Whoooaaa.... MM 2 was an upgrade to the bundled MM 1 in XP. What was MS to do recall all the pre SP2 Cd's? The OEMs that distributed SP2 slipstreamed also included MM2 in their versions. As far as charging the consumer they will charge the consumer both indirectly and directly.
Indirectly because the consumer will have to be exposed to advertising and directly when MS offers a paid and advertising free solution to hosted mail other types of apps.
You're right too I think. WGA probably does have a part to play here. Apple did something similar by making previously included applications a part of the purchased iLife suite. In the end MS is trying to create a relationship (read: revenue stream) with the customer directly instead of their current indirect relationship. The web based email client will most certainly feature advertising, so in a way Microsoft is making this a subscription service in that the consumer is subscribing to advertising in a way that previously did not exist. Look for MS to offer an advertising free solution that is part of a subscription package.
No being a principal is not "acting as a public figure". He is doing a job and not anything more. Are you seriously suggesting that being a principal automatically allows people to accuse you of being a pedophile in print? That's not an insult it is an accusation of being a criminal!
Again, on your private time go make a Facebook profile claiming to be your boss, state on that profile that you (acting as if you are your boss) is a pedophile. Now admit to your boss that you are the writer. Your company will fire you. Your company will fire you for the libelous things you've said on your time. Get it? The companies discipline system will punish you for something you said on your own time. It's good that those little children get a taste of real world responsibility.
Per this definition there is most certainly libel. The judge was completely correct in his ruling. There is still freedom of speech and there is no freedom from consequences.
Bull. Libel is decidedly not within the law. Why don't you go ahead and create a false Facebook profile for your boss and call him or her a pedophile and other such tasty insults and start your stop watch because you'll get fired very quickly and without much recourse.
Free speech is a lot like open source. Free as in freedom, not free as in beer. Free speech has costs associated with it in that you have to be willing to accept the consequences if you want to be able to say things that are wrong headed. Some things will cost you more than others and this would be one of those circumstances.
The optional activity argument is fallacious. Students are and should be accountable for what they say. The principal is a private citizen with a right to work without unjust accusations. These kids did not write anything of political or social value they were hurtful, mean and libelous. There doesn't appear to be any socially redeeming value to anything they said.
As for defining acceptable behavior well every single group entity defines behaviors that are acceptable from families to schools to large companies. Most large companies are much stricter about what employees can and can not say than any school is.
As far as being legal it is NOT legal to call someone a pedophile publicly if that allegation is false. Your argument is a distraction from this fact.
You're an idiot. When the students talk about it, focus on it, and publicize it DURING school which you KNOW happened it BECOMES a school issue.
Accusations such as presented on the Myspace page surely and completely impact a principals ability to function in the school and it schould properly be dealt with in school.
The problem I have with bandwidth caps as offered by ISPs is that when the ISP is also the cable provider the bandwidth cap is anti-competitive with Hulu and other video entertainment sites. As far as I can tell this is prime territory for an anti-trust investigation.
IANAL but it seems to me that these caps are not because of P2P but put in place because of competition for the television audience. By capping the users Comcast seems to be trying to guarantee that their cable service is still viable.
Look grandpa might have slower reaction times but how much reaction time do you need going 12 miles an hour with a right turn signal on? I know older drivers can be a pain but you just don't see too many of 'em in accidents. They forget where their keys are I suppose.
Nearly every close call I've had in the last 8 years was cell phone related. How about we tell those damn kids (who are still on my lawn by the way) to stop texting, reading, watching movies, and fiddling around with their GPS while driving to frakin' stop that stupid crap.
HP needs what most all of the other OEMs need and that is some market differentiation that isn't based on price. No one wants a perfectly commodotized market to compete in. Windows for all of it's possible benefits carries a huge burden in that when you wish to sell a product built around it your product ends up looking an awful lot like everyone else's product. Leaving price (and profit) as the only real difference
In the end I think that this is survival for HP because I think MS has jumped the shark.
