DISQUS

Good stuff Grandpa, congratulations to you and all your family. Praying the parents have Christ's perfect peace, and that little Sarah is a good sleeper and teether! shalom, Barry Gittins

thick as thieves.5.38


mr thick, have you taken some sensible pills today? Either that, or you're one of many imposters.

It is an interesting view you have. However, I remember that even the Web 1.0 very commercialized and captialistic back in the 90's. That is what the "dot com" boom was all about - making money off the internet.


I agree with you that many social networking sites use their services subversively to sell advertising. However Web 2.0 allows for a forum of 2 way communication. Just as you stated, "Web 1.0 is ‘read-only’" Web 2.0 allows for the exchange and update of ideas and information. It allows us to keep in touch with friends and family. It gives businesses a new outlet to promote and provide their services.



There will always going to be a commercialized aspect of the web, that is just the nature of the beast. It was there with Web 1.0 and it is here to stay with 2.0.

Wim, you rock! Thanks for the kind words, and damn those bike messengers...


Miss you bro. Hope we'll get to see each other this summer.



:)

Barry

Let's be honest, this kit is not very appealing at all!!

Weller, do you really think you are in any position to be judging someone's spelling?

HELL YEA!!

Readerware works pretty good for our library as well. I hacked the cuecat to not do the encrypting thing, then it works like a champ! Here's what about 4000 books looks like in our library.


http://web.mac.com/barrywoods/Site/Library.html

they should make it available in a 'lovebug' version, red width black dots.

I would have agreed with you Riverside, however I also have declans album. And they have totally changed the words so that it fits Declan. And is now about watching a brother, be led down the bad path of drink. I read on the album sleeve and credits that the writing of the lyrics for this song, was like one hole huge effort from Declan, Alan Field (his manager) , Alec Galbraith ( Declans Dad) , and a couple of the producers.

I also really hate this type of behavior.

IE7 does the same, but there is an option to show the xml-stylesheet.





It all started with Microsoft IE that won't show your 404 pages,


nou your RSS styles are ignored.





Hey why not ignore the entire style of your website and give it a


Live-theme or Mozilla look?!!





Anyway the rest of Firefox 2 seems fine!

What happened to linking with the post name? ;-)

Thanks Andy for the revised numbers. :)

Link baiter! ;-)

Happy birthday!

Andy, can you also tag them sessanjose06 for me? :)

Thanks!

I know you guys probably won't post this, since you deleted my last comment, but I think it speaks volumes about both your confidence in your own argument and your willingness to participate in an open debate on the subject when you censor people who disagree with you. Bravo.

When you apply the same "underdog argument" to the issue of DRM, for example, you see technology and software companies falling over each other to satisfy the content industry, despite the content industry being orders of magnitude smaller than the technology and software industries. Why is it that you suppose companies like Microsoft or Intel or Samsung or whoever are willing to accede to the RIAA/MPAA's demands, despite being much larger companies in a much, much larger industry?

How many competitors does Brazil's largest telecom have? How easy is it to switch from them to another service provider, and how much competition is there in the basic telephone service market? Are we talking broadband or dialup?

Those are key details that could make or break this story's importance in terms of network neutrality in the US, because if switching your ISP in Brazil is as easy as changing your socks, then sure, Brazil's largest telecom has something to worry about. But in the US, competition is minimal, as your choices for broadband are (a) your cable company and (b) your phone company, and both of those kinds of companies have a huge motivation to replace third-party VoIP or VoD services with their own offerings.

Hmmm... let's see, someone is providing free phone service to the world and regulators are still worried about consumer harm. Seems silly to me.

Apparently, you've forgotten that most Internet users in the US have to get their Internet service through companies who are direct competitors to Skype. As Agent Smith said, what good is a phone call if you're unable to speak?

Solveig, there is only one difference that a legalized DeCSS would make: I'd be able to legally use DVD software that allows me to play the disc in any region I want to, or skip past advertisements and the old-and-tired FBI warning. I could even write such software myself, including the features I like and want - and I'd be able to make said DVD software available for free and under an open source license.

Every movie out there has already been pirated, legal DeCSS or not, and they're tremendously easy to find and download, legal DeCSS or not. Will not having to see the FBI warning one... more... time... really induce me to rip off movies? No, of course not. That's ludicrous. But it *does* mean one less avenue for the content industry to force-feed me advertising (notwithstanding the fact that I've already paid them my pound of flesh to watch the content I want to watch).

If you really want to talk about setting up reasonable boundaries, try talking to the content industry. They plead with Congress that DRM is the only way they're going to protect their investment, but when they get the legislation they ask for (DMCA), they can't help themselves but to sprinkle on a little extra "screw you" to the legitimate consumer. They add extra features that force advertising down our throats or impose autodeletion on legally recorded content; or they implement oppressive, buggy, and unsafe DRM schemes (furthermore, ones that ironically violate the licensing terms of open source software); or they implement their DRM without regard for early adopters of new technology. And yes, I have actual concrete examples I can provide of each of those "screw yous" that I just mentioned.

If the content industry could be trusted, then nobody would be complaining about DRM except the pirates. But the content industry is no more trustworthy than the pirates, for the reasons I've already described above, and what you're seeing from legitimate consumers like myself is the beginning of the backlash. My worry is that the backlash won't become mainstream until it's too late (that being when the technology infrastructure relies upon the content industry's chosen DRM scheme being implemented by the hardware).

The MPAA has another reason besides piracy for trying to stifle open-source DVD player projects: if I can modify the code of DVD player software, then I can disable other key DRM features like region codes and UOP (user operation prohibited) flags. That means they wouldn't be able to force me to wait until a DVD is released in my region before I buy it, and they wouldn't be able to force me to watch additional advertising or the already boringly ubiquitous FBI warning.

Note that neither of these DRM features have anything to do with piracy, yet they are still protected by the DMCA, wholly at the legitimate consumer's expense.

Alright, you are forcing me to make a forum thread on this.

This is too funny.

Google Cola - I would drink that. Really.

"Google Cola - Boost Your Rankings!"

As a loyal viewer of the Practice I was very dissapointed that the characters who made this show (Bobby, Helen, Lindsey)were not brought back. Why ruin such a successful show? Cheers without Ted Danson, MASH without Alan Alda, Sopranos without James Gandolfini? Give me a break. Nothing against James Spader or Sharon Stone but this was a bad move and I wont be watching. Thank you to this site and the other posters because this is where I found out what really happened and why they were not on the show anymore.