For the first year after I had MS Windows on my computer, I did not have a mouse on my system. It is entirely possible that they know what they are doing with keyboard shortcuts, and therefore do not need a mouse.
I knew that when YT stated that the copyright holders need to report the infractions, there would be trouble. We users can not even flag a video on YT as being a possible copyright infringement - You have to be the actual holder of the copyright to do so. Viacom is definitely overstating that YT "depends on" them. This could not be further from the truth. If you removed every last YT video which broke copyright and were able to somehow keep them off, YT would still be just as big as ever.
When I view videos on YT, I'm not there to view illegal material. I like to watch the user-created of public domain videos - the copyrighted stuff I can watch legally on the networks own websites as well as the television that's gathering dust in the other room - yep, the lure of homebrew and public domain video is much greater than the junk they try to show on television.
With the exception of one or two Hollywood movies a year, all of the big budget stuff is a waste of time and money. Due to this, having Viacom's (or any other company's) content on YT is only helping to get their content to more eyes. I understand how it violates copyrights, but Hollywood and television are dying breeds.
Why not offer your content on your own website with maybe a banner or in-video advertising? Not 100% of internet users like dealing with it, but I'm willing to bet it will work out for you like it is working for other networks who are doing the same thing by bringing in revenue and steering at least some of the eyes back to the legitimate thing. Try as hard as you like, you will always have this problem, be it in a public place like YT, or simply on the underground file-sharing networks such as P2P and IRC. Get with the program Viacom: YT poses no threat to you.
This post shocked me at first. It states "Matt Damon, Adrien Brody and Gary Sinise will play Kirk, Spock, and Scotty, respectively." Gary Sinise as Scotty?! I just couldn't fathom that - he looks nothing like him. Accent could be faked, but still - Sinise?
I went and checked the 'source' which clarifies that Sinise is thought to be playing Leonard "Bones" McCoy, not Scotty. The original author wrote, "Recent rumours have also suggested that Scottish actor James McAvoy might be in talks to play engineer Montgomery Scott..." Which makes a bit more sense.
Sometimes I wonder how closely the media pays attention to the source when they are writing their stories. Obviously in this article, not very much.
Still, even if it were bad, knowing first-hand what it is all about and how bad it really is... Even if I used it only for 10 minutes, I would be satisfied knowing that I've given it a go lol.
Speaking of orkut - I've been trying to become a member for over 2 years. All they tell me is "someone will contact you soon, as our site is invite-only"
TWO YEARS i've waited... Is it worth it? How should I know? Nothing is public about it - at all!
So, if you are a member of Orkut, and you read this message, hit me up! I'm very curious!
The government should not have laws if it is not willing to follow them themselves! This is just ridiculous, though. It's a simple as giving notice, my god, is that so hard?
I was telling a friend about the article, he is Republican. He skimmed it and did not READ it. Now he is arguing in their favor "because military and intel agencies ALWAYS meet in closed session."
Well, okay, that's fine that they do - the article is saying that they're not giving NOTICE that they are going to, which is required by the law that they themselves created!
It's a really simple thing, really. You, as an agency, simply fax a piece of paper to a newspaper or other media source, or even just paste it on a bulletin board in a publically accessible place - that's all there is to it... Why the need for secrecy at the drop of a hat?
Hmm, I guess my programmer side is kicking in lol.
I personally think in that way most of the time - the way I mentioned. I'm not usually one to think "oh it's a chihuahua... which is a short haired... variety of breed... of canine... which is a mammal..." My mind goes the other way - "it's an animal, has to be a dog, and looks like a chihuahua"
Maybe I'm just different tho LOL! I don't mind being abnormal, I guess.
Anyone who has ever setup a DNS server knows that the domain naming scheme has been backwards! Glad to see someone owning up to the mixup back then!
It makes sense to me to have domain names reversed:
Today's URL (fake)
http://electronics.walmart.com/
which goes from narrow to broad. I don't normally try to think in reverse!
Better URL (fake)
http://com.walmart.electronics/
lends to a better way to list a web address. broad to narrow, just like the way we think.
type of website
name of company/organization/network
name of department/server inside the company/organization/network
When you are working with DNS servers, you'll note that it's not.com - it's com.
Now that was funny!
Personally, I continuously choke my 100 MB/s network during the day. I'm beginning to wonder if gigabit ethernet is really fast enough...
I'm curious to know how much is on the mouse. The article mentions that there is more bacteria and/or fungii on the enter and space keys because they are used more often...
I use my mouse a LOT more than my keyboard...
Slashdot Mirror
For the first year after I had MS Windows on my computer, I did not have a mouse on my system. It is entirely possible that they know what they are doing with keyboard shortcuts, and therefore do not need a mouse.
