While the offer I got was time-limited (and actually tied to the fact that I was a student at the time of signing), I had seen billboards for Bell advertising their no-extra-fees services when Virgin came around.
It's quite possible that they stopped offering it once Virgin was no longer the new and shiny thing it was then.
But, it's equally possible that they (and other carriers, of course) might start offering it again if there's enough fuss about it in the media and in competitors' advertising campaigns.
Actually, I have a pay-what-is-advertised plan with Bell, which is definitely not a virgin to the telephony scene, but rather has been around the block a few times (and certainly done its turn of screwing people).
I have no system access fees, no 911 fees, or any of that other junk. My plan costs the base price, plus any extra features I decide to buy, plus tax, period.
So I, and many others like me, will not be (directly) affected by this lawsuit.
no presenter in their right mind wants to rely on the internet to deliver a presentation. We tell people to have a copy ready on at LEAST one other kind of media, especially if they're giving a big talk. True, but I don't know how many presentations I've been to where the presenter's laptop wouldn't communicate properly with the host's video projector.
At the very least, this provides one other option.
Actually the ipod shuffle thing confused me. Are they talking about the size of the device? Are saying that the device is meant to play music? Do they mean that it is simply powered by a battery? No, they mean if you get a girl to piss on it, it won't tell you whether she's pregnant.
When will they focus on usability and speed rather than adding features. Probably the same time that people stop bitching about stuff that MS Office does that it doesn't.
Kinda reminds me of that quote from Apu in the Simpsons: "Mr. Homer, I have asked you kindly to please quit mangling with my merchandise. You leave me no choice but to ask you again!"
Pretty Hate Machine came out in 1989. Somewhere in the past 18 years I'd imagine it recouped it's production costs. Interestingly, following a link posted in another branch of the comments, I came upon this:
At the behest of Prudential Securities bankruptcy proceedings, TVT put the rights to Reznor's recordings for the label on auction in 2005. This offer included all of the label's catalog, including Pretty Hate Machine and a percentage of royalties from Reznor's song publishing company, Leaving Hope Music/TVT Music. Rykodisc, who did not win the auction but were able to license the rights from Prudential, re-issued the out-of-print Pretty Hate Machine CD on 22 November 2005.[84] Ryko also reissued the "Head Like a Hole" CD and a vinyl edition of Pretty Hate Machine on 31 January 2006. They considered releasing a deluxe edition, just as Interscope had done for The Downward Spiral; however, Reznor declined to produce it for them without payment.[85]
So the people who issued the most recent release purchased the rights at a 2005 auction, and may not yet have recouped those costs.
(Not that the spirit of your comment still stands; someone made enough revenue off the album to offset its production costs)
I don't see why you think you're better than this guy for telling him what to believe, even if you think he's wrong.
This guy is making a rational point about the misuse of the DMCA that is irrelevant to his creationist beliefs, yet you go and attack him on it anyway.
The "Creationist scumbags" are scumbags for foisting their beliefs on other people. Not for merely believing in creationism.
If anyone's flaming, it's you. And as he says of his fellow creationists, I'll say of you: "Don't go making the rest of us look bad just because you can't take some criticism/arguing."
If you really wanted to scientifically test the idiot-karma phenomenon, you wouldn't have introduced the extra variable of an insightful comment regarding the etymology of "LASER".
It seems that in Canada you have that right attached to a tax. Hm - being taxed for something and gaining a benefit. How novel! Don't be fooled. They were trying to screw us over. They just didn't foresee this consequence.
The most important component of the panopticon is not that the prisoners could be observed at any time, but that they don't know when they are being observed.
There could be nobody in the central tower watching the prisoners, yet the behaviour of the prisoners would still be affected, since they might be under the eye.
It's been a while since I've read my old criminology texts on the topic, but I believe a related component of the original panopticon was that prisoners could not see other prisoners. Therefore, the only person who knew that a violation went unchecked would be that person. (When devised, 24-hour silence was a standard component of prisons)
Not only that, but the airfield only brings them four miles away from their office. They still require a seven-minute drive to the Googleplex (okay, okay, I know the average US commute is over a masochistic half an hour each way).
Why don't NBC's stockholders revolt against the kind of mismanagement that throws away free money and turns content-distribution power over to pirates?
Because as stockholders, they (more or less) give the company a bunch of money, tell them to do whatever they want with it, and go play golf or something.
M$ should be able to force you to sing extra contract like Eula's on top of the ones at time you payed for XP for things like updates at are part of first contract / terms of sale. Yeah, but do you really think anyone would buy the recording?
I hate it when I'm looking at, say, a schedule that says "John Present", and I don't know if John will be there during that period, if he is presenting, or if "Present" is his last name.
While this isn't quite the same thing, I'd be loath to write something in an 'abbreviated' form and have my readers not be sure what I'm trying to communicate to them. Scanning works to get the gist of the text, but you can still go back and read it more carefully if the meaning is ambiguous in the scan.
Also, I think the US is the only (Western) country where the "no u in honour/colour" thing caught on, so don't think that any new forms of spelling are going to spread like mad anytime soon.
Slashdot Mirror
While the offer I got was time-limited (and actually tied to the fact that I was a student at the time of signing), I had seen billboards for Bell advertising their no-extra-fees services when Virgin came around.
It's quite possible that they stopped offering it once Virgin was no longer the new and shiny thing it was then.
But, it's equally possible that they (and other carriers, of course) might start offering it again if there's enough fuss about it in the media and in competitors' advertising campaigns.
- RG>
Actually, I have a pay-what-is-advertised plan with Bell, which is definitely not a virgin to the telephony scene, but rather has been around the block a few times (and certainly done its turn of screwing people).
I have no system access fees, no 911 fees, or any of that other junk. My plan costs the base price, plus any extra features I decide to buy, plus tax, period.
So I, and many others like me, will not be (directly) affected by this lawsuit.
- RG>
- RG>
At the very least, this provides one other option.
- RG>
If you ask for it in advance, then I'd expect so.
A budget is merely a prediction of revenues and expenses.
- RG>
And it might stop working.
- RG>
- RG>
Kinda reminds me of that quote from Apu in the Simpsons: "Mr. Homer, I have asked you kindly to please quit mangling with my merchandise. You leave me no choice but to ask you again!"
- RG>
So the people who issued the most recent release purchased the rights at a 2005 auction, and may not yet have recouped those costs.
(Not that the spirit of your comment still stands; someone made enough revenue off the album to offset its production costs)
- RG>
- RG>
I don't see why you think you're better than this guy for telling him what to believe, even if you think he's wrong.
This guy is making a rational point about the misuse of the DMCA that is irrelevant to his creationist beliefs, yet you go and attack him on it anyway.
The "Creationist scumbags" are scumbags for foisting their beliefs on other people. Not for merely believing in creationism.
If anyone's flaming, it's you. And as he says of his fellow creationists, I'll say of you: "Don't go making the rest of us look bad just because you can't take some criticism/arguing."
- RG>
does this mean I can keep the files I downloaded?
- RG>
If you really wanted to scientifically test the idiot-karma phenomenon, you wouldn't have introduced the extra variable of an insightful comment regarding the etymology of "LASER".
- RG>
Not sure what OS/Browser you're using, but I have no problems with SeaMonkey/XP or Firefox/OSX.
If you're using a Mozilla-based browser, the "Slashdotter" extension allows you to customize colour schemes for each section.
- RG>
- RG>
- RG>
Yes, but that's because the heat causes the champagne to expand to beyond the critical pressure.
- RG>
The most important component of the panopticon is not that the prisoners could be observed at any time, but that they don't know when they are being observed.
There could be nobody in the central tower watching the prisoners, yet the behaviour of the prisoners would still be affected, since they might be under the eye.
It's been a while since I've read my old criminology texts on the topic, but I believe a related component of the original panopticon was that prisoners could not see other prisoners. Therefore, the only person who knew that a violation went unchecked would be that person. (When devised, 24-hour silence was a standard component of prisons)
- RG>
Not only that, but the airfield only brings them four miles away from their office. They still require a seven-minute drive to the Googleplex (okay, okay, I know the average US commute is over a masochistic half an hour each way).
My daily commute is a quarter that distance.
- RG>
- RG>
- RG>
Link to the clip.
It's a clip of a VH1 show that shows Chris' campaign ad for a school board.
- RG>
If he lives in China, where the government censors a hella lot of information, how do you expect him to know that the government is spying on him?
- RG>
- RG>
Written English can be ambiguous enough as it is.
I hate it when I'm looking at, say, a schedule that says "John Present", and I don't know if John will be there during that period, if he is presenting, or if "Present" is his last name.
While this isn't quite the same thing, I'd be loath to write something in an 'abbreviated' form and have my readers not be sure what I'm trying to communicate to them. Scanning works to get the gist of the text, but you can still go back and read it more carefully if the meaning is ambiguous in the scan.
Also, I think the US is the only (Western) country where the "no u in honour/colour" thing caught on, so don't think that any new forms of spelling are going to spread like mad anytime soon.
- RG>