Oh sure following is what they WANT us to think they're doing! They start a comfortable 10' away at first, and then over the weeks slowly begin to follow closer and closer until....wait for it... BAM, robotic piano string around your neck with the soft whirrring sound of hydraulic motors tightening their metallic arms pulling the wire tighter and tighter around your neck until they toss your lifeless corpse in a mass grave.
Uhmmm yes. That is exactly what I'm claiming. We're not talking about witnesses that happened to think they see a car accident. We're talking about histories that have been repeated very often by many generations simultaneously over the course of many hundreds of years.
By the way the science is in here and THAT is what is backing me up.
I think we might be splitting hairs now and that probably isn't going to accomplish anything. I think that we might be throwing the baby out with the bath water. The historical accuracy of the oral tradition was originally where this started and even in your example with changes in nuance the story does essentially bear historical truth.
These people weren't just telling stories but they were expressing their lives and identities, I contend that they did so with the utmost care because those things were important to them. In a tribal group the whole of the group determines the rightness or wrongness of a telling. Given that when two people see an event there is normally a 10% to 12% difference in the story anyway I suppose that there is some sort of amalgam of the two that ends up being cannon. In the end I think that the historical facts of an event would continue to be accurate even with nuances. For those peoples there was just too much at stake to allow for anything less.
Telling a story isn't a networking protocol. The listeners are engaged intimately, it's the stories of their families, heroes, fathers etc. The listeners were active in the process and in some cases they (vikings for example) did vocally participate. We're not talking about a bed time tale we're talking about cultures that value their histories and stories highly. I would argue that for something as important as the history of your culture and family you would have incredible pressure to get it right. Hell I can still recite all 16 IRQ's and their devices circa 1998!
As far as Star Wars is concerned it is a perfect example. When a given population (Slashdot) has a story (Star Wars) that is culturally important and valued no matter which person get's it wrong it will get corrected hastily. Slashdot is arguably a very small population somewhat analogous to a village. Look at the flamefest that happens still when someone says that "Greedo shot at Han first!"
It doesn't take anyone balsy to make sure that the story is right. Think like a 4500 year old guy that has an ancestor that did something cool. When someone else is telling that ancestors story and gets it wrong it becomes an issue of family honor.
See my other post for one citation. We are not talking about ONE person or even fifty. We're talking about a village or an entire population of an area. Considerably different eh? Star Wars was created over thirty years ago and just like my example SOMEONE would correct it for me because most all of us have seen it and KNOW it. You can call BS until DNF is released but you're still wrong.
It wasn't just the village elder telling the stories at all. It was a group project, usually done with rhythmic devices or mnemonic devices as a group activity. EVERYONE in the village would raise their arm if the story went off.
Oral tradition != telephone game. The telephone game occurs after just a few minutes with a small group of people. Oral tradition is a large group activity over many generations so your initial comparison is wildly off base. As my Star Wars example indicates, someone will fix a mistake in oral tradition.
There IS rationality to Christianity. You are a little arrogant in stating that you think that it can't be defended. It's very tedious to try to do this here but I'm willing to give it a go. More than likely I'll get flamed to the point where I can't address every response but if you are serious about wanting to know WHY there is rationality to Christianity simply ask or at the least state your objections.
Honestly I don't not want to convert you to Christianity and won't proselytize you because you have to live your own life and work out your own beliefs and you can do that without my help. But my religion and faith are real, defendable, and not without merit.
Oral traditions are exceedingly reliable historical references. As the clan/tribe/village gathered to hear a story told it would be the same story that they had heard told from birth like their fathers and mothers.
Any error, addition or omission would have been corrected immediately.
If any geek arose to tell the story of Star Wars and claimed that Obi Wan said "Tashi Station, you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany" they would be flamed, flogged and their geek card would be confiscated. It was in the writing that things broke down because for most of human history most of the humans couldn't read but they could all talk and listen.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoooaaa.... MM 2 was an upgrade to the bundled MM 1 in XP. What was MS to do recall all the pre SP2 Cd's? The OEMs that distributed SP2 slipstreamed also included MM2 in their versions. As far as charging the consumer they will charge the consumer both indirectly and directly.
Indirectly because the consumer will have to be exposed to advertising and directly when MS offers a paid and advertising free solution to hosted mail other types of apps.