This is indeed nothing new. Geocoding photos has been around for years - even in the same form that this person has used: Article on using Google Maps + geocoded photos (check out the date). There have even been cameras which contain built-in GPS to automatically geotag your pictures as you take them on the market.
I knew that when YT stated that the copyright holders need to report the infractions, there would be trouble. We users can not even flag a video on YT as being a possible copyright infringement - You have to be the actual holder of the copyright to do so. Viacom is definitely overstating that YT "depends on" them. This could not be further from the truth. If you removed every last YT video which broke copyright and were able to somehow keep them off, YT would still be just as big as ever.
When I view videos on YT, I'm not there to view illegal material. I like to watch the user-created of public domain videos - the copyrighted stuff I can watch legally on the networks own websites as well as the television that's gathering dust in the other room - yep, the lure of homebrew and public domain video is much greater than the junk they try to show on television.
With the exception of one or two Hollywood movies a year, all of the big budget stuff is a waste of time and money. Due to this, having Viacom's (or any other company's) content on YT is only helping to get their content to more eyes. I understand how it violates copyrights, but Hollywood and television are dying breeds.
Why not offer your content on your own website with maybe a banner or in-video advertising? Not 100% of internet users like dealing with it, but I'm willing to bet it will work out for you like it is working for other networks who are doing the same thing by bringing in revenue and steering at least some of the eyes back to the legitimate thing. Try as hard as you like, you will always have this problem, be it in a public place like YT, or simply on the underground file-sharing networks such as P2P and IRC. Get with the program Viacom: YT poses no threat to you.
This post shocked me at first. It states "Matt Damon, Adrien Brody and Gary Sinise will play Kirk, Spock, and Scotty, respectively." Gary Sinise as Scotty?! I just couldn't fathom that - he looks nothing like him. Accent could be faked, but still - Sinise?
I went and checked the 'source' which clarifies that Sinise is thought to be playing Leonard "Bones" McCoy, not Scotty. The original author wrote, "Recent rumours have also suggested that Scottish actor James McAvoy might be in talks to play engineer Montgomery Scott..." Which makes a bit more sense.
Sometimes I wonder how closely the media pays attention to the source when they are writing their stories. Obviously in this article, not very much.
Still, even if it were bad, knowing first-hand what it is all about and how bad it really is... Even if I used it only for 10 minutes, I would be satisfied knowing that I've given it a go lol.
Speaking of orkut - I've been trying to become a member for over 2 years. All they tell me is "someone will contact you soon, as our site is invite-only"
TWO YEARS i've waited... Is it worth it? How should I know? Nothing is public about it - at all!
So, if you are a member of Orkut, and you read this message, hit me up! I'm very curious!
The government should not have laws if it is not willing to follow them themselves! This is just ridiculous, though. It's a simple as giving notice, my god, is that so hard?
I was telling a friend about the article, he is Republican. He skimmed it and did not READ it. Now he is arguing in their favor "because military and intel agencies ALWAYS meet in closed session."
Well, okay, that's fine that they do - the article is saying that they're not giving NOTICE that they are going to, which is required by the law that they themselves created!
It's a really simple thing, really. You, as an agency, simply fax a piece of paper to a newspaper or other media source, or even just paste it on a bulletin board in a publically accessible place - that's all there is to it... Why the need for secrecy at the drop of a hat?
Makes you wonder what they're really up to...
Hmm, I guess my programmer side is kicking in lol. I personally think in that way most of the time - the way I mentioned. I'm not usually one to think "oh it's a chihuahua... which is a short haired... variety of breed... of canine... which is a mammal..." My mind goes the other way - "it's an animal, has to be a dog, and looks like a chihuahua" Maybe I'm just different tho LOL! I don't mind being abnormal, I guess.
Anyone who has ever setup a DNS server knows that the domain naming scheme has been backwards! Glad to see someone owning up to the mixup back then! It makes sense to me to have domain names reversed: Today's URL (fake) http://electronics.walmart.com/ which goes from narrow to broad. I don't normally try to think in reverse! Better URL (fake) http://com.walmart.electronics/ lends to a better way to list a web address. broad to narrow, just like the way we think. type of website name of company/organization/network name of department/server inside the company/organization/network When you are working with DNS servers, you'll note that it's not .com - it's com.
Now that was funny! Personally, I continuously choke my 100 MB/s network during the day. I'm beginning to wonder if gigabit ethernet is really fast enough...
I can just imagine some company doing such a thing.
Someone forgot to run his - I'm getting a 404 Error on his blog lol.
I'm curious to know how much is on the mouse. The article mentions that there is more bacteria and/or fungii on the enter and space keys because they are used more often... I use my mouse a LOT more than my keyboard...