I can't say you're wrong, I just disagree with a lot of it. It's still a good analogy, because what brought about the changes was legislation. Just because there isn't legislation yet with the DRM doesn't mean the end effect isn't the same, customers getting something through one company, and being able to take it with them.
It's still good for the consumer, at least now they have a choice that doesn't involve having to waste cds. If Microsoft's product is inferior (which no doubt it will be) Apple will still have the market share and customer base to win out. They're not leveraging their money against some no name company to steal better technology and introduce it to the masses as their own this time. This time, the world already knows Apple did it first, and Microsoft will actually have to win them over.
However, I could see an argument about it being unfair towards other portable music devices that can't offer the same free download, now that I think about it, just not the iPod.
How is it anti-competetive? They're doing it so that people are more willing to try their product in a world where DRM has crippled the ability to take music you buy wherever you want.
Remember when people wouldn't switch cellular providers because they didn't wanna deal with switching numbers? Now that the law forces companies to release the numbers at the subscribers will (with possible applicable early termination fees) the market is much MORE competetive.
Now Microsoft is saying it will take the cost of giving consumers the choice, and you're calling it anti-competetive? Even the phone companies never offered to buy numbers from other providers for you. Sure, it's because Microsoft has the leverage to do it that they are, well, finally, in one case, good for them! Good for the consumer! This is one market where you can be sure Microsoft will actually have to make a better product to beat the iPod, and even then, it's a tough battle. They're not just gonna eat up the iPod like they have other technologies. It's here to stay unless microsoft can make a much better product. What they're doing now is just levelling the playing field a lot quicker than they'd otherwise be able to.
I Agree 100%. I think there's just a few anti google people here who are intent on overpowering weak minded people with repetition, or giving fodder to others who are anti-google now able to draw on complaints from others as well.
I search for a lot of stuff, and never porn (on google, because of my job) but nonetheless quite a bit of different subjects. I don't remember ever having to click the second page for results, unless it's an image search, or I need something very specific, or my task requires a lot of cross referencing. Yahoo sucks balls for everything i've tried to use it for.
You had better luck than I. It was so buggy for me I could barely play it. I blamed it on my computer at the time, and gave it to my friend, since he had a better machine. He couldn't get it to work correctly either. I suppose If I gave it another shot now, I might change my mind...I'll give ya that much.
That's the thing with Nintendo... whether intentionally or not, they've fallen behind in the cutting edge graphics and focused more on a different market than Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo games for the most part have simpler controls and are designed for a casual environment, either a party or when you just wanna relax and have a little fun.
I still play solitare on my computer every once in a while, when I get sick of devoting time and energy to complicated RTSs and FPSs. I think that's the demographic Nintendo is aimed at here.
One thing a lot of people overlook is the fact that just because artists receive little money per sale...and most of it goes to the various production companies, the more the artist sells, the better a contract they will be able to negotiate, and in turn get paid better. Just because they don't get much in royalties doesn't mean that the other 99% percent of the sale price goes straight into the coffers and never sees the light of day./Just don't buy from RIAA or MPAA members.
I for one...
Think we should just skip the bullshit and start chipping babies at birth. We all know that's where it's going... resistence is futile.. etc etc..
My cell phone camera's lense is around 5 milimeters accross... so according to TFA, it would still have a foucs time of just over a minute and a half. Kinda gets rid of the spontaneous opportunities that cell cameras provide.
Ridiculous... sorry. Moon landing, fine. I made no argument to that. You continue to ignore the what people are saying in their posts, and change the subject.
To be fair, niether of you had arguments at all. Second, he didn't sound like he was even *trying* to prove a point, like you were, he was just explaining the popular reason for modding you like everyone did.
Heck, if you're right, are you gonna complain about one negatively modded post when other rediculous naysaysers as yourself like Gallileo and Copernicusaucisaurus suffered much worse fates?
I Just have to ask... what kind of things do you search for that only return expired ebay auction links/linkfarms/shitty blogs/online stores ?
I'm not saying it never happens... but I search for a pretty broad range of things on Google, and the only time I ever get bad results is when I'm looking for less-than-admirable things... Hell, If I didn't need to crossreference things so much, that I'm Feeling Lucky button would still work for me, still ends up being the most relevent thing.
