silentsteel’s Techdirt Profile

silentsteel

About silentsteel




silentsteel’s Comments comment rss

  • Sep 7th, 2010 @ 9:39pm

    Re: Re:

    Oracle does not. HP, however, makes PCs and servers and does operating system development on Unix and Linux platforms, in addition to their recent purchase of Palm, strictly for WebOS. The competition is not such that you and I would see it daily, but they are competitors.

  • Aug 27th, 2010 @ 9:11pm

    Re: Hypocrisy

    Democrats are the same way. Whatever suits their needs at the time.

    Both sides are suspect at this point, the system is broken.

  • Jun 17th, 2010 @ 5:31am

    Re: Proof of competition being GOOD for consumers.

    A significant part of the issue is that Sprint and AT&T have completely different network architectures. For my Sprint phone to work on AT&T, it would require a very large investment in collaborative network upgrades. I am pretty sure that the carriers do not want to pay for this, and if the FCC/whomever mandates it, then the government (we) will pay for it. I am not sure I like that idea either.

  • Jun 14th, 2010 @ 5:22am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thank God...

    So how do you think traffic violations should be addressed? The traffic laws were written for a reason, and despite your cynical suggestion of a profit motive, I'm pretty sure they were written to help traffic move either more safely or more efficiently. So when such laws are broken, what should happen? Should the culprits just be given a stern talking-to? Or should the legal system provide an actual disincentive to breaking the law?

    Actually, the profit motive argument gains legitimacy when you realize that before a certain point in our history (before the 55 mph nationwide) the vast majority of the country did not have speed limits. Law enforcement wrote a ticket if you crashed, usually for excessive speed, reckless driving, or what ever fit the situation. Once a national limit was put in place, and cities, counties, and states realized there was revenue to be brought in by ticketing speeders. Why do you think in good times, law enforcement backs off on ticketing speeders (5+ mph buffer), and in tougher times, the buffer can be as low as 1 mph?

    Just because cynicism irritates you, does not mean that it is misplaced.

  • May 5th, 2010 @ 6:19pm

    Re:

    Unfortunately, as Windstream is a rural ISP, there are very few alternatives in the areas they serve. The few places I have heard of that competition has come in, Windstream, Valor Telecom at that time, was pushed almost completely out.

  • Sep 25th, 2009 @ 5:35am

    Re:

    Of course the current administration will not untangle this. It is not in President Obama's best interest to remove a policy that benefits him, also. As long as the telco's have immunity from lawsuits they will continue to provide access to their networks, for gov't surveillance purposes, of course. I do not care if you are a Republican or a Democrat, having that kind of access to information is....useful.

  • Jul 8th, 2009 @ 6:01am

    Re: Bern Convention

    That is very likely the case, but AFAIK, there is not a situation where a treaty or convention trumps the U. S. Constitution.

  • Mar 25th, 2009 @ 12:49pm

    Re: Re: Re: Fishy

    You ass.

    No more explanation needed.

  • Mar 24th, 2009 @ 6:51am

    Skype might have a problem here

    There are other companies already offering the same thing, (VoSKY-http://www.vosky.com) or similar, (Etherspeak-http://www.etherspeak.us). Both of these companies were demoing production products to a company I was working for 3 months ago, which does not sound like a long time until you consider that with the economy the way it is, few companies are going to want to change product lines just because Skype thinks they should.

    VoSky uses Skype to make its connections. Why would I, as one with purchasing authority, go with Skype's offering when VoSKY has had months to work out bugs.

  • Mar 20th, 2009 @ 4:56am

    Re: The Military

    The military's bandwidth has been allocated in such a way that its main use, communication between forward deployed units and command centers takes priority. Social networking sites have not written their pages in a manner that gives the option of not sucking bandwidth. Why should the military have to account in their tactical network design, which is limited by technology that will handle "being in the field" for sites that do not account for them? FYI, some of the gear the military uses will work happily in Iraq without air conditioning, find me some Cisco gear that will do that.

    Of course, there is also the issue of troops inadvertently compromising a unit's location and/or mission through a post on facebook or myspace.

  • Feb 24th, 2009 @ 8:30am

    Not seeing a test of true correlation

    As someone who was in the military, I have to say that this is not the best way to truly gauge whether violent video games and movies make one numb to real violence. From personal experience, the number of soldiers and marines that are reluctant to sight in on another human being is about where it was during Viet Nam. The line may be finer with the SFX that are in use now, but when another human's life is actually in the balance, that line still appears to be a mile wide.

