funny how a coward would take a simple statement, and assume something absolutly opposite. Can one contend a theory without being assumed to be of a particular religious group? You are sad indeed.
Plus humans suck at fighting. We have soft underbellies, no claws, no proper teeth, our reproductive organs hang out in plain sight, we can't run fast, we can't climb trees quickly, our sense of smell sucks.
Yet we "evolved" into a friece predator. Wait a min.
And we wonder why there is a debate between Darwinism and Creationism. I do find it interesting that those who propose to believe in a scientific answer, which defines itself on proof of fact, that they will make "matter of fact" statements that have not been proven as such, but are in actuallity mere theory and speculation.
Now I assume this will cause the generic, self-agnostic complaints and personal insults, but let them come. The same thing you complain about those on the other side of the fence, you do yourself as well. Complain that creationism has no scientic "proof" then deny science when making sweeping "matter of fact" statements about a theory that you subscribe too.
Not that I'm that smart about your situation or anything but. ..
I keep my itunes library on a portable HD 250GB, and just take it along if I want to hook to another PC, then once connected I just replace the Library file with mine that I have saved on the external HD, and walla, start up Itunes, and everything is just the way I left it. Downloaded songs, ripped songs, downloaded movies (from more then just the itunes service), or ripped movies, all my albulm art, and everything.
Now for the ipod thing. Well the Ipod is a portable solution for your music library. It is not designed to be your music library. Now before you flame me for saying that, that is Apple's model for the ipod. That's why you copy to an ipod and not from an ipod. Now if you don't like their business model for a particular appliance, then don't bitch about it here. Bitch with your spending dollars. I know many people use the ipod as their sole music library, and well it can work, but don't get mad at Apple for doing something that is not the intent of the product. Your ipod is not a transfer device. It is a portable music listening device.
One more thing. . . Do you still have your ipod? Do you still use it? If so, then you aren't putting your spending dollars where your mouth is. Don't expect a company to change a product because you don't like part of what it does, as long as you continue to buy and use the product as is.
Please explain how a database is considered a technology, instead of just a use of technology. Then answer why your comment deserves merit.
If you didn't like my comment posted on a forum of comments about uses of technology, then state that if you like. I stated how this could be used. Do you see another use? Then state so. If you have a problem with my stated use then state that.
This will make it much easier for theives to "legally" steal from stores.
Let me explain. . ..
An theif duplicates the barcode of a cheap item, say a pair of jeans that was on clearance at a particular sotre, say Walmart. Then that theif takes his/her duplicated barcodes (on labels) and applies them to a more expensive pair of jeans. Then they proceed to the "newest" clerk at the checkout lines, and proceeds to purchase a number of the jeans at the clearance price instead of at their retail prices.
Now there will be a database so the theif can do more of their work in the safety of their home. How nice!
Please re-read my post and tell me where I mentioned anything about setting a reserve price??????
I was not talking about setting a reserve price. I was talking about setting a lower then "perceived value" in order to get bidders to bid on your item instead of the 100 others just like it (if there are 100 others).
If you want to list things on Ebay that will sell, then you have to find something there is a market for already, and a price that you are willing to sell it for that is a lower price then the avg. listing/selling amount of similar items.
In contrast, there is, in my opinion, only 1 good reason to ever use a reserve listing. That is if you are using that listing as a test, to see what the "perceived value" of an item is, when you are not sure.
If you don't like reserve auctions then you have every right to avoid them. I honestly don't like them either. You can however figure out the intent of the seller of that auction by looking at their feedback score, and if they have a high score (meaning they sell a lot or buy a lot) then they are probably a seasoned Ebayer, and are using the reserve listing to find out the "perceived value" of the item and most likely if it doesn't sell, then they will relist the item with a more reasonable opening bid, and no-reserve. The other type would be a novice seller, who doesn't understand the usefullness of using a reserve listing, and instead are doing what you mentioned. those are the auctions I would avoid. Not because of the reserve listing, but because there are often to many headaches when buying something from a novice seller in such situations.
