"You know what's worse? It'd be a quick half-hour job to fix it, if only the owners had thought to demand the Source Code."
Spoken like someone who has never actually debugged crappy code before. If I had a nickel for every time someone just needed "a half-hour" to fix a problem in code....
"im just tired that "photoshop this" "photoshop that""
Just "Google" it. It is a legitimate verb now.
"I bet that over 50% Photoshop owners just has a warez version of it and 80% of photoshop users could do their things with any other software"
And I bet there is a 100% chance you pulled those numbers from right out of yer ass. Thinking something doesn't automagically make it a fact. And haven't you ever seen the GIMP vs. Photoshop discussions like a million times on Slashdot before? If not let me condense it for you - GIMP works great as a free software tool, but most professionals wouldn't use it to do their paid work, as it lacks some of the higher end features of Photoshop.
Good. If people are really putting their money where their mouth is, there should be a few million in there already. Something tells me that sadly, that isn't the case.
Dr Pepper has been around since 1885. I would think that qualifies as "old". I think I still have a couple bottles from the 70s around in my garage somewhere...
Yeah, looks like Steve Jobs doesn't have the monopoly on the "Reality Distortion Field". Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rummy, and Rice all seemed to have it figured out pretty well.
All a matter of perspective. (Winning also helps, as the winners are the ones that write the history books.) One man's "terrorist" is another man's "freedom fighter".
Ever hear of MCI or Sprint? That's right, anyone can use their phone services if they don't want to use AT&T or one of the other "Baby Bells". And in the split, AT&T was reduced in value by approximately 70%.(first paragraph) Sounds like "more powerful than ever" to me!
No, the bolded portion is absolutely true. AT&T used to be the exclusive phone company and consumers had zero other choices for phone services. That is no longer the case. From the article you cited -
"The new AT&T includes eleven Bell Operating Companies, and the long distance division.[3] While it reconstitutes much of the original parent company, the new AT&T Inc. lacks the vertical integration of the historic AT&T Corp. which prompted the antitrust suit and breakup in 1984."
And that is just AT&T. You have heard of it's competitors MCI and Sprint, right? If not, try this link.
"The break up of AT&T was initiated in 1974 by the U.S. Department of Justice antitrust suit against the telephone monopoly. Under the terms of a settlement finalized on January 8, 1982, "Ma Bell" agreed to divest its local exchange service operating companies, in return for a chance to go into the computer business, AT&T Computer Systems. Effective January 1, 1984, AT&T's local operations were split into seven independent Regional Holding Companies, also known as Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs), or "Baby Bells". Afterwards, AT&T, reduced in value by approximately 70%, continued to operate all of its long-distance services, although in the ensuing years it lost portions of its market share to competitors such as MCI and Sprint."
So yes, even though some of the "Baby Bells" are back together, you are not forced to use them as the one and only phone company in the US anymore. Care to explain how that isn't a "meaningful effect"?
"f you show me a single instance of u.s. government action against a monopoly that had any meaningful effect"
Never heard of Ma Bell and the phone monopoly they used to have? That's right, the entire US used to have only 1 phone company. Your choice was use them, or don't have a phone. Hell in the old days, you couldn't even OWN your own phone - they were all considered "rentals" from the phone company.
It has been changed for security purposes. The SSID is now "Geezer" and the password is "psychograndpa". It also displays a warning when logging in "WARNING - unauthorized users will be shot in the face with a shotgun!"
Yes. Technically what they are doing is a "man in the middle" attack. Even more they are looking inside the packets to decide what to do to them. That is a big no-no. If they want to start inspecting packets, they had better be ready to accept all responsibilities for what is inside them. Otherwise stay net neutral and don't look.
More than likely Comcast didn't oversell in your area, so there is tons of bandwidth for few customers. They only tend to get pissy when a small percentage of their customers are using an inordinate amount of bandwidth. You probably haven't hit that limit yet. Either that or they are getting scared of the FCC already.
Correct. I am pretty sure every administration in the past has also tried to expand their power. The current administration just seems to be very effective at doing so without anyone raising much of a clamor.
