That's exactly the point. Nobody (except apparently 4 people at the FCC) actually wants them to expand.
As a general rule, a company in a dominant position in its market further expanding is bad for everyone involved, except the company itself, more often than not.
It's been over 10 years since I read this, and I'd have difficulty finding it again, but I recall reading once that it used to be thought that cities grew out of towns, which grew out of villages, but archaeologists are starting to learn the exact opposite: ancient cities were almost always intended to be cities from the beginning. IIRC the article was written back in the 50s or 60s, so I'm not sure how much the conventional wisdom has changed since then, but there's more than one viewpoint on the matter, at the very least.
And here you were thinking competition was a good thing. Of course, if these smaller cable operators don't want Charter coming to town and taking their milk money, they could simply offer cheaper, faster service themselves.
There is at least a certain amount of truth to this. When a behemoth much larger than your own company comes in and starts to compete with a local company, it frequently does cause harm to both your business and the community. Just ask anyone who used to be in retail until a Wal-Mart showed up, used economies of scale to be able to afford to "compete" all the local retailers out of business, then started sucking money out of the local economy and treating its workers abysmally.
Not sure how well that same paradigm translates to the cable industry, but it's a real problem that does exist in some sectors, at least.
Python is a dynamically typed language, rather than statically typed, meaning that the declaring code is much more concise, and much more obviously a specification of what's needed, rather than code designed to do something directly.
Static vs. dynamic typing has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of statically typed languages that use type inference (automatically figuring out what type you're talking about) to achieve results similar to Python, rather then requiring manifest typing (declaring all types up-front) as Java does.
"Merge investigated the issue and later reported to the FDA that the problem occurred because of the antivirus software running on the doctors' computer. The antivirus was configured to scan for viruses every hour, and the scan started right in the middle of the procedure. Merge says the antivirus froze access to crucial data acquired during the heart catheterization. Unable to access real-time data, the app crashed spectacularly."
On one hand, yeah, that's kind of stupid of the IT guys.
On the other hand, that's kind of stupid of the Merge developers, and extremely stupid of them to not fix the problem when it's brought to their attention.
As a general principle, with applicability far beyond police work, nobody reports on all the times the system works correctly. That doesn't grab attention and bring in ratings.
Ugh, I wasn't done. Why does Techdirt still not have an Edit button?
Rationale: In any case involving the attempted taking of property, the law must, by necessity, initially presume one party to be in the wrong before any legal proceedings have been initiated, much less resolved. Either the person doing the taking gets to keep the property by default, or they don't by default.
Considering both the stakes--if you initially presume the foreclosure to be valid, then someone ends up out on the streets, whereas if you initially presume it to be invalid, no harm is done to anyone, not even the bank because they're still having trouble selling off foreclosed houses--and the precedents, (a well-established history of rampant foreclosure fraud over the last decade and probably longer, which I assume you already know about,) both common sense and basic human decency fall squarely on the side of the homeowner.
Meh. Personally, I don't see anything proper in letting someone break into a home and steal stuff out of it, particularly if you're an officer of the law who has a duty to prevent stuff like that and arrest people who do it.
I don't usually believe in "guilty until proven innocent" but in the case of foreclosures I am willing to make a much-needed exception.
Okay, so no one is talking about how any kind of new train system still needs to get land use rights and political approval
It always surprises me, and depresses me just a little, to see people say things like this. "Yeah, the Hyperloop sounds like a good idea, except for how they aren't considering [insert incredibly obvious thing here]."
Does anyone really believe that? Does any rational person truly think that you can get together hundreds of very smart engineers to solve a specific problem, and they'll somehow all overlook something so obvious than John Q. Random Outsider notices it in an instant?
Simply because they're not discussing land use deals and political approval in public--because the relevant negotiations are still underway--doesn't mean it's not happening.
Also, some people actually are talking about it publicly.
For example, HTT (the company that didn't just waste a bunch of time and money on a publicity stunt sending a pod up to an astounding 100 MPH--which my car could match without breaking a sweat--out in the middle of nowhere) is working on building an actual, functioning Hyperloop in Quay Valley, CA, with construction expected to begin later this year and opening for business by 2018.
On one hand, what he said about the foreclosure order being worthless was more likely to be true than false. In this post-2008 world, that should be the default attitude of anyone who's been paying attention, and it's good to see LE standing up to foreclosure fraud and going after the real criminals.
On the other hand... it would have a lot less of a skeezy "conflict of interest" feel to it had the victim not been himself.
Considering the stuff that the Colombians are trying to put an end to with the Paz Colombia process, I don't suppose there's any way to take this threat by Everett Eissenstat and charge him with support for terrorism?
Wow, so much fail here. Almost everything you said is wrong! Where do I even start?
First off, an API and an ABI have nothing whatsoever to do with each other. An API is a defined set of data types and functions to use to communicate with a specific system; an ABI is a set of conventions used to define how functions, function calls, and data are organized on a specific platform and language. It's possible to implement the exact same API on multiple different ABIs, and to implement multiple APIs on any given ABI. Despite their similar names, the two are entirely unrelated concepts and the copyrightability of one has nothing to do with the copyrightability of the other.
because technically, all code is an API
What in the world are you talking about? An API is a defined interface for external code to interface with a system. This comes nowhere near covering "all code," or even "all code that interfaces with external systems" for that matter!
Has anyone actually read them? If not, I'd ask you do because you'll note something unique about them. However, if you don't have the time or care to do so, here's what a typical GNU/GPL licenses says: "You can use our software and do what you want with it, but you can't sell it and you need to keep it open".
First, there's no such thing as "a typical GNU/GPL licence". There is the GPL license, with various versions thereof, all of which are set in stone. It's a legal document crafted for a specific purpose by a specific group of people.
Second, nowhere does the GPL say you can "do what you want with" the GPL'd code; its entire purpose is to restrict what you can do with the code. It also doesn't say "you can't sell it"; the FSF has repeatedly come out and said the exact opposite: selling GPL software in no way violates either the letter or the spirit of the GPL, so long as it isn't done in a way that violates the GPL.
I'm not quite clear what points you're trying to make, but can you please fact-check your arguments before deploying things that are simply not true in support of them?
Oh, I dunno ... say you have finally gotten that appointment with that HIV specialist and have no other way to get there but your own car.
Why say that? Show me a scenario in which public transportation and cabs are unavailable, and yet normal businesses are open for business and the roads are clear for normal driving (ie. not a natural disaster situation) and I will show you a contrived scenario that has no place in a discussion of real-life events.
On the post: Cable Lobbying Group Claims More Competition Would Hurt Consumers
Re: Re:
As a general rule, a company in a dominant position in its market further expanding is bad for everyone involved, except the company itself, more often than not.
On the post: DailyDirt: The Newest Of The Old
Re: cheers or however they say it at Octoberfest
It's been over 10 years since I read this, and I'd have difficulty finding it again, but I recall reading once that it used to be thought that cities grew out of towns, which grew out of villages, but archaeologists are starting to learn the exact opposite: ancient cities were almost always intended to be cities from the beginning. IIRC the article was written back in the 50s or 60s, so I'm not sure how much the conventional wisdom has changed since then, but there's more than one viewpoint on the matter, at the very least.
On the post: German Publishers Whine Because They Must Pay To Authors Misappropriated Copyright Levies
How has Microsoft not sued them for trademark infringement yet? :P
On the post: Cable Lobbying Group Claims More Competition Would Hurt Consumers
There is at least a certain amount of truth to this. When a behemoth much larger than your own company comes in and starts to compete with a local company, it frequently does cause harm to both your business and the community. Just ask anyone who used to be in retail until a Wal-Mart showed up, used economies of scale to be able to afford to "compete" all the local retailers out of business, then started sucking money out of the local economy and treating its workers abysmally.
Not sure how well that same paradigm translates to the cable industry, but it's a real problem that does exist in some sectors, at least.
On the post: How Java's Inherent Verboseness May Mess Up Fair Use For APIs
Re: Re: Serious question:
On the post: How Java's Inherent Verboseness May Mess Up Fair Use For APIs
Static vs. dynamic typing has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of statically typed languages that use type inference (automatically figuring out what type you're talking about) to achieve results similar to Python, rather then requiring manifest typing (declaring all types up-front) as Java does.
On the post: Court Denies Immunity To Law Enforcement Officer Who Arrested Crew Sent To Clean Out His Foreclosed House
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Heart Surgery Stalled For Five Minutes Thanks To Errant Anti-Virus Scan
On one hand, yeah, that's kind of stupid of the IT guys.
On the other hand, that's kind of stupid of the Merge developers, and extremely stupid of them to not fix the problem when it's brought to their attention.
On the post: DailyDirt: Faster Than A Locomotive...
Re: Re:
On the post: James Comey Still Trying To Blame Increase In Violent Crime On 'Viral Videos'
Re:
On the post: Court Denies Immunity To Law Enforcement Officer Who Arrested Crew Sent To Clean Out His Foreclosed House
Re: Re: Re:
Rationale: In any case involving the attempted taking of property, the law must, by necessity, initially presume one party to be in the wrong before any legal proceedings have been initiated, much less resolved. Either the person doing the taking gets to keep the property by default, or they don't by default.