A seller lists lower bids because we understand the concept of hooking. That's where you hook a bidder with their low initial bid, and because the bidder has already placed a level of commitment in the item, they are more likely to continue to bid on that item.
You obviously know nothing of this. Because well, your a moron.
A seller who does this plays on odds. yes. And there is a chance that the item you have listed at $1.00 opening bid only gets one bidder and sells for $1.00. Yipee for that bidder! But then that tells the seller that 1. there isn't a good enough market for that item on Ebay, or 2. That's all the item is worth.
So how does your attacking comments make you as the poster of those comments look? Let's see to paraphrase you, "I'm sorry but you are a moron. A big F@### moron."
Not all money is made with 1 item sold. It's about selling more units. Do I sell one widget for $100.00 (with a cost of say, $50.00) because it is worth it, on the open market somewhere in the world. Or do I list that same item for $75.00 and end up selling 3 of them at that price? Which one nets me more money?
If your shallow mind can only think as far as 1 item then yes selling it for $100.00 nets more money per item. But if I can sell a higher qty. at a lower price then I will net a higher profit.
I tell you what, I'm glad there are buyers and sellers out there like you. That makes my job easier.
I want those impluse bidders to bid incrementally. It's good for the bottom line, and that is what is most important isn't it?
Auctions are not there for the good "deal" that the bidder gets. It is there to make money for the sellers and the auction house. Ebay is an auction house. Their customers are not those who bid on items list. It's the people that list things to sell, and Ebay makes more money if my items sell for more money.
It would be a very good thing for Ebay to put in a bid extention if a bid is placed in the last few min. of an auction, but I would not have it set to 10 min. like someone else has mentioned. If all you want to do is stop the snipping, then make it the last min. If someone puts in a bid with less the 60 sec. left in the auction then extend the auction by 60 sec. This keeps the snippers at bay, as long as the other bidders watching the auction have the chance to make an impulse higher bid. There is a lot of people who would up their "max" bid by a buck or two or ten if they now a snipe has happened. And that is good for business.
Ebay makes money from sellers, and sellers would make more money this way.
Could someone still find an automated way around this? Absolutely. They could set the snipe to 61 sec. before auction close instead of 30 sec. and they would probably still win because not every bidder watches the auction at the last min. But for those who do, they still have a chance to manually bid up the item.
This is so freaking funny!!! Mod parent up for laugh effect.
Who knows why the OS community is having a harder time becoming mainstream? Is it because the technical skills of the developers isn't there?
A big resounding NO. It's because of greedy little tightwad people like the parent here.
Podcast is to Klenex, as Vidcast is to tissue. . .
on
NPR's Gaming Podcast
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
It's funny how a "brand" can change something.
Many people refer to any generic tissue for blowing your nose, to Klenex. Klenex is a brand of tissue, but that brand is coined as the defacto term for all tissue.
Just like Klenex, Apple's Ipod has reached a level of iconic status, because simple video clips posted on the net are now refered to as a podcast, yet all they really are is a simple video clip posted on a website. This should more correctly be termed as a vidcast if anything.
Praise the gods of Apple for generating such a term as podcast, and praise the media for using that term to redefine internet released videos.
I'm curious about what those that have no problem with duplicating software (without the proper registration/purchase) or sharing/downloading/copying music as well.
Does plagerism* differ for these different mediums? How so?
Creative has been riding the coat tails of publicity for their case, for months, hoping Apple would crack and just pay them off. but what their lawyers failed to account for was all the time they where giving the Apple lawyers, to come up with a counter-measure.
Creative almost begged Apple to find something to fight back with.
I don't know about you, but if some bully down the block was bragging about knocking your block off, and telling all your neighbors how he was going to kick your ass. . . Well, I for sure would be getting as much dirt and weapons together in my arsonal* to be able to fight back when the wanna-be bully came knocking on my door.
The best way to win a fire-fight is the element of surprise. You see the bad guy coming to get you, and you set up an ambush, and you put them in their place.
Let's see. . . 1 patent vs. 4 who wins? Who was more "creative?"
