I'm a novice musician, but a decent programmer. My band is doing ok, but we could do better. We could do a lot better if I designed a nifty tool which made it easy to distribute mp3s, specifically my band's mp3s. Then we could sue. My band is mostly comprised of people with highly technical backgrounds, so this is ideal for us. I'm gonna be a star!!
Hmmm.. I was thinking of taking a class
in philosophy. I had an introductory class once,
but I didn't learn a whole lot. There is probably a lot more out there worth reading, you're right. As long as it's shorter than Atlas Shrugged, I'll try anything. That Arithmetic book sounds intriguing.
I started reading "The Virtue of Selfishness", but never finished it.
I bought that book first, expecting it to be
the epistemology of Objectivism. It seemed like
it was, but it got annoying because it was
full of quotes from Atlas Shrugged. Thinking back to this now, I should have taken that for a bad sign. What kind of ground work for a philosophy uses quotes from a fictional story written by the same author. That's how I ended up reading Atlas Shrugged. Also, an alarming number of my friends claim to be Objectivists, and they told I'd understand if I read Atlas Shrugged. I did take this as a bad sign. Maybe you could put it in better words, but I'm not sure why I'm so against the idea of using a fictional allegory as the main vehicle of a philosophy, specifically when it's intended for that purpose. I mean, I felt like I got an idea of Douglas Adam's personal philosophy (maybe) by reading his Hitchhiker's Books, but it didn't come across as preachy and I didn't continually feel like someone was setting up some big scheme to trick me.
So I planned to read all of her books until I understood it, because Atlas Shrugged didn't really do it for me. But maybe I did get it after all.
Welp, thanks. While I'm at it, I probably should brush up on my grammar. Geeze, how many times did I use it's instead of its in that last post.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the
similarities. I'm just wondering how long
before the two philosophies merge,
if they haven't already.
Scientology lacks the surface credibility
that Objectivism has, yet it would be
very dangerous if anyone took it seriously.
The first thing I heard about the objectivism was
the word, "Objectivism" (no kidding). The first
thought I had was, "Gee, I wonder what held them
back from nameing it 'We are rightism'".
www.m-w.com gives one definition of 'objective'
as:
expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
So, on a basic level, an objectivist is someone
who sees clearly. They aren't humble enough to
be trying to see things clearly, no, they DO see things clearly. And you don't - then you're not one of them. What a great philosophy,
why hasn't anyone else thought of this? BTW,
this is just my impression of objectivism,
not only after hearing it's name, but after
reading a few of Rand's books, not my impression
of the people who follow it.
I believe Objectivism is good, mostly, but it's
inherent arrogance and it's inabilty to admit
it's weak case against 'might makes right' make
it easily corruptable.
IMHO, the only thing Objectivism does have going
for it are most of it's followers are smart and
usually have what I feel are subconcious or
inherent anti-'might makes right' feelings,
they usually just won't admit it. So personality
attacks is the last place I would start on
attack against objectivism. I say that that's
the only thing it has going for it becuase the
parts of objectivism I agree on are things that
didn't seem new to me.
I'm in the process of reading all of Rand's books,
because dispite the above, I believe it's one
of the best out there, but I still don't believe
it's as great as the name, or it's writings would
suggest.
I'm dreading the day Scientology and Objectivism
merge.
www.primedata.org/psx.htm written in Visual C++ by Erik Aronesty the only bad thing i can say about it is that it's not available for Linux... yet. the docs suck email and maybe i'll fix them
More evidence to support my hypothesis made in 1987 after watching Robotech and Voltron (ok maybe those weren't totally Japanese, but I was 12) that the Japanese are indeed insane. They sleep in tiny boxes, wear surgical masks on the train, and hire people to act as their family to impress the CEO of Happy Walking Moonchain Cakes, Inc.
Don't get me wrong, the Japanese are a great people and have contributed a lot to the world, but they are still insane. Yes, all of them.
Then again, half my experience with the Japanese is badly translated anime, from which I gather 'Huh?', 'Hey wait!!', and 'Tetuso!!' comprise most of their language. And every grade school teacher is an absolute bombshell.
If you had any sense you wouldn't be taking the E Train, you would be taking the F Train. Oh I forgot, you crossed the river to mutant land and prefer to be irradiated on the path train
For some reason, whenever people tell me about the hit they've taken on the stock market, I'm not too sympathetic. And immediatly, a scene plays in my head from the Simpsons. The one where Homer buys an obscene amount of Disney Land-Type Money from a worker and she says the different between this money and real money is that it's 'Fun' when actually it's a load of crap.
