Under common law both sides have to benefit for an agreement to be valid
This statement is so utterly wrong on so many levels... At the very least, give me a reference to back this up. You can't, and I know you can't because I just spent the last 30 minutes looking up "common law" (which generally applies to BRITISH COLONIES...)
Next up: I'm patenting my idea for a TV remote with the volume on the right and the channel changing button on the left. Oh, and the power button is near the bottom, the number keys are all in Roman Numerals and it only works with Durabrand brand TV's. Innovative, eh?
How is this a troll? Seriously, mods, this should be insightful. He makes a perfect point. Printing a scaled newsletter on a 4x6 sheet of paper, versus a non-scaled version on an 8.5x11 sheet of paper DOES NOT make it 1/4th the price (ie: 1/4th the paper / ink used) as there are so many other aspects to "cost" than just the materials used. HD may be more expensive to produce (as HD cameras are more expensive to buy, HD storage requires more space, etc...) BUT the standard packaging, shipping, retail, etc... should NOT change. The only difference, again, being production, which shouldn't add so much to the end product outside increasing the cost by a mere few percentage points.
With this said, the HD market is looking to be nothing but LUCRATIVE for those players involved, especially in the retail, packaging, shipping areas. The only increase in cost is coming from the movie studio's, which again brings up the chicken/egg scenario, but once the cost of purchasing HD cameras and HD-DVD/BR burners has been made back, the rest should be the same (or close to it). As they are selling these at a premium, that really only means profits!
In a way, I view China as a giant "Matrix." The only difference being that the participants are AWARE of their situation, but either don't care (ie: they are happy) or don't know how to change it. It's in this utter control of all external stimulus that China is able to "censor." I don't mean the physical act of censoring, but simply by providing access to only stimulation that betters China, as opposed to allowing a freedom of information. The "ideological spam" you are referring to is the perfect example to what I was thinking when I wrote the above post. Thank you for your clarification.
I just bought the parts for a brand-new computer. Core 2 duo, 10,000 RPM SATA drive, another storage SATA drive, XP 64-bit, etc... I actually had to drive all the way into work, rip a drive out of my old server (neither of my 2 new computers had them), drive all the way back.... GOD WHAT A PAIN! Good riddance to the disk drive, but I swear if RAID drivers can't be installed in some new means (ie: USB drive, CD, etc...) I might have to convert to a Mac!!
Is there any sort of consumer interest in this? This sounds convenient for a corporate system where you have complete control over the server, but in a residential environment where my email is controlled at every level until it hits my inbox, this isn't a very plausible solution.
Ultimately, we should get rid of "email" altogether, or at least the 30 year old technology behind it, and use more secure messaging methods. Sure this would take a lot of work, but I have many clients (ie: Outlook Express) that can not only check SMTP mail, but also HTTP (and I'm sure many more with the right plugins). Granted, this would require much more than a simple change in protocol, but I don't see how it would be so hard to force validation of each message sent (in the form of worldwide black/white lists?)
What we need is the Email 2.0 revolution.
Re:NOT GUILTY: I am NOT a Google SHILL !!
on
New Ice Age Theory
·
· Score: 3, Funny
if (strpos("shill", $comment[text])) { echo "[Post deleted due to:] <i>User being a douchebag.</i>"; $sql_code="delete from comments where commentID = $comment[id]"; sql($sql_code); }
...back to the article. There's no way to stop opinions. Really, when the Chinese say "maintain the initiative in opinion on the internet" they really mean "limit what opinion that are expressed to be strictly that of the government."
Chinese Communism (note: not true communism) really really scares me
[joke]
ermmm, except that in 1968 Wal-Mart was a 2 year old company that existed only in Arkansas, Missouri and Oklahoma. Any store that sold a 12 button calculator, working time piece and accepted "metaly money" was a technological giant.:-)
[/joke]
Again, you are missing the point. This has nothing to do with who is in jail, this has to do with the example made of THIS INDIVIDUAL. There have been NO OTHER SPAMMERS brought to trial who were charged EXCLUSIVELY because of the Spam. (There could be a case made against those who spam AND commit fraud, but that does not apply here). Spammers are, at the very least, smart enough to know how to use a computer. CHANCES are, when in the "business" of Spamming one would check up on the recent "spammers" news (occasionally), and I basically just mean that the ability to use email implies a LITTLE intelligence. Again, I have to stress that Murder IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING LIKE Spamming. Yes they are crimes, NO they have nothing more in common than that. If the US jails are filling up with Murderers, Rapists or (apparently) even worse: Mexicans, that has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make. If the jails were filling up with those found guilty of SPAMMING at 3 times the rate of population growth, THEN your point would apply.