You're right too I think. WGA probably does have a part to play here. Apple did something similar by making previously included applications a part of the purchased iLife suite. In the end MS is trying to create a relationship (read: revenue stream) with the customer directly instead of their current indirect relationship. The web based email client will most certainly feature advertising, so in a way Microsoft is making this a subscription service in that the consumer is subscribing to advertising in a way that previously did not exist. Look for MS to offer an advertising free solution that is part of a subscription package.
It's about the training of the consumer to accept upselling to subscription based services.
No being a principal is not "acting as a public figure". He is doing a job and not anything more. Are you seriously suggesting that being a principal automatically allows people to accuse you of being a pedophile in print? That's not an insult it is an accusation of being a criminal!
Again, on your private time go make a Facebook profile claiming to be your boss, state on that profile that you (acting as if you are your boss) is a pedophile. Now admit to your boss that you are the writer. Your company will fire you. Your company will fire you for the libelous things you've said on your time. Get it? The companies discipline system will punish you for something you said on your own time. It's good that those little children get a taste of real world responsibility.
You are so completely wrong.
Per this definition there is most certainly libel. The judge was completely correct in his ruling. There is still freedom of speech and there is no freedom from consequences.
Bull. Libel is decidedly not within the law. Why don't you go ahead and create a false Facebook profile for your boss and call him or her a pedophile and other such tasty insults and start your stop watch because you'll get fired very quickly and without much recourse.
Free speech is a lot like open source. Free as in freedom, not free as in beer. Free speech has costs associated with it in that you have to be willing to accept the consequences if you want to be able to say things that are wrong headed. Some things will cost you more than others and this would be one of those circumstances.
The optional activity argument is fallacious. Students are and should be accountable for what they say. The principal is a private citizen with a right to work without unjust accusations. These kids did not write anything of political or social value they were hurtful, mean and libelous. There doesn't appear to be any socially redeeming value to anything they said.
As for defining acceptable behavior well every single group entity defines behaviors that are acceptable from families to schools to large companies. Most large companies are much stricter about what employees can and can not say than any school is.
As far as being legal it is NOT legal to call someone a pedophile publicly if that allegation is false. Your argument is a distraction from this fact.
You're an idiot. When the students talk about it, focus on it, and publicize it DURING school which you KNOW happened it BECOMES a school issue.
Accusations such as presented on the Myspace page surely and completely impact a principals ability to function in the school and it schould properly be dealt with in school.
The problem I have with bandwidth caps as offered by ISPs is that when the ISP is also the cable provider the bandwidth cap is anti-competitive with Hulu and other video entertainment sites. As far as I can tell this is prime territory for an anti-trust investigation.
IANAL but it seems to me that these caps are not because of P2P but put in place because of competition for the television audience. By capping the users Comcast seems to be trying to guarantee that their cable service is still viable.
Look grandpa might have slower reaction times but how much reaction time do you need going 12 miles an hour with a right turn signal on? I know older drivers can be a pain but you just don't see too many of 'em in accidents. They forget where their keys are I suppose.
Nearly every close call I've had in the last 8 years was cell phone related. How about we tell those damn kids (who are still on my lawn by the way) to stop texting, reading, watching movies, and fiddling around with their GPS while driving to frakin' stop that stupid crap.
Dang and I thought the DRM in Vista was bad. I had no idea that BEOS could determine if I witnessed a crime.
I knew that it was ahead of it's time but Geesh! Does anyone know what version he is using?
Just goes to show, there is no security by obscurity! Hopefully those Haiku guys will get it up and running soon!
HP needs what most all of the other OEMs need and that is some market differentiation that isn't based on price. No one wants a perfectly commodotized market to compete in. Windows for all of it's possible benefits carries a huge burden in that when you wish to sell a product built around it your product ends up looking an awful lot like everyone else's product. Leaving price (and profit) as the only real difference
In the end I think that this is survival for HP because I think MS has jumped the shark.
Does this mean that 13 year old girls are going to pretend to be FBI agents now?
Hmmm.... work for D-Link do you?
Oh sure following is what they WANT us to think they're doing! They start a comfortable 10' away at first, and then over the weeks slowly begin to follow closer and closer until....wait for it... BAM, robotic piano string around your neck with the soft whirrring sound of hydraulic motors tightening their metallic arms pulling the wire tighter and tighter around your neck until they toss your lifeless corpse in a mass grave.
Uhmmm yes. That is exactly what I'm claiming. We're not talking about witnesses that happened to think they see a car accident. We're talking about histories that have been repeated very often by many generations simultaneously over the course of many hundreds of years.
By the way the science is in here and THAT is what is backing me up.
I think we might be splitting hairs now and that probably isn't going to accomplish anything. I think that we might be throwing the baby out with the bath water. The historical accuracy of the oral tradition was originally where this started and even in your example with changes in nuance the story does essentially bear historical truth.
These people weren't just telling stories but they were expressing their lives and identities, I contend that they did so with the utmost care because those things were important to them. In a tribal group the whole of the group determines the rightness or wrongness of a telling. Given that when two people see an event there is normally a 10% to 12% difference in the story anyway I suppose that there is some sort of amalgam of the two that ends up being cannon. In the end I think that the historical facts of an event would continue to be accurate even with nuances. For those peoples there was just too much at stake to allow for anything less.
Telling a story isn't a networking protocol. The listeners are engaged intimately, it's the stories of their families, heroes, fathers etc. The listeners were active in the process and in some cases they (vikings for example) did vocally participate. We're not talking about a bed time tale we're talking about cultures that value their histories and stories highly. I would argue that for something as important as the history of your culture and family you would have incredible pressure to get it right. Hell I can still recite all 16 IRQ's and their devices circa 1998!
As far as Star Wars is concerned it is a perfect example. When a given population (Slashdot) has a story (Star Wars) that is culturally important and valued no matter which person get's it wrong it will get corrected hastily. Slashdot is arguably a very small population somewhat analogous to a village. Look at the flamefest that happens still when someone says that "Greedo shot at Han first!"
It doesn't take anyone balsy to make sure that the story is right. Think like a 4500 year old guy that has an ancestor that did something cool. When someone else is telling that ancestors story and gets it wrong it becomes an issue of family honor.
See my other post for one citation. We are not talking about ONE person or even fifty. We're talking about a village or an entire population of an area. Considerably different eh? Star Wars was created over thirty years ago and just like my example SOMEONE would correct it for me because most all of us have seen it and KNOW it. You can call BS until DNF is released but you're still wrong.
It wasn't just the village elder telling the stories at all. It was a group project, usually done with rhythmic devices or mnemonic devices as a group activity. EVERYONE in the village would raise their arm if the story went off.
Oral tradition != telephone game. The telephone game occurs after just a few minutes with a small group of people. Oral tradition is a large group activity over many generations so your initial comparison is wildly off base. As my Star Wars example indicates, someone will fix a mistake in oral tradition.
Citation
There IS rationality to Christianity. You are a little arrogant in stating that you think that it can't be defended. It's very tedious to try to do this here but I'm willing to give it a go. More than likely I'll get flamed to the point where I can't address every response but if you are serious about wanting to know WHY there is rationality to Christianity simply ask or at the least state your objections.
Honestly I don't not want to convert you to Christianity and won't proselytize you because you have to live your own life and work out your own beliefs and you can do that without my help. But my religion and faith are real, defendable, and not without merit.
Oral traditions are exceedingly reliable historical references. As the clan/tribe/village gathered to hear a story told it would be the same story that they had heard told from birth like their fathers and mothers.
Any error, addition or omission would have been corrected immediately.
If any geek arose to tell the story of Star Wars and claimed that Obi Wan said "Tashi Station, you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany" they would be flamed, flogged and their geek card would be confiscated. It was in the writing that things broke down because for most of human history most of the humans couldn't read but they could all talk and listen.
I'm trying to figure out what all the fuss is about but I can't find this WGA thing. Does anyone know what repository it's in?
In other news Don Quixote was recently introduced as the new president of Psystar.
I agree. Let's vote on it. I found this voting machine
Well said.