"Conspiracy theory" is a term constantly re-invented and propagated, and most importantly, given negative emotional connotation by the media.
Yeah, I know, men in boardrooms sit around and say "today let's direct media to give conspiracy theory a negative connotation". Not that there aren't, at any time, any number of conspiracy theories floating around, many of which give themselves bad names. There are also conspiracy theories popularized by the media and believed by the public.
So the real question is what do you believe and why? There are tons of conspiracy theories to choose from. If you believe in a Illuminati-type conspiracy, complete with the idea that big media prevents people from seeing it, then show the evidence that everybody is missing because they are watching too much TV. I mean it must be blindingly obvious if it's just a matter of too much TV.
I would guess that you would hold conspiracy theory and religion to be closely related phenomena, yet conspiracy theory is marginalized while religion is widespread.
That's because religion offers answers to the "meaning of life".
It sounds to me that you take a bunch of random conspiracy theories as true. I'm not sure what TV has to do with it -- you can watch TV and believe in conspiracy theories at the same time.
Not Utopia, but certainly fewer glassy eyes. Video games must go as well.
Yeah, how dare people seek out entertainment. Imagine all those stupid people throughout the history of humanity telling stories and playing games. They should spend all their leisure time doing some kind of meaningful work, like listening to Fantastic Lad on Slashdot.
You have definitely been watching too much TV.
Or you haven't watched any or looked hard enough, or maybe you just have a stick up your ass. I don't like >90% of movies or television, but there's always a few things to pick out from the pile. Then again, there's only a few shows that I watch, and I only watch a movie now and then. Nobody says you have to spend all your time in front of the TV.
But then you also think the government is more interested in creating jobs than in keeping people under thumb, and I didn't say government, did I? I said 'Elite'. Big difference.
Right, how dare there be a class of people that gain more than others. I worked for this real elitist bastard, totally rich. Oh sure, he started his own company and used his intelligence, vision, and dedication to make it work, and sold it for millions and then started another company. But what an elitist bastard!
I despise 99% of the brain-rotting garbage produced as news and entertainment today, and consider it to be largely responsible for the mess the human race is currently in.
Humanity has always been in a mess. I don't think getting rid of Hollywood will lead to Utopia.
Keeping the masses well-drugged is a vital ingredient in successful global control, so it hardly matters how the brain-rot is distributed.
Government is probably more worried about keeping people employed than "drugging" the masses. Besides that, on a personal level there are plenty of quality music, movies, and shows that I would miss without an industry supported by copyright. It's not up to you to decide what people find entertaining.
Oh, you might have lots of fancy contracts protecting minority shareholder rights etc. - but in the end they'll just be more worthless paper to file with the share certificates.
If its just a matter of selling ad banners, then I can see them perhaps doing as they say; breaking even.
TPB is very large and well into the profit making range for an advertising based web site.
It also sounds like they're paying tax on their income.
Where do you get this from? I have seen stories that the money goes offshore and is not taxed. Why don't you ask the site operators just what their expenses and revenue are? Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer.
Don't do your research on slashdot, if you want to know how much money they make, read their blogs!
You won't reply to Reality Master's request for a link, because you don't have one. These guys don't list their expenses and revenue. They funnel their money via offshore accounts. Why do you think that is? It's pretty naive to think a site as large as TPB can't make money from advertising.
On the other hand, that calculation does not take into account what they spend running servers for a major international website with millions of users every day (both HTTP and BitTorrent).
They don't host the BitTorrent files themselves -- they just provide links. Their expenses are minimal.
Maybe it is, but I'm not the type to try and "scam" karma by using trickery. [...] but I appreciate the fact that someone considered it Informative.
I suspect most people game the system without even thinking about it, in the same way they might call somebody with an opposing view a troll. The point is that moderators often respond to special pleading about karma, so your Informative is tainted, even if that wasn't your conscious intention.
Well, all very interesting, and I thank you for the Milberg & Weiss link, but what I'm still missing is what the law actually says. So for now I'll reserve judgment until I do some research.
Are you saying this for the specific case of Google, or are you saying this because you think that public companies can only act in the interest of profit?
I'm saying this in the specific case of Google, based on their actions, though it's the safest assumption to make of any company.
If you are saying that Google is compelled by securities law to act badly, you're wrong, despite what the people with rolled-up sleeves say on CNBC.
A lot of people on Slashdot say this too. What's your explanation for why they are wrong?
I do not see why your post was moderated flamebait, it seems perfectly well reasoned.
Because somebody complained that it should be, and because the original poster didn't play the Slashdot game of defiantly declaring how he doesn't care how he'll be down-modded.
AFAICT, they've stuck by their motto, and they understand how important these issues are for humankind.