I somewhat agree with the blogs thing... but I've even found with that, that it only happens when I'm looking for something a little more abstract, where I can't quite come up with the right search term, a more human description. In that case, the blogs are great, because more often than not, it's someone else describing the same thing and it usually helps me hone down my search a little bit more
Long Live Google. Just, don't get lazy, cuz then you will suck.
Yeah I wasn't very detailed with some things, and you are completely correct. I should have been more specific with some things, but you definitely filled in my blanks.
Like I said, I never held hope for it passing all the way through the major party heirarchies, but I was hoping maybe my more local "hometown" people might be willing to discuss it. I understand the concept for them protecting themselves, but the way that rebuttal was worded to me was almost offensive. At least in public, parties still sugar coat things, it was like he was completely unaware of the fact that there were voters there (like myself) who hadn't pledged to voting for a particular candidate, and the people at our district level definitely lost my votes that day.
Exactly... It's always been such a sure thing for the Dems, that it is a little more unique among other states with an increase in Bush votes.
Little off topic here... I actually went to a Republican district level meeting, with an agenda of making it party policy to change Minnesota's electoral system to a proportional thing. I do understand the pros and cons, and I knew it wouldn't work, but I figured that if I could get it approved at the district level, the issue would at least receive the attention it deserves, and a more popular, revised version of my motion might be drafted. Nope.
"For the first time in our lifetimes, the Republican party has a chance to win a majority in a presidental election. Why in God's good name would we take that and right away hand at least four of those votes back over to the other side? We must do everything we can to get every vote for the party!"
I was disgusted by this "for the party" and not "for the people" idealogy. I wasn't naive, but I was hoping at a more local level, these people would be more neighboorly. I was wrong. That was my first and only delve into partisan politics!/End useless story
Slashdot Mirror
who the hell modded this as troll?
"I just need another minute to get into the mainframe! Just give me one more minute! Where's the van?"
I stand ustreas.govowned
Yes, but federally issued money is "Legal for all debts, public and private" so you can use your own, but you can't deny paper.
I can't say you're wrong, I just disagree with a lot of it. It's still a good analogy, because what brought about the changes was legislation. Just because there isn't legislation yet with the DRM doesn't mean the end effect isn't the same, customers getting something through one company, and being able to take it with them. It's still good for the consumer, at least now they have a choice that doesn't involve having to waste cds. If Microsoft's product is inferior (which no doubt it will be) Apple will still have the market share and customer base to win out. They're not leveraging their money against some no name company to steal better technology and introduce it to the masses as their own this time. This time, the world already knows Apple did it first, and Microsoft will actually have to win them over. However, I could see an argument about it being unfair towards other portable music devices that can't offer the same free download, now that I think about it, just not the iPod.
How is it anti-competetive? They're doing it so that people are more willing to try their product in a world where DRM has crippled the ability to take music you buy wherever you want.
Remember when people wouldn't switch cellular providers because they didn't wanna deal with switching numbers? Now that the law forces companies to release the numbers at the subscribers will (with possible applicable early termination fees) the market is much MORE competetive.
Now Microsoft is saying it will take the cost of giving consumers the choice, and you're calling it anti-competetive? Even the phone companies never offered to buy numbers from other providers for you. Sure, it's because Microsoft has the leverage to do it that they are, well, finally, in one case, good for them! Good for the consumer! This is one market where you can be sure Microsoft will actually have to make a better product to beat the iPod, and even then, it's a tough battle. They're not just gonna eat up the iPod like they have other technologies. It's here to stay unless microsoft can make a much better product. What they're doing now is just levelling the playing field a lot quicker than they'd otherwise be able to.
I Agree 100%. I think there's just a few anti google people here who are intent on overpowering weak minded people with repetition, or giving fodder to others who are anti-google now able to draw on complaints from others as well. I search for a lot of stuff, and never porn (on google, because of my job) but nonetheless quite a bit of different subjects. I don't remember ever having to click the second page for results, unless it's an image search, or I need something very specific, or my task requires a lot of cross referencing. Yahoo sucks balls for everything i've tried to use it for.
So it is different. I guess I shouldn't believe parents so blindly.