Keep in mind too, our first inter-terrestrial transmissions were Hitlers speech in the 1936 Olympics. That's a mere 70 years, and in a 70 light-year radius, there isn't much out there. We also do not transmit at the powers required for intelligible communication. The "aliens" might see a bit of static on the channel, but to them it's probably not much more than random white noise. They might simply not know we exist!
Because during the process of his intrawebs fraud, he had no idea that he'd be caught, let alone charged (read: THE FIRST GUY TO BE CHARGED...) Now seeing that yes, for stealing some poor old ladies credit cards, using them, and trying to convince them that AOL still needs more money (for a service that's been free for months!), you should rot for a long time. The next guy to do this will not only be shaking in his boots, but will most likely think twice (ie: is it worth it? probably not.)
Inconveniencing, defrauding and potentially ruining 100 people financially ISN'T on the same "moral" scale, but it sure as hell NEEDS to be punished, and not lightly. Murder : Fraud:: Apples : Oranges.
Awww man!!! How can I build my own when the article clearly states:
To continue reading this article, subscribe to New Scientist. Get 4 issues of New Scientist magazine and instant access to all online content for only USD $4.95
Um, no. Do you really want a trial version of MusicMatch, trial version of Yahoo! Games, trial versions of Anti-Virus, AOL Online links, Earthlink Links, eGames links, a crappy productivity suite (well ok this might not count as it's generally a MS product....), basic trial imaging products from Corel, Quickbooks Demo, Roxio demo, Webroot SpySweeper demo...etc...
Well hell, maybe I should move to California. Try doing that in NY. From personal experience I have had many ideas that have failed to come to fruition. If I had moved to turn it into tangible property, the company I work for would (and has to other employees) either demand the product, or take me to court for it. I signed the document, so I can't blame them. It's just refreshing to hear that this is not universal!
Not exactly. Neither are necessarily "right" as it's entirely due to perception. Then we get into subjective metaphysics, and I'm not touching that. I recommend reading the differences between absolutism and relationalism.
Slashdot Mirror
Under common law both sides have to benefit for an agreement to be valid
This statement is so utterly wrong on so many levels... At the very least, give me a reference to back this up. You can't, and I know you can't because I just spent the last 30 minutes looking up "common law" (which generally applies to BRITISH COLONIES...)
How is this INSIGHTFUL?
Next up: I'm patenting my idea for a TV remote with the volume on the right and the channel changing button on the left. Oh, and the power button is near the bottom, the number keys are all in Roman Numerals and it only works with Durabrand brand TV's. Innovative, eh?
YES! Our new sarcasm-filtering overlords ARE listening!
How is this a troll? Seriously, mods, this should be insightful. He makes a perfect point. Printing a scaled newsletter on a 4x6 sheet of paper, versus a non-scaled version on an 8.5x11 sheet of paper DOES NOT make it 1/4th the price (ie: 1/4th the paper / ink used) as there are so many other aspects to "cost" than just the materials used. HD may be more expensive to produce (as HD cameras are more expensive to buy, HD storage requires more space, etc...) BUT the standard packaging, shipping, retail, etc... should NOT change. The only difference, again, being production, which shouldn't add so much to the end product outside increasing the cost by a mere few percentage points.
With this said, the HD market is looking to be nothing but LUCRATIVE for those players involved, especially in the retail, packaging, shipping areas. The only increase in cost is coming from the movie studio's, which again brings up the chicken/egg scenario, but once the cost of purchasing HD cameras and HD-DVD/BR burners has been made back, the rest should be the same (or close to it). As they are selling these at a premium, that really only means profits!
In a way, I view China as a giant "Matrix." The only difference being that the participants are AWARE of their situation, but either don't care (ie: they are happy) or don't know how to change it. It's in this utter control of all external stimulus that China is able to "censor." I don't mean the physical act of censoring, but simply by providing access to only stimulation that betters China, as opposed to allowing a freedom of information. The "ideological spam" you are referring to is the perfect example to what I was thinking when I wrote the above post. Thank you for your clarification.
I wish you hadn't posted A/C, I would definitely add you as a friend right now.
In case you can't read my post above, read: BRAND NEW COMPUTER. BRAND NEW (legit) COPY OF XP-64.........wait a......
OHHHHH, I get it. This is Slashdot, and that was a Microsoft bash.... AHHH It all makes sense now!
I just bought the parts for a brand-new computer. Core 2 duo, 10,000 RPM SATA drive, another storage SATA drive, XP 64-bit, etc... I actually had to drive all the way into work, rip a drive out of my old server (neither of my 2 new computers had them), drive all the way back.... GOD WHAT A PAIN! Good riddance to the disk drive, but I swear if RAID drivers can't be installed in some new means (ie: USB drive, CD, etc...) I might have to convert to a Mac!!