You really should read the link you posted. No buildings fell down in it.
But that is beside the point. Finding a single example means nothing. Look around you, there are examples that prove the contrary all around you. In fact, I bet you are in one right now! All I need to site (or is it sight in this case?) my evidence is to look out the window at all the buildings standing. I can see at least 100 from here...
"but I don't allow just anyone to cut me open. I usually check references and such.
Gee, if only there were some sort of qualified agency to do all the reference checking for me. Maybe they would check the doctor out, and if they pass the checks, and I don't know maybe give them something that proves they were checked out by a qualified agency. Hmm, what could they issue that would prove that? Maybe some sort of license?
"The public doesn't need protecting"
Yes, it does. Read your own signature if you really need to know the reason why.
"Actually, I think there are already laws in place to protect people from these things."
Yes, they are called licensing laws.
"How does one stop a licensed person from being those things?"
By taking away their license if they violate the rules, therby preventing them from doing business.
"Those kinds of people still exist even with licensing."
Look, licensing isn't going to solve every problem. We all know that. But your idea of throwing it out entirely will cause more of the problems you describe. Without licensing, ANYONE can operate any type of business. At least licensing will catch some of the problems. Even with licensing, you can still do all the things you describe - checking references, asking other people what they think, etc. Licensing isn't stopping you from doing any of those things. Your solution is the equivalent of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Slashdot Mirror
"the inventor of the innernet doesn't like it"
Al Gore doesn't like tracking?
"You know what's worse? It'd be a quick half-hour job to fix it, if only the owners had thought to demand the Source Code."
Spoken like someone who has never actually debugged crappy code before. If I had a nickel for every time someone just needed "a half-hour" to fix a problem in code....
"im just tired that "photoshop this" "photoshop that""
Just "Google" it. It is a legitimate verb now.
"I bet that over 50% Photoshop owners just has a warez version of it and 80% of photoshop users could do their things with any other software"
And I bet there is a 100% chance you pulled those numbers from right out of yer ass. Thinking something doesn't automagically make it a fact. And haven't you ever seen the GIMP vs. Photoshop discussions like a million times on Slashdot before? If not let me condense it for you - GIMP works great as a free software tool, but most professionals wouldn't use it to do their paid work, as it lacks some of the higher end features of Photoshop.
Good. If people are really putting their money where their mouth is, there should be a few million in there already. Something tells me that sadly, that isn't the case.
I'm sure the RIAA covers all it's bases and donates the maximum they can to EVERY candidate.
"Get a million people together (shouldn't be hard if all the torrent sites make note of the campaign) to chip in $1 or $10 each"
If this is such an easy method to raise millions of dollars, why hasn't it already been done to set up a defense fund for RIAA cases?
Maybe Mythbusters should do an episode where they debunk the theory that not only do Slashdotters read TFA, they also read TFC before posting.
Dr Pepper has been around since 1885. I would think that qualifies as "old". I think I still have a couple bottles from the 70s around in my garage somewhere...
Soap box, Ballot box, Jury box, Ammo box -- In that order. I think the jury is just about letting out now...
Yeah, looks like Steve Jobs doesn't have the monopoly on the "Reality Distortion Field". Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rummy, and Rice all seemed to have it figured out pretty well.
"our forefathers would be considered terrorists"
All a matter of perspective. (Winning also helps, as the winners are the ones that write the history books.) One man's "terrorist" is another man's "freedom fighter".
"we get to sink Haley Joel Osmond "
Except he's like, 45 now.
Ever hear of MCI or Sprint? That's right, anyone can use their phone services if they don't want to use AT&T or one of the other "Baby Bells". And in the split, AT&T was reduced in value by approximately 70%.(first paragraph) Sounds like "more powerful than ever" to me!
No, the bolded portion is absolutely true. AT&T used to be the exclusive phone company and consumers had zero other choices for phone services. That is no longer the case. From the article you cited -
"The new AT&T includes eleven Bell Operating Companies, and the long distance division.[3] While it reconstitutes much of the original parent company, the new AT&T Inc. lacks the vertical integration of the historic AT&T Corp. which prompted the antitrust suit and breakup in 1984."