But yeah. That's just me. I like making my system work more smoothly.
Are you kidding me? You call this. . ..
I'm very surprised that the default action for a.app folder outside of Applications is not 'copy to Applications and execute'
smooth?
Smooth for who? Let's see. . . Don't allow the user to define how they want to organize their files, including programs? And then you want the computer to auto-execute any old program upon installation? Come on. that's butt-ass backwards.
Apple doesn't make the user drag and drop. It allows it. It is the software developer that defines how the install process works.
Maybe someone should back the stupid train up to your house so you can climb on board.
hmm, you got me interested. Please help me do this as well. I have t-mobile, and a Razr, and would like to find a way around T-zones. email me admin(at)focusarts(dot)net
I mean really. . . . . We all aready knew this. It wasn't some big shocker.
What is a big shocker is that this guy doesn't get the fact that that is exactly the reason that many people are thinking about buying a mac, because they can try out a mac and still have windoz to fall back on (ouch that would have to hurt).
He touts this as if people are jumping into it blindly, and being swindeled. Come on, get with it. Pleople realize this, and are looking forward to it. It's a benefit, not some underhanded sucker punch.
Is this going to be yet another organization watching what people transfer and ratting them out to the RIAA/MPAA/CIA, or will they be Not Evil. . . (tm)
I just thought I would mention that I find this quite an interesting comment. It implies that doing the "legal" thing is evil, and that turning one's head blindly to criminal acts is the good (non-evil) thing to do. Is it then not evil to "steal" works of another (copyrighted) and give them (copyrighted works) to others? Which is then better. . . To stand by and watch someone break into a store and rob it blind, or make a simple call on your cellphone to the law inforcement? (or possibly a better analogy would be, "and when asked to come forward as a witness and testify to what you saw?")
I don't have a problem with bittorrent, but to call obviously illegal activities as anything other then evil is well evil.
If you don't like the law seek to change it or move to a land without such laws.
Slashdot Mirror
evolution does not define Darwinism. And Ironicly Darwin, himself, professed Christianity later in his life.
funny how a coward would take a simple statement, and assume something absolutly opposite. Can one contend a theory without being assumed to be of a particular religious group? You are sad indeed.
mod up, mod up, I mean evolve to a higher status! Either way we can't do it on our own now can we? Good point.
Yet, we swallow it up not even knowing the difference.
Yet we "evolved" into a friece predator. Wait a min.
(Smiles) It's all relative, or is it? To truely believe, is to believe that all have free will and choice to believe in what they choose to believe.
And we wonder why there is a debate between Darwinism and Creationism. I do find it interesting that those who propose to believe in a scientific answer, which defines itself on proof of fact, that they will make "matter of fact" statements that have not been proven as such, but are in actuallity mere theory and speculation.
Now I assume this will cause the generic, self-agnostic complaints and personal insults, but let them come. The same thing you complain about those on the other side of the fence, you do yourself as well. Complain that creationism has no scientic "proof" then deny science when making sweeping "matter of fact" statements about a theory that you subscribe too.
Let the hypocrisy fly!
And you want to be treated like adults.
Speak as an American for those in Holand. Makes sence. Get over it. This is not Holand's history, so your comment holds little water.
Not that I'm that smart about your situation or anything but. . .
I keep my itunes library on a portable HD 250GB, and just take it along if I want to hook to another PC, then once connected I just replace the Library file with mine that I have saved on the external HD, and walla, start up Itunes, and everything is just the way I left it. Downloaded songs, ripped songs, downloaded movies (from more then just the itunes service), or ripped movies, all my albulm art, and everything.
Now for the ipod thing. Well the Ipod is a portable solution for your music library. It is not designed to be your music library. Now before you flame me for saying that, that is Apple's model for the ipod. That's why you copy to an ipod and not from an ipod. Now if you don't like their business model for a particular appliance, then don't bitch about it here. Bitch with your spending dollars. I know many people use the ipod as their sole music library, and well it can work, but don't get mad at Apple for doing something that is not the intent of the product. Your ipod is not a transfer device. It is a portable music listening device.