Get real. First and foremost they care about their bottom line. Having an open network prevents ISPs from squeezing them. Sometimes Google's interests and the public's interests align. Great, I'm glad when it does. Just don't pretend that Google is some kind of saintly company. They've done plenty of wrong, and you'd be a fool to blindly trust them.
It's not my fault I'm behind a Websense gateway. Many people that read Slashdot are. The OP is irresponsible, or perhaps a better word is inconsiderate, for not keeping that in mind.
What the fuck, why should the original poster care that you are filtered by Websense? How is that his responsibility? As somebody who is not afraid to click on that link, why should I be denied information because of your puritanical fear?
(Burning my karma once again, folks don't seem to like to see "popular" falsehoods debunked).
Oh bullshit. I've seen this "debunked" and debated nearly every time this gets mentioned in a thread, and it's nearly always modded up. Acting like some kind of martyr with your karma is a cheap Slashdot trick to get modded up.
If you don't want to sped that much, you will get far less performance than me. And that makes a lot of difference to the experience of gaming.
I don't think so. Most games run perfectly fine on cards that are a year or two old. Besides that, there's been a diminishing return on graphic card upgrades for quite some time. If you're spending $500 on graphic cards you are paying top dollar for small benefits.
I'm both having a hard time finding any apple apologists
You're a classic apologist, but don't think you are, which is why you can't find any. You even end your post with "Even in cases where Apple is just fighting dilution of their own apps/sales by preventing competition - we don't like it, but without Apple having a monopoly, it's not actually unethical of them to do so."
Speaks for itself. Step out of the reality distortion field one of these days.
Your post is incomprehensible. You say "it depends" and then you say "always go for efficiency". They just aren't compatible.
Efficiency is not worth sacrificing code readability unless there's a demonstrable need for it. You have your priorities backwards. First priority is to get your code working in a straightforward manner. Give some thought to performance up front, but don't obfuscate your code for performance reasons unless you really need to.
What does OSS have to do with "free, as in speech".
I prefer the phrase is "free as in freedom", where part of that freedom means you can redistribute (possibly modified) what you have received. It restores the freedom of speech that copyright has taken away.
Slashdot Mirror
Go to take a look at the "enterprise softwares" first, make sure you even know what all those terms mean
It's "software", not "softwares".
I just run my computer in a hidden dimension only accessible to myself.
"Conspiracy theory" is a term constantly re-invented and propagated, and most importantly, given negative emotional connotation by the media.
Yeah, I know, men in boardrooms sit around and say "today let's direct media to give conspiracy theory a negative connotation". Not that there aren't, at any time, any number of conspiracy theories floating around, many of which give themselves bad names. There are also conspiracy theories popularized by the media and believed by the public.
So the real question is what do you believe and why? There are tons of conspiracy theories to choose from. If you believe in a Illuminati-type conspiracy, complete with the idea that big media prevents people from seeing it, then show the evidence that everybody is missing because they are watching too much TV. I mean it must be blindingly obvious if it's just a matter of too much TV.
I would guess that you would hold conspiracy theory and religion to be closely related phenomena, yet conspiracy theory is marginalized while religion is widespread.
That's because religion offers answers to the "meaning of life".
It sounds to me that you take a bunch of random conspiracy theories as true. I'm not sure what TV has to do with it -- you can watch TV and believe in conspiracy theories at the same time.
Not Utopia, but certainly fewer glassy eyes. Video games must go as well.
Yeah, how dare people seek out entertainment. Imagine all those stupid people throughout the history of humanity telling stories and playing games. They should spend all their leisure time doing some kind of meaningful work, like listening to Fantastic Lad on Slashdot.
You have definitely been watching too much TV.
Or you haven't watched any or looked hard enough, or maybe you just have a stick up your ass. I don't like >90% of movies or television, but there's always a few things to pick out from the pile. Then again, there's only a few shows that I watch, and I only watch a movie now and then. Nobody says you have to spend all your time in front of the TV.
But then you also think the government is more interested in creating jobs than in keeping people under thumb, and I didn't say government, did I? I said 'Elite'. Big difference.
Right, how dare there be a class of people that gain more than others. I worked for this real elitist bastard, totally rich. Oh sure, he started his own company and used his intelligence, vision, and dedication to make it work, and sold it for millions and then started another company. But what an elitist bastard!
I despise 99% of the brain-rotting garbage produced as news and entertainment today, and consider it to be largely responsible for the mess the human race is currently in.
Humanity has always been in a mess. I don't think getting rid of Hollywood will lead to Utopia.
Keeping the masses well-drugged is a vital ingredient in successful global control, so it hardly matters how the brain-rot is distributed.
Government is probably more worried about keeping people employed than "drugging" the masses. Besides that, on a personal level there are plenty of quality music, movies, and shows that I would miss without an industry supported by copyright. It's not up to you to decide what people find entertaining.
