nor there; the perception is that he did. And the fact that the election process is so obviously broken reinforces that perception. Not only is it obviously broken, but that it remains obviously broken, which leads to the question: why hasn't it been repaired? And the conclusion? because it is in the interests of the incumbents that it retains the ability to be manipulated.
Intellectual Property is no different than physical property?
Surely that should be from or to physical property
*Than* implies that both are different but doesn't specify from what
Fair enough, I'm sounding a bit like a grammar nazi here, but surely the MPAA should not be lapsing into this kind of sloppy communication in, what I assume are, official documents?
Dear me! They've gone down a bit in my estimation!
IOW, the person you give/sell to probably has no right to effect a further transfer to some 3d person or back to you.
Agreed.
But how does the EULA affect the 3d party?
ie. If the EULA no longer apples to him, surely he cannot be held to the other restriction that MS is imposing on the original user?
I accept that this doesn't actually make sense (to be honest the whole concept of a click-through EULA doesn't make sense), but surely MS would need to provide a completely seperate EULA to apply to a completely seperate set of circumstances?
But that is what makes the iniquities of the American Justice system more pronounced.
On the one hand statistics tell us that a member of an ethnic minority is more likely to suffer injustice at the hands of the legal system, on the other it is plain that, had the accused sufficient funds to pay for a top drawer defence, he would be acquitted.
Neither case fulfils the requirements of a fair trial, but that is probably the point: the American system would tend to look after it's own.
China and India have too much vested interest to allow such bullying to have any influence.
It's a lot more important, however, to ensure that developing countries don't get themselves into a position where they might be able to compete. I really think that that is where the brunt of American diplomatic offensive lies.
>BTW, if you think it is an accident that bad patents are issued left and right, >think again. You won't find Microsoft, Oracle and Amazon spending millions of >dollars lobbying Congress to properly fund the patent office. The patent office >is underfunded because the people who get face time with our leaders like it >that way.
Yes, and clearly they want the rest of the world similarly hamstrung.
Seems he makes a living out of advising start ups on patent issues.
I've had to advise most of the startups we've funded about them, and despite years of experience I'm still not always sure I'm giving the right advice.
The US has bocome so polarised under Bush that nobody can express an oppinion without being labelled as being from one or the other end of the political spectrum.
There is supposed to be free speech, but your speech is only accepted if the majority of the audience concurrs.
So, regardless of whether or not there is merit in the CATO Institute's report, it is already tainted by their percieved political affiliations.
Slashdot Mirror
Two years ago, if you used more than 1 Gig in a month, the Telkom monopoly would cut you off with a nasty note saying you were "abusing" the internet(?).
Now I note that the cap is now around 3 Gig and that 1 Gig is considered okay.
As TFA said, "fair" usage is increasing as the popularity of bandwidth-intensive activities like viewing live video and music increases.
Bush has essentially given you a loan which will have to be paid back (with interest) by higher taxes in the future.
Fiendishly Clever!
Bush and his successors can continue to spend safe in the knowledge that any other party who takes over from them will have to foot the bill for their profligacy!
Hence the Republicans will continue their reputation as tax-cuttin' big spenders while the 'Dems will have to raise taxes and cut spending and thus incur the unpopularity that will ensure that the Republicans regain office if ever deposed.
At some time, however, the Republicans will be unable to spend their way back into the hearts of the American Public.
Will Bush care? He probably figures that he won't be around to care.
But at that point the good ole US of A will be fsked.
Wonder where Al Quaeda will be then?
Who you gonna believe?
Ghostbusters?
I'm laughing all the way to a Rethuglican victory this coming Tuesday.
Very likely.
The capacity of Americans for perverse logic appear to know no bounds.
Well, to be fair, that was "The Sun".
When I first went to the UK, it amazed me that people actually paid the cover price for that rag, but having lived in the country for over 20 years and seen the British people at close quarters during that time, it makes sense now.
The BBC, on the other hand, I do regard as an august and impartial institution and I use news.bbc.co.uk as my first port of call on the net.
No wonder successive UK Governments have tried to dismantle it.
Cynic! :)
But travel to Zimbabwe and ask Government supporters about rigged elections.
They will tell you that they used tactics not unlike those used in American elections.
The point is that Bush has not only eroded democracy in America, but he has undermined democracy throughout the world.
Now you may be a home-lovin', God-fearin', all-american redneck (by which I mean a Republican supporter regardless of the colour of your neck or your religious affiliation), who believes that Bush won those elections fair and square. But the perception in places like Zimbabwe is that George W. Bush used the very same tactics that Robert Gabriel Mugabe currently uses to cow his people into toeing the line.
Personally, whether Bush used underhand tactics to win the elections is neither here nor there; the perception is that he did. And the fact that the election process is so obviously broken reinforces that perception. Not only is it obviously broken, but that it remains obviously broken, which leads to the question: why hasn't it been repaired? And the conclusion? because it is in the interests of the incumbents that it retains the ability to be manipulated.
Seriously?
Intellectual Property is no different than physical property?
Surely that should be from or to physical property
*Than* implies that both are different but doesn't specify from what
Fair enough, I'm sounding a bit like a grammar nazi here, but surely the MPAA should not be lapsing into this kind of sloppy communication in, what I assume are, official documents?
Dear me! They've gone down a bit in my estimation!
IOW, the person you give/sell to probably has no right to effect a further transfer to some 3d person or back to you.
Agreed.
But how does the EULA affect the 3d party?
ie. If the EULA no longer apples to him, surely he cannot be held to the other restriction that MS is imposing on the original user?
I accept that this doesn't actually make sense (to be honest the whole concept of a click-through EULA doesn't make sense), but surely MS would need to provide a completely seperate EULA to apply to a completely seperate set of circumstances?
What a horror story.
Totally confirms my perception of the US justice system.
There are enough innocent people waiting on death row for me to be pretty pessimistic about Hans Reiser's chances of a fair trial.
Oh yes, I see what you mean.
But that is what makes the iniquities of the American Justice system more pronounced.
On the one hand statistics tell us that a member of an ethnic minority is more likely to suffer injustice at the hands of the legal system, on the other it is plain that, had the accused sufficient funds to pay for a top drawer defence, he would be acquitted.
Neither case fulfils the requirements of a fair trial, but that is probably the point: the American system would tend to look after it's own.
Yes, although I have never been to the US, it has always been my impression that justice there is dependent on the quality of your representation in court.http://www.amnesty.org.uk/content.asp?Catego ryID=10410
There have been plenty of instances of innocent people on death row for deeds that they are unlikely to have committed.
On the other hand, if you have sufficient funds (Michael Jackson, O. J. Simpson) you have a very good chance of getting a favourable verdict.
Yeah. That should work.
o zol-hates-microsoft.html you will understand how important it is for the USA that Africa remains in chains.
China and India have too much vested interest to allow such bullying to have any influence.
It's a lot more important, however, to ensure that developing countries don't get themselves into a position where they might be able to compete. I really think that that is where the brunt of American diplomatic offensive lies.
I you read this http://gnuosphere.blogspot.com/2006/06/jonathan-k
Too right!
All whistle-blowers should be strung up by their toenails until they confess their lies. Well, until they confess, anyway.
> You aren't kidding. I remember back in the 486 days
486? I used to dream of running a 486
Oh.
I thought we were talking about an operating system to install in a $100 laptop.
Sorry, should have been paying attention. I lost you when you were explaining how you like Windows XP.
Are we talking about Linux being too fat to install on a $100 Laptop, or are we talking about the average user installing on 120Gig HD?
>BTW, if you think it is an accident that bad patents are issued left and right,
>think again. You won't find Microsoft, Oracle and Amazon spending millions of
>dollars lobbying Congress to properly fund the patent office. The patent office
>is underfunded because the people who get face time with our leaders like it
>that way.
Yes, and clearly they want the rest of the world similarly hamstrung.
Big technology firms, such as Philips, Nokia, Microsoft, Siemens, and telecoms firm Ericsson, continued to voice their support for the original bill.
BBC article on attempts to grant European Software Patents
Also see the comments made against the business week columnist's pro-software patents piece.
>So anyway, who is this guy?
Seems he makes a living out of advising start ups on patent issues.
I've had to advise most of the startups we've funded about them, and despite years of experience I'm still not always sure I'm giving the right advice.
Possible he may have a vested interest?
And?
Yes, his scientific credentials are impeccable.
I don't think he disputes Global Warming as such.
I think he is repeating what President Bush is saying, namely that we didn't do it, guv.
Funny how everybody on /. seems so well informed.
Yet their opinions on climate change are so vehemently diametric.
Those who argue that it exists passionatly quote figures, theories and scientific data.
Those that state that it doesn't exists claim natural causes, past history and government reports.
Each side is angrily well assured of their arguments.
My own view is that we owe it to generations following us to at least acknowledge that it's a possibibilty.
And having acknowledged that, to make what feeble efforts might be within our remit to try to counter it.
That's the point isn't it?
The US has bocome so polarised under Bush that nobody can express an oppinion without being labelled as being from one or the other end of the political spectrum.
There is supposed to be free speech, but your speech is only accepted if the majority of the audience concurrs.
So, regardless of whether or not there is merit in the CATO Institute's report, it is already tainted by their percieved political affiliations.
Uh....
And the point to this tirade?
When I started to read I thought, "Ah, at last, a little insight", but you flatter to decieve.
It rather reminds me of a conversation with a Romanian who said "You think you know fuck-all, but you know fuck-nothing!"
once they actually started listening to my arguments
Arrogant? Moi?
This is simply one of the most unambiguously badly written laws in American legislative history.
And surely one of the most successful?
After all, it it the lawyer who drafts the law?
His objective is, surely, to keep himmself in gainful employment?
I don't know why we are so surprised that legislation such as the DMCA and the USPO fiasco are such a boon to the lawyers.
After all, is that not their purpose?
Well, then.