One more thing. . . Do you still have your ipod? Do you still use it? If so, then you aren't putting your spending dollars where your mouth is. Don't expect a company to change a product because you don't like part of what it does, as long as you continue to buy and use the product as is.
Please explain how a database is considered a technology, instead of just a use of technology. Then answer why your comment deserves merit.
If you didn't like my comment posted on a forum of comments about uses of technology, then state that if you like. I stated how this could be used. Do you see another use? Then state so. If you have a problem with my stated use then state that.
But as is, Troll you are. So I defy you.
This will make it much easier for theives to "legally" steal from stores.
.
Let me explain. . .
An theif duplicates the barcode of a cheap item, say a pair of jeans that was on clearance at a particular sotre, say Walmart. Then that theif takes his/her duplicated barcodes (on labels) and applies them to a more expensive pair of jeans. Then they proceed to the "newest" clerk at the checkout lines, and proceeds to purchase a number of the jeans at the clearance price instead of at their retail prices.
Now there will be a database so the theif can do more of their work in the safety of their home. How nice!
you coward.
Am I the only one here who preferes Yahoo over Google?
Please re-read my post and tell me where I mentioned anything about setting a reserve price??????
I was not talking about setting a reserve price. I was talking about setting a lower then "perceived value" in order to get bidders to bid on your item instead of the 100 others just like it (if there are 100 others).
If you want to list things on Ebay that will sell, then you have to find something there is a market for already, and a price that you are willing to sell it for that is a lower price then the avg. listing/selling amount of similar items.
In contrast, there is, in my opinion, only 1 good reason to ever use a reserve listing. That is if you are using that listing as a test, to see what the "perceived value" of an item is, when you are not sure.
If you don't like reserve auctions then you have every right to avoid them. I honestly don't like them either. You can however figure out the intent of the seller of that auction by looking at their feedback score, and if they have a high score (meaning they sell a lot or buy a lot) then they are probably a seasoned Ebayer, and are using the reserve listing to find out the "perceived value" of the item and most likely if it doesn't sell, then they will relist the item with a more reasonable opening bid, and no-reserve. The other type would be a novice seller, who doesn't understand the usefullness of using a reserve listing, and instead are doing what you mentioned. those are the auctions I would avoid. Not because of the reserve listing, but because there are often to many headaches when buying something from a novice seller in such situations.
Ok, your the idiot and moron here.
A seller lists lower bids because we understand the concept of hooking. That's where you hook a bidder with their low initial bid, and because the bidder has already placed a level of commitment in the item, they are more likely to continue to bid on that item.
You obviously know nothing of this. Because well, your a moron.
A seller who does this plays on odds. yes. And there is a chance that the item you have listed at $1.00 opening bid only gets one bidder and sells for $1.00. Yipee for that bidder! But then that tells the seller that 1. there isn't a good enough market for that item on Ebay, or 2. That's all the item is worth.
So how does your attacking comments make you as the poster of those comments look? Let's see to paraphrase you, "I'm sorry but you are a moron. A big F@### moron."
Not all money is made with 1 item sold. It's about selling more units. Do I sell one widget for $100.00 (with a cost of say, $50.00) because it is worth it, on the open market somewhere in the world. Or do I list that same item for $75.00 and end up selling 3 of them at that price? Which one nets me more money?
If your shallow mind can only think as far as 1 item then yes selling it for $100.00 nets more money per item. But if I can sell a higher qty. at a lower price then I will net a higher profit.
I tell you what, I'm glad there are buyers and sellers out there like you. That makes my job easier.
I, as a seller, do not like snipping bids.
I want those impluse bidders to bid incrementally. It's good for the bottom line, and that is what is most important isn't it?
Auctions are not there for the good "deal" that the bidder gets. It is there to make money for the sellers and the auction house. Ebay is an auction house. Their customers are not those who bid on items list. It's the people that list things to sell, and Ebay makes more money if my items sell for more money.