Oh, you might have lots of fancy contracts protecting minority shareholder rights etc. - but in the end they'll just be more worthless paper to file with the share certificates.
Did you sue?
If its just a matter of selling ad banners, then I can see them perhaps doing as they say; breaking even.
TPB is very large and well into the profit making range for an advertising based web site.
It also sounds like they're paying tax on their income.
Where do you get this from? I have seen stories that the money goes offshore and is not taxed. Why don't you ask the site operators just what their expenses and revenue are? Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer.
Don't do your research on slashdot, if you want to know how much money they make, read their blogs!
You won't reply to Reality Master's request for a link, because you don't have one. These guys don't list their expenses and revenue. They funnel their money via offshore accounts. Why do you think that is? It's pretty naive to think a site as large as TPB can't make money from advertising.
On the other hand, that calculation does not take into account what they spend running servers for a major international website with millions of users every day (both HTTP and BitTorrent).
They don't host the BitTorrent files themselves -- they just provide links. Their expenses are minimal.
Maybe it is, but I'm not the type to try and "scam" karma by using trickery. [...] but I appreciate the fact that someone considered it Informative.
I suspect most people game the system without even thinking about it, in the same way they might call somebody with an opposing view a troll. The point is that moderators often respond to special pleading about karma, so your Informative is tainted, even if that wasn't your conscious intention.
Well, all very interesting, and I thank you for the Milberg & Weiss link, but what I'm still missing is what the law actually says. So for now I'll reserve judgment until I do some research.
Are you saying this for the specific case of Google, or are you saying this because you think that public companies can only act in the interest of profit?
I'm saying this in the specific case of Google, based on their actions, though it's the safest assumption to make of any company.
If you are saying that Google is compelled by securities law to act badly, you're wrong, despite what the people with rolled-up sleeves say on CNBC.
A lot of people on Slashdot say this too. What's your explanation for why they are wrong?
I do not see why your post was moderated flamebait, it seems perfectly well reasoned.
Because somebody complained that it should be, and because the original poster didn't play the Slashdot game of defiantly declaring how he doesn't care how he'll be down-modded.
AFAICT, they've stuck by their motto, and they understand how important these issues are for humankind.
Get real. First and foremost they care about their bottom line. Having an open network prevents ISPs from squeezing them. Sometimes Google's interests and the public's interests align. Great, I'm glad when it does. Just don't pretend that Google is some kind of saintly company. They've done plenty of wrong, and you'd be a fool to blindly trust them.
It's not my fault I'm behind a Websense gateway. Many people that read Slashdot are. The OP is irresponsible, or perhaps a better word is inconsiderate, for not keeping that in mind.
What the fuck, why should the original poster care that you are filtered by Websense? How is that his responsibility? As somebody who is not afraid to click on that link, why should I be denied information because of your puritanical fear?
(Burning my karma once again, folks don't seem to like to see "popular" falsehoods debunked).
Oh bullshit. I've seen this "debunked" and debated nearly every time this gets mentioned in a thread, and it's nearly always modded up. Acting like some kind of martyr with your karma is a cheap Slashdot trick to get modded up.
If you don't want to sped that much, you will get far less performance than me. And that makes a lot of difference to the experience of gaming.
I don't think so. Most games run perfectly fine on cards that are a year or two old. Besides that, there's been a diminishing return on graphic card upgrades for quite some time. If you're spending $500 on graphic cards you are paying top dollar for small benefits.
If you want a reply repost with your real account.
I'm both having a hard time finding any apple apologists
You're a classic apologist, but don't think you are, which is why you can't find any. You even end your post with "Even in cases where Apple is just fighting dilution of their own apps/sales by preventing competition - we don't like it, but without Apple having a monopoly, it's not actually unethical of them to do so."
Speaks for itself. Step out of the reality distortion field one of these days.
I don't think it's time to panic yet.
Don't panic. Just walk away in disgust.
Ken Iverson was a Real Man of Genius.
Your post is incomprehensible. You say "it depends" and then you say "always go for efficiency". They just aren't compatible.
Efficiency is not worth sacrificing code readability unless there's a demonstrable need for it. You have your priorities backwards. First priority is to get your code working in a straightforward manner. Give some thought to performance up front, but don't obfuscate your code for performance reasons unless you really need to.
What does OSS have to do with "free, as in speech".
I prefer the phrase is "free as in freedom", where part of that freedom means you can redistribute (possibly modified) what you have received. It restores the freedom of speech that copyright has taken away.
3. Um I've run vista just fine on computers NOT marked as vista capable. And this is the same as #1 so you're just inflating your numbers.
The fraudulent "Vista Capable" is well documented. It wasn't just about beefy hardware, it was also about poorly supported device drivers: