The article does say that it is mostly to combat people harvesting and selling large number of accounts/passwords which seems reasonable to me. It is scary that they could go after people sharing with a friend with up to a year in jail though.
That's a bit over dramatic. Just because the RIAA sponsored or endorsed a bill doesn't mean its necessarily a bad thing.
Can you provide a reason why it's unreasonable for a company to want each person (or even household) who uses their service to have a separate subscription?
That being said, I haven't read the bill, and only know what the article says about it.
If you plan to stick with Android phones, then go ahead and buy apps. I'm on my third android and the apps just download to your new phone when you sign in.
The article even says that you aren't telling the world your plans, your telling a specific group of people. I could see this being useful by starting out general and making the plans more specific over time, just like the article says. For example, I could post to a group of close friends that I want to go out on Friday night. Someone else could suggest dancing, and advertisers could suggest a specific club. Because this plan was generated by a group of close friends we can all go. This isn't all that different from how I see my plans made today, but it's online and made with a little more notice.
>What it teaches is out of date by the time students graduate
Subjects like math and algorithms (some of the most useful classes I took) do not go out of date by the time you graduate. I may have to learn a new algorithm later in life, but the building blocks that I got in the class are often necessary.
The way I understood it, the pay cap is only for companies that take government money. So companies that are already in trouble are going to be the ones that can't attract the new executive talent they need to survive. If a company that takes government money can't turn itself around and still fails, then all the bailout did was postpone the failure - and the government loses its investment - a bad deal all around.
This is a really interesting take on the article, but not one that I can agree with.
It could just be the culture at the company that I work for, but when my manager tells me that I'm doing great work, I'm a top contributer, etc. but that the penny-pinching accountants won't let me have a raise then I do take that personally. I'm trying to move up but the company doesn't seem to want to let me. This isn't the way to turn me into an "alumni". Instead I'm going to be bitter at the company that gives lip service to career growth but isn't willing to put its money where its mouth is.
If a company wants employees to say for ten or more years, like they claim, then they need to be willing to pay up. Otherwise I would prefer the "you will be here for three years, then move on" talk on my starting day.
- Consumer Reports: When it comes to buying a big ticket item, like a car, the reviews and the user comments are very useful. Plus canceling my subscription after I bought my car was quick and painless
The idea that MySpace Music _might_ give my email address to any band that I buy a song from terrifies me to the point that I _won't_ buy anything from MySpace until I know that they won't do that. If I want a band to be able to contact me I will sign up for their mailing list.
You make an interesting point, but I'm not convinced that the ends justify the means. Just because Safari is better than IE does not mean it is okay to push it on people - especially when most of the people are using iTunes only because they have an iPod and Apple pushed iTunes on them. (This is just an observation. I have absolutely no real evidence to back up this claim.)
I do tend to be an idealist though, and I think that everyone needs to take the high ground when pushing for change.
I have the same feeling which is why I've held out buying any Apple stock. I might change my mind if at MacWorld Steve Jobs introduced a new product and a VP that had almost total control of the design. I want to see that someone else can run the company and keep Apple at the forefront of innovation before I invest.