Considering both the stakes--if you initially presume the foreclosure to be valid, then someone ends up out on the streets, whereas if you initially presume it to be invalid, no harm is done to anyone, not even the bank because they're still having trouble selling off foreclosed houses--and the precedents, (a well-established history of rampant foreclosure fraud over the last decade and probably longer, which I assume you already know about,) both common sense and basic human decency fall squarely on the side of the homeowner.
On the post: Court Denies Immunity To Law Enforcement Officer Who Arrested Crew Sent To Clean Out His Foreclosed House
Re: Re:
I don't usually believe in "guilty until proven innocent" but in the case of foreclosures I am willing to make a much-needed exception.
On the post: DailyDirt: Faster Than A Locomotive...
It always surprises me, and depresses me just a little, to see people say things like this. "Yeah, the Hyperloop sounds like a good idea, except for how they aren't considering [insert incredibly obvious thing here]."
Does anyone really believe that? Does any rational person truly think that you can get together hundreds of very smart engineers to solve a specific problem, and they'll somehow all overlook something so obvious than John Q. Random Outsider notices it in an instant?
Simply because they're not discussing land use deals and political approval in public--because the relevant negotiations are still underway--doesn't mean it's not happening.
Also, some people actually are talking about it publicly.
For example, HTT (the company that didn't just waste a bunch of time and money on a publicity stunt sending a pod up to an astounding 100 MPH--which my car could match without breaking a sweat--out in the middle of nowhere) is working on building an actual, functioning Hyperloop in Quay Valley, CA, with construction expected to begin later this year and opening for business by 2018.
They've also announced a major deal to build Hyperloops to connect several major European cities. This is something that's really happening, a lot faster than most people realize!
On the post: Court Denies Immunity To Law Enforcement Officer Who Arrested Crew Sent To Clean Out His Foreclosed House
On one hand, what he said about the foreclosure order being worthless was more likely to be true than false. In this post-2008 world, that should be the default attitude of anyone who's been paying attention, and it's good to see LE standing up to foreclosure fraud and going after the real criminals.
On the other hand... it would have a lot less of a skeezy "conflict of interest" feel to it had the victim not been himself.
On the post: At The Behest Of Big Pharma, US Threatens Colombia Over Compulsory Licensing Of Swiss Drug
On the post: Mozilla Asks Court To Force FBI To Turn Over Information On Hacking Tool It Used In Child Porn Case
Double negative alert
I assume you mean "not opposed" here?
On the post: Stakes Are High In Oracle v. Google, But The Public Has Already Lost Big
Re:
First off, an API and an ABI have nothing whatsoever to do with each other. An API is a defined set of data types and functions to use to communicate with a specific system; an ABI is a set of conventions used to define how functions, function calls, and data are organized on a specific platform and language. It's possible to implement the exact same API on multiple different ABIs, and to implement multiple APIs on any given ABI. Despite their similar names, the two are entirely unrelated concepts and the copyrightability of one has nothing to do with the copyrightability of the other.
What in the world are you talking about? An API is a defined interface for external code to interface with a system. This comes nowhere near covering "all code," or even "all code that interfaces with external systems" for that matter!
First, there's no such thing as "a typical GNU/GPL licence". There is the GPL license, with various versions thereof, all of which are set in stone. It's a legal document crafted for a specific purpose by a specific group of people.
Second, nowhere does the GPL say you can "do what you want with" the GPL'd code; its entire purpose is to restrict what you can do with the code. It also doesn't say "you can't sell it"; the FSF has repeatedly come out and said the exact opposite: selling GPL software in no way violates either the letter or the spirit of the GPL, so long as it isn't done in a way that violates the GPL.
I'm not quite clear what points you're trying to make, but can you please fact-check your arguments before deploying things that are simply not true in support of them?
On the post: Guy Who Didn't Invent Email Sues Gawker For Pointing Out He Didn't Invent Email
Just saying...
On the post: Is It Really That Big A Deal That Twitter Blocked US Intelligence Agencies From Mining Public Tweets?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why say that? Show me a scenario in which public transportation and cabs are unavailable, and yet normal businesses are open for business and the roads are clear for normal driving (ie. not a natural disaster situation) and I will show you a contrived scenario that has no place in a discussion of real-life events.
On the post: Is It Really That Big A Deal That Twitter Blocked US Intelligence Agencies From Mining Public Tweets?
Re: Re:
And a driver has total control over where they choose to drive publicly, and even which route they choose to take to get there. What's the difference?
Next >>