  • Feb 17th, 2009 @ 3:40pm

    Re: These are not chargers...

    Actually, it is more complicated than apparently you think. Though I could be wrong here, true standardization includes not just making every phone use a mini-usb charger. You also have to take into account that some phones are set up to require far less electricity from the adapter than others. As an example, I have three chargers in my drawer and none of them have the same output power. This means that phones and batteries have to be redesigned with the plan that company a's charger will safely power company b's phone. If any manufacturer decides to be bullish it could easily take until 2012.

  • Jan 23rd, 2009 @ 11:10am

    The major flaw in Economics

    From my perspective, The greatest flaw in Economics lies in the fact that is is classified as a social science, which by that classification implies that people are inherently involved. People, and their ability to act like lemmings will skew a model entirely because the model can not take into account exactly why the human psyche does what it does. Individuals, as mentioned above, have an unknown ability for greed that no model can account for.

    Socialism and capitalism face the same issues. Both look outstanding on paper, but neither works well in a pure state.

  • Nov 19th, 2008 @ 6:00am

    But Apple is not in business to sell software

    Most people seem to forget that Apple is, first and foremost, a hardware company. Mac OSX is simply the icing on the cake for the hardware experience. What that experience is, exactly, I do not know; I refuse to drink the Kool-aid. I support some macs some of my extended family has purchased, and I see an over-priced, locked in system, with an OS that is optimized for Apple hardware. IMHO, if you move the system off the Apple hardware you have a dressed-up Ubuntu Linux, i. e. most things work, most of the time.
    Disclaimer: I use various Linux distributions exclusively at home.

  • Sep 15th, 2008 @ 10:52am

    Re: Re: In Defense of Myspace Music (Update)

    I am not sure how many people know about this already (it has been out for a week, almost) but (in my opinion) this would be an example of anti-competitive business practice Apple is able to engage in because of the monopolistic status of the ipod/iphone/itms. While there may be more to the story than this, what is mentioned in the blog is rather obvious to me as anti-competitive.

    http://almerica.blogspot.com/2008/09/podcaster-rejeceted-because-it.html

  • Sep 15th, 2008 @ 5:36am

    Re: In Defense of Myspace Music

    The pieces of legislation you are referring to are the Sherman and Clayton acts, which do not set out to define a company as a monopoly, and limit the company based on it being a monopoly, in and of itself. They were passed with the intention of limiting a company's ability to establish, and keep, a monopoly through anti-competitive practices, e. g. Microsoft, AT&T, Standard Oil.

    Many companies fit your criteria of monopoly; Google, and Hewlett Packard in the printer market, to name two off the top of my head. Neither one, however engages in the anti-competitive practices to keep any other entity out of their respective markets.

    If you feel that you can bring a better product or service to market than any of these guys (Google, Apple, or HP) go ahead and try. If, once you get your feet on the ground (credibility with your target consumer) there is verifiable evidence that your entrance into the market is being blocked by a competitor, then the government might (highly unlikely in the US currently) step in with fines, or whatever else necessary.

  • Aug 11th, 2008 @ 7:46am

    Re: MTA Hackers

    I could be wrong, but I think I read that the students contacted the MBTA regarding this presentation and all they got in return was that they had been reported to the FBI, and now were under investigation.

  • Jul 30th, 2008 @ 1:50pm

    Re: Re: Who to root for? by Alex Hagen

    Since you decided to play grammar nazi, proper English dictates that it should be "for whom to root." Otherwise "who to root for" is correct. As last I checked this is a technology blog, and not an English Literature blog, as long as the statement is coherent, I could not care less about a vernacular usage of the English language.

  • Jul 1st, 2008 @ 1:27pm

    Institute for Justice Link

    Here is a link directly to the page Institute for Justice has set up for continuing coverage of this case. http://www.ij.org/first_amendment/tx_computer_repair/index.html

  • Jun 9th, 2008 @ 1:19pm

    Re: Title 35

    IANAL, nor have I read any comments past this one quoting the pertinent portion of Title 35; however, based upon what it says, and what was being argued before SCOTUS, the key term I see is "infringement". Intel was not infringing on this patent as they had licensed the technology from LG to begin with.

More comments from silentsteel >>