That was more of my point, that browsers are becomming more integrated with our default programs. I installed K recently and was surprised to see they took the integrated browser route as well, but you're right, Windows was the only O/S I knew of that truly integrated it in the o/s.
I guess I meant that in a more general sense, that money oiling the world in favor of those who have a lot of it, whether it's in the form of a company, monarchy or tribe, it's still true.
for $2.20 an hour. These poor illegal aliens transmit TCP/IP by hand, via telegraph and are forced to learn PHP by gunpoint. In many South American communities, slashdot is a word uttered with great fear. The 'slash' in slashdot means and entirely different thing to these people.
If nothing else, please post responsibly people- remember there may be a human beinging grueling over the ip header of the packet containing your ill-mannered post. And no, they don't have moderator access either.
Maybe I'm not informed of the entire issue, but I thought most of the monopoly and unfair business practices had to do with how Microsoft leveraged their operating system. I don't see how splitting them up in this regard would help. I like ideas such as open sourcing their code, making windows cheaper. Law suits may even be enough, or fines and more oversight into their business practices. The windows O/S has proliferated the market, but many people use other software. I'm often surprised by how often microsoft applications are not chosen for enterprise solutions. Maybe what we are really talking about here is the browser. If you split the browser from the O/S, then yes, I think it will hurt Microsoft. But the browser is part of the O/S now, and not just in Windows. I don't know what brand of crack the Netscape team is on to think they can compete building a program on the enemy's platform. Netscape has some good qualities. But I find it crashes a lot. Not that IE doesn't crash, but less often... some think MS put some anti netscape code in their o/s... not that this would be shocking, but the simpler answer is that IE is better because it was made by the same people who built the o/s. I like Netscape. I think I'd like it even more if they spent less time making it work for Windows and had it kick ass on Linux and other operating systems. Amazing how money continues to oil the world in favor of the big companies. I'm not sure what is so amazing about this, since this is how things have worked for a few thousand years. I think their O/S would have choked the market without their bully business practices. But they were a bunch of greedy bastards. They should pay. We shouldn't - and we will (even if you're one of many who use windows as a fancy interface into linux) if the DOJ does something to hinder development of MS products, which was never the problem.
The burden to securing the game should be on the Verant programmers. I don't own Everquest or even ever played it, but I'm a long time online gamer (bbs days) and look down upon cheating on multiplayer games. Even still, I think this is pretty low and I'd be ashamed if I was a game programmer and had to rely on laws and scanning HD's or whatever even minor privacy intrusion to make up for my lack of ability to secure the game data. I hope the rest of the gaming industry keeps notes on these sort of things, I hope these aren't the kind of programmers they want to hire.
Overall, I feel Microsoft's impact on the world was a good and profound one. True, they have not made any great advancements in science, but it is foolish to say they have no had a deep impact on the world. They have had arguably a more profound impact by designing much of the way we work. Also arguable is whether or not they have made a positive impact. I believe they have. I believe that dispite the bugs and even illegal activities of the company, we have saved money in productivity by having fewer operating systems to deal with. Windows is better. It's better overall, for the majority of users. Perhaps the only way an operating system could have gained so much market share is through methods Microsoft employed. It's popularity is not only due to pushes by illegal practices it is at least due equally to Microsoft's ability make an O/S the rest of us can use without having to think much about it, an ability that includes taking ideas that were already there, and bringing them together in a better way. This is not to say I think Linux is not good, in fact I think Linux is many times better, but not for all applications. Maybe one day it will be, and it will be stronger for having had to surpass Windows, even easier to use. I think we can deal with a handful of operating systems sharing the market, but I really don't look foward to a day when 10 or 20 have equal shares of the market. Maybe Microsoft has stepped the line by trying to eliminate too many. Maybe when they are forced to split, one branch will make a Microsoft Linux and other branches will go after other O/Ss, and maybe they'll be in a better position to dominate in less conspicuous ways. I think they should receive a reprimand, but be kept together.
Almost as much fun as the vibrating dongle I put on a few months ago. I wonder if I could combine the two for some.. er.. new experiences. It's great to see some major headway into the new functionality of the Palm Pilot as a life-long companion. If you've ever uttered the phrase, "My palm pilot and I...", you need to seek help.
I for one would like to learn more about the dramatic struggle (or lack of) of a giant corporation to crush the smaller competion. Maybe also about how in the hell the Netscape team ever tought they would win a war writing software that competes with the company who makes the platform they are writing the software on.
Are you kidding? Deep linking is used more than 1-click purchasing, and law was important there, was it not? Law stories may be boring to read, but they are very important. Issues like these effect how you work the internet, even how some 12 year old kid designs his geocities shrine to Tina Turna. It would be cool if nobody really cared and there were no lawsuits like this, but wouldn't you like to hear it here first if suddendly you could be fined a few grand for linking to a picture of your favorite name brand ice cream?
The HTTP idea is better, but even more annoying to those trying to refrence your site would be to add expiring keys to the url. You could do this by simply renaming the files periodically, perhaps adding random nonsense to the name, or by fake links that your server maps to real names. Your site would have to be capable of dynamically conforming to the ever changing filenames. This is somewhat annoying, but much less so if you are using a good server side scripting language (they are few and far between) where you could replace real page names with variables, ie. any request of 5ad523f13114446111abbes.htm gets directed to realfilename.htm. It's a little harder passing session/form info, but not that much harder.
This is not necessarily fool proof, depending on how you do it, those trying to deep link into your site can still try to examine your site each time it wants to serve their page linking to yours. This should not be a big deal to implement at medium sized web site, and it's probably cheaper to pay programmers to do this than paying legal fees on a topic which may get you bad press.
I think you should be able to hard link or even frame anyone's site. Companies don't have to make it easy, however.
I saw about 5 minutes of it, mostly entrigued by floor's shifting light patterns. Then some hollywood fairy walked over it like it wasn't there and I shut off the tv. F the Oscars.
They don't have to be ugly - that's my point. It's retarted when they try to make beautiful actors ugly to fit the sterotype. Take Hackers for instance, (it sucked), the characters weren't made to look like rejects. The chick was really hot, but I thought she came off reasonably well as a geek, dispite the movie's overall stupidity. There is something so alluring to the sound of 'mad bitches'... a lovly white frothing at the mouth, perhaps?
I didn't have her in mind at all, since she was supposed to be pretty. American Beauty was very entertaining, but I didn't find it to have that much deep meaning. The movie is largly motivated by characters I could not relate to and did not seem real to me on most levels. Kevin Spacey's character was my favorite, and I could buy into it. I find more and more movies try to wow us with interesting, but unrealisitic characters whose lifestyles only work because of their amazing ability, in American Beauty I think of the beauty obessed kid in this regard. He's an interesting, amazing, maybe even inspirational character, but does he add anything to my understanding of the world? Not really - because he doesn't work like anything else I've seen in the world, not even in a minute way.
....by this thread. they don't let nerds into the oscars, why should we promote them. We know Matrix rocked, we don't need some academy to tell us that. American Beauty, another movie that tries to dress up beautiful young actors/actresses as geeks... like putting glasses on Alicia Silverstone and calling her ugly. We're going to swallow this?
Like a lot of other posters, I'd have to say Yes and No too. I think a good compromise would be to allow everyone 1 online identity. This identity would not be traceable to any real person's address, phone, name or other information. It would be possible to trace what IP this identity gets used from, and perhaps the other information could be deduced by calling the ISP, etc, but (and I thought this was the case) only law enforcement could request that information. Where I stand on the technical aspects is sketchy at best, but basically, I think total anonimity too often weakens the credibility of the internet and eliminates the need or desire to create, maintain and protect a reputation. I belive part of the reason we are civilized in the real world is because we have to look each other in the eye every so often and have to deal with the very real possibility that someone may beat the hell out of you. I'm not saying there aren't other solutions, and there are solutions to the worst cases, such as yahoo chat where people come on, yell and curse rampantly. If they did that in the street, nobody would talk to them, and if they directed it at someone, they would probably have a tough time in that neighborhood later on. And there are more important cases, take this Slashdot forum for example, i see anonymous flamers post every so often, and sometimes they have valid points, but they choose to put someone else down in a very mean way. I think that person deserves to have a reputation. I'd like to hear the other side of this view.
I'd rather have a CD player that can play CDs with MP3s burned on them. 80 hours? I mean really, who needs 80 hours of music. 6 hours on 1 cd is plenty for me.. and it's pretty easy to carry more cds. I also don't know if I trust hard drive technology in portable format. Something that small, with a HD in it, I wonder how it stands up to a jog in the park. You can pre order CD MP3 players, only 2 I know of (i'm sure there are more), check out theMambo X and theD'Music. Each is not much more expensive than a regular CD player.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a novice musician, but a decent programmer. My band is doing ok, but we could do better. We could do a lot better if I designed a nifty tool which made it easy to distribute mp3s, specifically my band's mp3s. Then we could sue. My band is mostly comprised of people with highly technical backgrounds, so this is ideal for us. I'm gonna be a star!!
Hmmm.. I was thinking of taking a class in philosophy. I had an introductory class once, but I didn't learn a whole lot. There is probably a lot more out there worth reading, you're right. As long as it's shorter than Atlas Shrugged, I'll try anything. That Arithmetic book sounds intriguing.
I started reading "The Virtue of Selfishness", but never finished it. I bought that book first, expecting it to be the epistemology of Objectivism. It seemed like it was, but it got annoying because it was full of quotes from Atlas Shrugged. Thinking back to this now, I should have taken that for a bad sign. What kind of ground work for a philosophy uses quotes from a fictional story written by the same author. That's how I ended up reading Atlas Shrugged. Also, an alarming number of my friends claim to be Objectivists, and they told I'd understand if I read Atlas Shrugged. I did take this as a bad sign. Maybe you could put it in better words, but I'm not sure why I'm so against the idea of using a fictional allegory as the main vehicle of a philosophy, specifically when it's intended for that purpose. I mean, I felt like I got an idea of Douglas Adam's personal philosophy (maybe) by reading his Hitchhiker's Books, but it didn't come across as preachy and I didn't continually feel like someone was setting up some big scheme to trick me.
So I planned to read all of her books until I understood it, because Atlas Shrugged didn't really do it for me. But maybe I did get it after all.
Welp, thanks. While I'm at it, I probably should brush up on my grammar. Geeze, how many times did I use it's instead of its in that last post.
Yes, I know, sad replying to my own message. Welp, there are some similarities, and they're pretty funny. http://www.suck.com/daily/99/05/27/
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the similarities. I'm just wondering how long before the two philosophies merge, if they haven't already. Scientology lacks the surface credibility that Objectivism has, yet it would be very dangerous if anyone took it seriously.
The first thing I heard about the objectivism was the word, "Objectivism" (no kidding). The first thought I had was, "Gee, I wonder what held them back from nameing it 'We are rightism'".
www.m-w.com gives one definition of 'objective' as:
expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
So, on a basic level, an objectivist is someone who sees clearly. They aren't humble enough to be trying to see things clearly, no, they DO see things clearly. And you don't - then you're not one of them. What a great philosophy, why hasn't anyone else thought of this? BTW, this is just my impression of objectivism, not only after hearing it's name, but after reading a few of Rand's books, not my impression of the people who follow it.
I believe Objectivism is good, mostly, but it's inherent arrogance and it's inabilty to admit it's weak case against 'might makes right' make it easily corruptable.
IMHO, the only thing Objectivism does have going for it are most of it's followers are smart and usually have what I feel are subconcious or inherent anti-'might makes right' feelings, they usually just won't admit it. So personality attacks is the last place I would start on attack against objectivism. I say that that's the only thing it has going for it becuase the parts of objectivism I agree on are things that didn't seem new to me.
I'm in the process of reading all of Rand's books, because dispite the above, I believe it's one of the best out there, but I still don't believe it's as great as the name, or it's writings would suggest.
I'm dreading the day Scientology and Objectivism merge.
www.primedata.org/psx.htm written in Visual C++ by Erik Aronesty the only bad thing i can say about it is that it's not available for Linux... yet. the docs suck email and maybe i'll fix them
Don't get me wrong, the Japanese are a great people and have contributed a lot to the world, but they are still insane. Yes, all of them.
Then again, half my experience with the Japanese is badly translated anime, from which I gather 'Huh?', 'Hey wait!!', and 'Tetuso!!' comprise most of their language. And every grade school teacher is an absolute bombshell.
If you had any sense you wouldn't be taking the E Train, you would be taking the F Train. Oh I forgot, you crossed the river to mutant land and prefer to be irradiated on the path train
For some reason, whenever people tell me about the hit they've taken on the stock market, I'm not too sympathetic. And immediatly, a scene plays in my head from the Simpsons. The one where Homer buys an obscene amount of Disney Land-Type Money from a worker and she says the different between this money and real money is that it's 'Fun' when actually it's a load of crap.
More power to them, though I still think they're on crack, maybe just the right brand of crack. I eagerly await the final version of NS6.
I guess I meant that in a more general sense, that money oiling the world in favor of those who have a lot of it, whether it's in the form of a company, monarchy or tribe, it's still true.
If nothing else, please post responsibly people- remember there may be a human beinging grueling over the ip header of the packet containing your ill-mannered post. And no, they don't have moderator access either.
Maybe I'm not informed of the entire issue, but I thought most of the monopoly and unfair business practices had to do with how Microsoft leveraged their operating system. I don't see how splitting them up in this regard would help. I like ideas such as open sourcing their code, making windows cheaper. Law suits may even be enough, or fines and more oversight into their business practices. The windows O/S has proliferated the market, but many people use other software. I'm often surprised by how often microsoft applications are not chosen for enterprise solutions.
Maybe what we are really talking about here is the browser. If you split the browser from the O/S, then yes, I think it will hurt Microsoft. But the browser is part of the O/S now, and not just in Windows. I don't know what brand of crack the Netscape team is on to think they can compete building a program on the enemy's platform. Netscape has some good qualities. But I find it crashes a lot. Not that IE doesn't crash, but less often... some think MS put some anti netscape code in their o/s... not that this would be shocking, but the simpler answer is that IE is better because it was made by the same people who built the o/s. I like Netscape. I think I'd like it even more if they spent less time making it work for Windows and had it kick ass on Linux and other operating systems.
Amazing how money continues to oil the world in favor of the big companies.
I'm not sure what is so amazing about this, since this is how things have worked for a few thousand years.
I think their O/S would have choked the market without their bully business practices. But they were a bunch of greedy bastards. They should pay. We shouldn't - and we will (even if you're one of many who use windows as a fancy interface into linux) if the DOJ does something to hinder development of MS products, which was never the problem.
The burden to securing the game should be on the Verant programmers. I don't own Everquest or even ever played it, but I'm a long time online gamer (bbs days) and look down upon cheating on multiplayer games. Even still, I think this is pretty low and I'd be ashamed if I was a game programmer and had to rely on laws and scanning HD's or whatever even minor privacy intrusion to make up for my lack of ability to secure the game data. I hope the rest of the gaming industry keeps notes on these sort of things, I hope these aren't the kind of programmers they want to hire.
Overall, I feel Microsoft's impact on the world was a good and profound one. True, they have not made any great advancements in science, but it is foolish to say they have no had a deep impact on the world. They have had arguably a more profound impact by designing much of the way we work. Also arguable is whether or not they have made a positive impact. I believe they have. I believe that dispite the bugs and even illegal activities of the company, we have saved money in productivity by having fewer operating systems to deal with. Windows is better. It's better overall, for the majority of users. Perhaps the only way an operating system could have gained so much market share is through methods Microsoft employed. It's popularity is not only due to pushes by illegal practices it is at least due equally to Microsoft's ability make an O/S the rest of us can use without having to think much about it, an ability that includes taking ideas that were already there, and bringing them together in a better way. This is not to say I think Linux is not good, in fact I think Linux is many times better, but not for all applications. Maybe one day it will be, and it will be stronger for having had to surpass Windows, even easier to use. I think we can deal with a handful of operating systems sharing the market, but I really don't look foward to a day when 10 or 20 have equal shares of the market. Maybe Microsoft has stepped the line by trying to eliminate too many. Maybe when they are forced to split, one branch will make a Microsoft Linux and other branches will go after other O/Ss, and maybe they'll be in a better position to dominate in less conspicuous ways. I think they should receive a reprimand, but be kept together.
Almost as much fun as the vibrating dongle I put on a few months ago. I wonder if I could combine the two for some.. er.. new experiences. It's great to see some major headway into the new functionality of the Palm Pilot as a life-long companion. If you've ever uttered the phrase, "My palm pilot and I...", you need to seek help.
I for one would like to learn more about the dramatic struggle (or lack of) of a giant corporation to crush the smaller competion. Maybe also about how in the hell the Netscape team ever tought they would win a war writing software that competes with the company who makes the platform they are writing the software on.
Are you kidding? Deep linking is used more than 1-click purchasing, and law was important there, was it not? Law stories may be boring to read, but they are very important. Issues like these effect how you work the internet, even how some 12 year old kid designs his geocities shrine to Tina Turna. It would be cool if nobody really cared and there were no lawsuits like this, but wouldn't you like to hear it here first if suddendly you could be fined a few grand for linking to a picture of your favorite name brand ice cream?
The HTTP idea is better, but even more annoying to those trying to refrence your site would be to add expiring keys to the url. You could do this by simply renaming the files periodically, perhaps adding random nonsense to the name, or by fake links that your server maps to real names. Your site would have to be capable of dynamically conforming to the ever changing filenames. This is somewhat annoying, but much less so if you are using a good server side scripting language (they are few and far between) where you could replace real page names with variables, ie. any request of 5ad523f13114446111abbes.htm gets directed to realfilename.htm. It's a little harder passing session/form info, but not that much harder.
This is not necessarily fool proof, depending on how you do it, those trying to deep link into your site can still try to examine your site each time it wants to serve their page linking to yours. This should not be a big deal to implement at medium sized web site, and it's probably cheaper to pay programmers to do this than paying legal fees on a topic which may get you bad press.
I think you should be able to hard link or even frame anyone's site. Companies don't have to make it easy, however.
I saw about 5 minutes of it, mostly entrigued by floor's shifting light patterns. Then some hollywood fairy walked over it like it wasn't there and I shut off the tv. F the Oscars.
They don't have to be ugly - that's my point. It's retarted when they try to make beautiful actors ugly to fit the sterotype. Take Hackers for instance, (it sucked), the characters weren't made to look like rejects. The chick was really hot, but I thought she came off reasonably well as a geek, dispite the movie's overall stupidity. There is something so alluring to the sound of 'mad bitches'... a lovly white frothing at the mouth, perhaps?
I didn't have her in mind at all, since she was supposed to be pretty. American Beauty was very entertaining, but I didn't find it to have that much deep meaning. The movie is largly motivated by characters I could not relate to and did not seem real to me on most levels. Kevin Spacey's character was my favorite, and I could buy into it. I find more and more movies try to wow us with interesting, but unrealisitic characters whose lifestyles only work because of their amazing ability, in American Beauty I think of the beauty obessed kid in this regard. He's an interesting, amazing, maybe even inspirational character, but does he add anything to my understanding of the world? Not really - because he doesn't work like anything else I've seen in the world, not even in a minute way.
....by this thread. they don't let nerds into the oscars, why should we promote them. We know Matrix rocked, we don't need some academy to tell us that. American Beauty, another movie that tries to dress up beautiful young actors/actresses as geeks... like putting glasses on Alicia Silverstone and calling her ugly. We're going to swallow this?
Like a lot of other posters, I'd have to say Yes and No too. I think a good compromise would be to allow everyone 1 online identity. This identity would not be traceable to any real person's address, phone, name or other information. It would be possible to trace what IP this identity gets used from, and perhaps the other information could be deduced by calling the ISP, etc, but (and I thought this was the case) only law enforcement could request that information.
Where I stand on the technical aspects is sketchy at best, but basically, I think total anonimity too often weakens the credibility of the internet and eliminates the need or desire to create, maintain and protect a reputation. I belive part of the reason we are civilized in the real world is because we have to look each other in the eye every so often and have to deal with the very real possibility that someone may beat the hell out of you.
I'm not saying there aren't other solutions, and there are solutions to the worst cases, such as yahoo chat where people come on, yell and curse rampantly. If they did that in the street, nobody would talk to them, and if they directed it at someone, they would probably have a tough time in that neighborhood later on. And there are more important cases, take this Slashdot forum for example, i see anonymous flamers post every so often, and sometimes they have valid points, but they choose to put someone else down in a very mean way. I think that person deserves to have a reputation. I'd like to hear the other side of this view.
I'd rather have a CD player that can play CDs with MP3s burned on them. 80 hours? I mean really, who needs 80 hours of music. 6 hours on 1 cd is plenty for me.. and it's pretty easy to carry more cds. I also don't know if I trust hard drive technology in portable format. Something that small, with a HD in it, I wonder how it stands up to a jog in the park. You can pre order CD MP3 players, only 2 I know of (i'm sure there are more), check out theMambo X and theD'Music. Each is not much more expensive than a regular CD player.