Posted 09/22/2009 at 07:32:52pm

While I don't agree with a business being able to prevent someone from looking at something, I do support their right to say, "You can't look at it on our equipment."

You have every right to look at whatever politician’s website you like, and Congress can do nothing about it, nor can I, but I can prevent you from doing so on my home network. If I own a business that provides network access to you, then I have the right to make a decision of blocking any content I desire. I HOWEVER DO HAVE A MORAL AND LEAGLE OBLIGATION TO DISCLOSE THIS TO YOU. I want it to be clearly known, I am not recommending that business do this, but saying that they have the right.

The 1st amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Congress has no right to prevent us from speaking, posting most anything online, or most any other form of expressing opinion. However an ISP is not congress.

P.S. I do have an issue with the government anything in the market. I feel sorry for those of you who don't have competition in your local market, Dallas does. We are not entitled to the Internet; there is no reason that any company should have to give us unrestricted access. There is a reason for companies to get rid of bandwidth limits, it’s called ‘customers want it’.

Posted 09/22/2009 at 11:11:50am

I just had a great idea, the government could require that ISPs not charge over a certain price, tell them where they will lay lines, and what capacity the lines will be able to carry. I believe the Soviet Union took this approach.
I think the biggest issue we have is different opinions on if we should follow the constitution as the letter of the law or a guideline. If it is a guideline then yes, let the government regulate that my ISP has to do things that benefit me. If it’s the letter of the law, then sadly they should attempt to limit competition, charge me as much as I am willing to pay. AKA follow the law of supply and demand.

Posted 09/21/2009 at 11:14:56am

If Hulu is making money is anyones guess. Do they have income? Yes. Profit? Maybe.

The furthest behind I've seen a show is 8 days, not bad at all.

SO how much is a monthly subscription worth, would new releases being  offered for "rent" work?

Posted 09/11/2009 at 12:23:35pm

so you mean if I post something online and then people who want to invest in me, might look at it. So there was a reason those professors mentioned that a time or two. Thanks Mr. Prez

Posted 09/11/2009 at 12:21:11pm

I like the step forward, and enough monitors that will finaly fill up my great grandfathers monster of a desk

Posted 09/03/2009 at 11:47:10am

V1agra from Pf1zer cannot exist legally. As you said, any reasonable judge, sadly that excludes one from my home state, would rule against this. Can I compete with Viagra, you bet, can I have a great marketing campaign, yes, can I try to steal their customers, yes I can and within the letter of the law. Can I try to trick their customers into buying my product thinking it is Viagra? Nope, not without breaking laws and being sued successfully.
I don’t want to buy a stick of memory only to find out it isn’t really Kingston, but it’s K1NGston, a cheap brand that puts little money into R&D because they intend to trick consumers into buying their product thinking it is a great stick of memory produced by a good company. Trademark is actually designed to protect consumers. It is not profitable to build up a brand of quality products and then have some knock off pretending to be that brand makes money off of innovation. Therefore if innovation is worth less money, companies will innovate less.
And yes some trademark lawsuits have gotten out of control.

Posted 09/03/2009 at 10:49:51am

She was wrong and committed a crime. But she was sued in civil court, where the burden of proof is less than in criminal court. She was selected to be sued as an example, nothing really is wrong with that. She was sued for a ridiculous amount of money, something is wrong with that. If RIAA were to sue her for the costs of each album and lawyer’s fees, they would still be attacked, but not by me. Their amount was silly, and insulting, to themselves. Why would an industry sue their customers? Stupidity.

Posted 08/02/2009 at 01:24:13pm

There is a lot of confusion as to where some of the prices came from, Why not creat a list of where those cost come from?

I am wondering where the RAM & Cooling from the Budget surpluss prices are

Thanks

Posted 07/20/2009 at 10:03:47am

Unlike computers, even technically advanced districs would have a hard time repairing the Kindles. Upgrades will be necessary as the products wear out, schools don't buy a new batch of textbooks every year, becausee most of the cost in a text book is the content, licences, not the physical book. I have worked in the Tech Dept. of a school district that uses one on one laptops, while the Kindle and other devices like it are a great idea, and will work well in limited areas, they are not ready to be pushed down onto schools.

Posted 07/20/2009 at 07:28:19am

Last time I checked you could, gasp, push out updates from 1 computer, it might not be as expensive as you think Mr. Under Secretary.