You had better luck than I. It was so buggy for me I could barely play it. I blamed it on my computer at the time, and gave it to my friend, since he had a better machine. He couldn't get it to work correctly either. I suppose If I gave it another shot now, I might change my mind...I'll give ya that much.
The first one was far superior.
wait, did Bush leave?
That's the thing with Nintendo... whether intentionally or not, they've fallen behind in the cutting edge graphics and focused more on a different market than Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo games for the most part have simpler controls and are designed for a casual environment, either a party or when you just wanna relax and have a little fun. I still play solitare on my computer every once in a while, when I get sick of devoting time and energy to complicated RTSs and FPSs. I think that's the demographic Nintendo is aimed at here.
One thing a lot of people overlook is the fact that just because artists receive little money per sale...and most of it goes to the various production companies, the more the artist sells, the better a contract they will be able to negotiate, and in turn get paid better. Just because they don't get much in royalties doesn't mean that the other 99% percent of the sale price goes straight into the coffers and never sees the light of day. /Just don't buy from RIAA or MPAA members.
I for one... Think we should just skip the bullshit and start chipping babies at birth. We all know that's where it's going... resistence is futile.. etc etc..
awesome... definitely mod this guy up ;)
My cell phone camera's lense is around 5 milimeters accross... so according to TFA, it would still have a foucs time of just over a minute and a half. Kinda gets rid of the spontaneous opportunities that cell cameras provide.
Ridiculous... sorry. Moon landing, fine. I made no argument to that. You continue to ignore the what people are saying in their posts, and change the subject.
To be fair, niether of you had arguments at all. Second, he didn't sound like he was even *trying* to prove a point, like you were, he was just explaining the popular reason for modding you like everyone did. Heck, if you're right, are you gonna complain about one negatively modded post when other rediculous naysaysers as yourself like Gallileo and Copernicusaucisaurus suffered much worse fates?
Jaw Muscles? your Larynx? I'm lost.
No.... they OWE 30 million dollars.
I Just have to ask... what kind of things do you search for that only return expired ebay auction links/linkfarms/shitty blogs/online stores ? I'm not saying it never happens... but I search for a pretty broad range of things on Google, and the only time I ever get bad results is when I'm looking for less-than-admirable things... Hell, If I didn't need to crossreference things so much, that I'm Feeling Lucky button would still work for me, still ends up being the most relevent thing. I somewhat agree with the blogs thing... but I've even found with that, that it only happens when I'm looking for something a little more abstract, where I can't quite come up with the right search term, a more human description. In that case, the blogs are great, because more often than not, it's someone else describing the same thing and it usually helps me hone down my search a little bit more Long Live Google. Just, don't get lazy, cuz then you will suck.
but the author overestimated the population of the US by 50 Million people...How am I supposed to believe anything else he says?
Nice Post.
Yeah I wasn't very detailed with some things, and you are completely correct. I should have been more specific with some things, but you definitely filled in my blanks.
Like I said, I never held hope for it passing all the way through the major party heirarchies, but I was hoping maybe my more local "hometown" people might be willing to discuss it. I understand the concept for them protecting themselves, but the way that rebuttal was worded to me was almost offensive. At least in public, parties still sugar coat things, it was like he was completely unaware of the fact that there were voters there (like myself) who hadn't pledged to voting for a particular candidate, and the people at our district level definitely lost my votes that day.
Exactly... It's always been such a sure thing for the Dems, that it is a little more unique among other states with an increase in Bush votes.
/End useless story
Little off topic here... I actually went to a Republican district level meeting, with an agenda of making it party policy to change Minnesota's electoral system to a proportional thing. I do understand the pros and cons, and I knew it wouldn't work, but I figured that if I could get it approved at the district level, the issue would at least receive the attention it deserves, and a more popular, revised version of my motion might be drafted. Nope.
"For the first time in our lifetimes, the Republican party has a chance to win a majority in a presidental election. Why in God's good name would we take that and right away hand at least four of those votes back over to the other side? We must do everything we can to get every vote for the party!"
I was disgusted by this "for the party" and not "for the people" idealogy. I wasn't naive, but I was hoping at a more local level, these people would be more neighboorly. I was wrong. That was my first and only delve into partisan politics!
I'd blame my fingers for thinking on their own, but I missed all the mistakes in preview mode too. There's gotta be a pill for this.