Ah, but I jest.
Is there any sort of consumer interest in this? This sounds convenient for a corporate system where you have complete control over the server, but in a residential environment where my email is controlled at every level until it hits my inbox, this isn't a very plausible solution.
Ultimately, we should get rid of "email" altogether, or at least the 30 year old technology behind it, and use more secure messaging methods. Sure this would take a lot of work, but I have many clients (ie: Outlook Express) that can not only check SMTP mail, but also HTTP (and I'm sure many more with the right plugins). Granted, this would require much more than a simple change in protocol, but I don't see how it would be so hard to force validation of each message sent (in the form of worldwide black/white lists?)
What we need is the Email 2.0 revolution.
if (strpos("shill", $comment[text]))
{
echo "[Post deleted due to:] <i>User being a douchebag.</i>";
$sql_code="delete from comments where commentID = $comment[id]";
sql($sql_code);
}
He said pretty, not fake.
...back to the article. There's no way to stop opinions. Really, when the Chinese say "maintain the initiative in opinion on the internet" they really mean "limit what opinion that are expressed to be strictly that of the government."
Chinese Communism (note: not true communism) really really scares me
[joke] :-)
ermmm, except that in 1968 Wal-Mart was a 2 year old company that existed only in Arkansas, Missouri and Oklahoma. Any store that sold a 12 button calculator, working time piece and accepted "metaly money" was a technological giant.
[/joke]
Congrats. I'll be quitting again here in a few weeks...
Except, of course, for the fact that it was Io used as a point of reference instead of the probe... But hey, a satellite is a satellite! :-)
A cool slight diversion: this is exactly the reverse process of how Ole Roemer in the 1670's came up with his estimate of the speed of light.
Again, you are missing the point. This has nothing to do with who is in jail, this has to do with the example made of THIS INDIVIDUAL. There have been NO OTHER SPAMMERS brought to trial who were charged EXCLUSIVELY because of the Spam. (There could be a case made against those who spam AND commit fraud, but that does not apply here). Spammers are, at the very least, smart enough to know how to use a computer. CHANCES are, when in the "business" of Spamming one would check up on the recent "spammers" news (occasionally), and I basically just mean that the ability to use email implies a LITTLE intelligence. Again, I have to stress that Murder IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING LIKE Spamming. Yes they are crimes, NO they have nothing more in common than that. If the US jails are filling up with Murderers, Rapists or (apparently) even worse: Mexicans, that has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make. If the jails were filling up with those found guilty of SPAMMING at 3 times the rate of population growth, THEN your point would apply.
Keep in mind too, our first inter-terrestrial transmissions were Hitlers speech in the 1936 Olympics. That's a mere 70 years, and in a 70 light-year radius, there isn't much out there. We also do not transmit at the powers required for intelligible communication. The "aliens" might see a bit of static on the channel, but to them it's probably not much more than random white noise. They might simply not know we exist!
Because during the process of his intrawebs fraud, he had no idea that he'd be caught, let alone charged (read: THE FIRST GUY TO BE CHARGED...) Now seeing that yes, for stealing some poor old ladies credit cards, using them, and trying to convince them that AOL still needs more money (for a service that's been free for months!), you should rot for a long time. The next guy to do this will not only be shaking in his boots, but will most likely think twice (ie: is it worth it? probably not.) Inconveniencing, defrauding and potentially ruining 100 people financially ISN'T on the same "moral" scale, but it sure as hell NEEDS to be punished, and not lightly. Murder : Fraud :: Apples : Oranges.
I was, and let my tell you my new appendages thank you!
but Killer is my friend!!!
Oh yeah, and try removing them. Go ahead, do it!
P.S. if you can figure out how, please let me know.
Um, no. Do you really want a trial version of MusicMatch, trial version of Yahoo! Games, trial versions of Anti-Virus, AOL Online links, Earthlink Links, eGames links, a crappy productivity suite (well ok this might not count as it's generally a MS product....), basic trial imaging products from Corel, Quickbooks Demo, Roxio demo, Webroot SpySweeper demo...etc...
x ?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc=DYCWJS3&s=dhs
I'm not kidding either: http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.asp
Well hell, maybe I should move to California. Try doing that in NY. From personal experience I have had many ideas that have failed to come to fruition. If I had moved to turn it into tangible property, the company I work for would (and has to other employees) either demand the product, or take me to court for it. I signed the document, so I can't blame them. It's just refreshing to hear that this is not universal!
Not exactly. Neither are necessarily "right" as it's entirely due to perception. Then we get into subjective metaphysics, and I'm not touching that. I recommend reading the differences between absolutism and relationalism.