And that is just AT&T. You have heard of it's competitors MCI and Sprint, right? If not, try this link.
"The break up of AT&T was initiated in 1974 by the U.S. Department of Justice antitrust suit against the telephone monopoly. Under the terms of a settlement finalized on January 8, 1982, "Ma Bell" agreed to divest its local exchange service operating companies, in return for a chance to go into the computer business, AT&T Computer Systems. Effective January 1, 1984, AT&T's local operations were split into seven independent Regional Holding Companies, also known as Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs), or "Baby Bells". Afterwards, AT&T, reduced in value by approximately 70%, continued to operate all of its long-distance services, although in the ensuing years it lost portions of its market share to competitors such as MCI and Sprint."
So yes, even though some of the "Baby Bells" are back together, you are not forced to use them as the one and only phone company in the US anymore. Care to explain how that isn't a "meaningful effect"?
"f you show me a single instance of u.s. government action against a monopoly that had any meaningful effect"
Never heard of Ma Bell and the phone monopoly they used to have? That's right, the entire US used to have only 1 phone company. Your choice was use them, or don't have a phone.
Hell in the old days, you couldn't even OWN your own phone - they were all considered "rentals" from the phone company.
It has been changed for security purposes. The SSID is now "Geezer" and the password is "psychograndpa". It also displays a warning when logging in "WARNING - unauthorized users will be shot in the face with a shotgun!"
"So Yeah. There is no 'Just don't buy it' crap with kids."
Exactly. That's why I went with the 'Don't Ever Have Kids' thing. Lots of extra money, big shortage of headaches.
Yes. Technically what they are doing is a "man in the middle" attack. Even more they are looking inside the packets to decide what to do to them. That is a big no-no. If they want to start inspecting packets, they had better be ready to accept all responsibilities for what is inside them. Otherwise stay net neutral and don't look.
More than likely Comcast didn't oversell in your area, so there is tons of bandwidth for few customers. They only tend to get pissy when a small percentage of their customers are using an inordinate amount of bandwidth. You probably haven't hit that limit yet. Either that or they are getting scared of the FCC already.
Correct. I am pretty sure every administration in the past has also tried to expand their power. The current administration just seems to be very effective at doing so without anyone raising much of a clamor.
Yeah but your doctor says you had better cut out all that you-know-what or your hands will never release their kung-fu grips.
You really should read the link you posted. No buildings fell down in it.
But that is beside the point. Finding a single example means nothing. Look around you, there are examples that prove the contrary all around you. In fact, I bet you are in one right now! All I need to site (or is it sight in this case?) my evidence is to look out the window at all the buildings standing. I can see at least 100 from here...
"but I don't allow just anyone to cut me open. I usually check references and such.
Gee, if only there were some sort of qualified agency to do all the reference checking for me. Maybe they would check the doctor out, and if they pass the checks, and I don't know maybe give them something that proves they were checked out by a qualified agency. Hmm, what could they issue that would prove that? Maybe some sort of license?
"The public doesn't need protecting"
Yes, it does. Read your own signature if you really need to know the reason why.
"Actually, I think there are already laws in place to protect people from these things."
Yes, they are called licensing laws.
"How does one stop a licensed person from being those things?"
By taking away their license if they violate the rules, therby preventing them from doing business.
"Those kinds of people still exist even with licensing."
Look, licensing isn't going to solve every problem. We all know that. But your idea of throwing it out entirely will cause more of the problems you describe. Without licensing, ANYONE can operate any type of business. At least licensing will catch some of the problems. Even with licensing, you can still do all the things you describe - checking references, asking other people what they think, etc. Licensing isn't stopping you from doing any of those things. Your solution is the equivalent of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Actually, it's "Cocaine is a hell of a drug".
Just flat out wrong.
A) XP is far from "dying"
B) Gamers have never looked at Linux as a gaming platform, because quite simply - it isn't one.