It would be a very good thing for Ebay to put in a bid extention if a bid is placed in the last few min. of an auction, but I would not have it set to 10 min. like someone else has mentioned. If all you want to do is stop the snipping, then make it the last min. If someone puts in a bid with less the 60 sec. left in the auction then extend the auction by 60 sec. This keeps the snippers at bay, as long as the other bidders watching the auction have the chance to make an impulse higher bid. There is a lot of people who would up their "max" bid by a buck or two or ten if they now a snipe has happened. And that is good for business.
Ebay makes money from sellers, and sellers would make more money this way.
Could someone still find an automated way around this? Absolutely. They could set the snipe to 61 sec. before auction close instead of 30 sec. and they would probably still win because not every bidder watches the auction at the last min. But for those who do, they still have a chance to manually bid up the item.
This is so freaking funny!!! Mod parent up for laugh effect.
Who knows why the OS community is having a harder time becoming mainstream? Is it because the technical skills of the developers isn't there?
A big resounding NO. It's because of greedy little tightwad people like the parent here.
It's funny how a "brand" can change something.
Many people refer to any generic tissue for blowing your nose, to Klenex. Klenex is a brand of tissue, but that brand is coined as the defacto term for all tissue.
Just like Klenex, Apple's Ipod has reached a level of iconic status, because simple video clips posted on the net are now refered to as a podcast, yet all they really are is a simple video clip posted on a website. This should more correctly be termed as a vidcast if anything.
Praise the gods of Apple for generating such a term as podcast, and praise the media for using that term to redefine internet released videos.
Sounds like a Parody of another OS to me.
Music, or software?
I'm curious about what those that have no problem with duplicating software (without the proper registration/purchase) or sharing/downloading/copying music as well.
Does plagerism* differ for these different mediums? How so?
Duh!
Creative has been riding the coat tails of publicity for their case, for months, hoping Apple would crack and just pay them off. but what their lawyers failed to account for was all the time they where giving the Apple lawyers, to come up with a counter-measure.
Creative almost begged Apple to find something to fight back with.
I don't know about you, but if some bully down the block was bragging about knocking your block off, and telling all your neighbors how he was going to kick your ass. . . Well, I for sure would be getting as much dirt and weapons together in my arsonal* to be able to fight back when the wanna-be bully came knocking on my door.
The best way to win a fire-fight is the element of surprise. You see the bad guy coming to get you, and you set up an ambush, and you put them in their place.
Let's see. . . 1 patent vs. 4 who wins? Who was more "creative?"
Are you kidding me? You call this. . .
smooth?
Smooth for who? Let's see. . . Don't allow the user to define how they want to organize their files, including programs? And then you want the computer to auto-execute any old program upon installation? Come on. that's butt-ass backwards.
Apple doesn't make the user drag and drop. It allows it. It is the software developer that defines how the install process works.
Maybe someone should back the stupid train up to your house so you can climb on board.
hmm, you got me interested. Please help me do this as well. I have t-mobile, and a Razr, and would like to find a way around T-zones. email me admin(at)focusarts(dot)net
Thank you
I mean really. . . . . We all aready knew this. It wasn't some big shocker.
What is a big shocker is that this guy doesn't get the fact that that is exactly the reason that many people are thinking about buying a mac, because they can try out a mac and still have windoz to fall back on (ouch that would have to hurt).
He touts this as if people are jumping into it blindly, and being swindeled. Come on, get with it. Pleople realize this, and are looking forward to it. It's a benefit, not some underhanded sucker punch.
I just thought I would mention that I find this quite an interesting comment. It implies that doing the "legal" thing is evil, and that turning one's head blindly to criminal acts is the good (non-evil) thing to do. Is it then not evil to "steal" works of another (copyrighted) and give them (copyrighted works) to others? Which is then better. . . To stand by and watch someone break into a store and rob it blind, or make a simple call on your cellphone to the law inforcement? (or possibly a better analogy would be, "and when asked to come forward as a witness and testify to what you saw?")
I don't have a problem with bittorrent, but to call obviously illegal activities as anything other then evil is well evil.
If you don't like the law seek to change it or move to a land without such laws.