For instance I was getting worried that zombies would take over my farm. I was relieved that this book explained to me that that was a different game altogether and that they are completely separate, and the zombies from the game I had not signed up for wouldn't rise.
right-click -> block content
and then hit the details button for fine tuning . . .
I have to admit I don't use FF, so no idea how sophisticated their extension is . . .
. ..that someone over in Yugoslavia can hear my music now . ..
slightly off-topic but there's been no such thing as Yugoslavia since about 1995 and probably before (the Balkan wars of that period make an exact date for the breakup of the Yugoslav Republic difficult).
If 1 in 100,000 people cannot properly operate a device and there's a fair chance of a class action lawsuit then you can bet your ass the problem is with the person!
If you sacrifice security and/or privacy for convenience, that is your problem (or in this case your sister's).
Well that's exactly the point - I didn't sacrifice my privacy, in fact I respect it enough not to have an account on either Facebook or MySpace or Bebo or any of the others. However I can not control everyone I know and the worrying thing in the example I gave was that someone else sacrificed my privacy without my consent.
As always the issue here is not the type of information (data valuable to divorce lawyers) but the context in which it is gathered (Facebook search unbeknownst to the poster). And once again the usual responses will be - a) Poster is stupid, and b) Facebook is evil.
I tend to think that so long as you are empowered to share or not to share then all is well. With Facebook this is not the case. My sister shared a reasonably embarrassing photo of me with some mutual friends (some of which I work with) which was then shared with my whole building by whatever networking effect took over - nice!. I was not in control of this. Now you can argue that she could have done this pre-social networking site era - but she couldn't simple because she is not in physical contact with 99.5% of people in my building. Social networking makes ones dis-empowerment that much more pervasive.
er you seem to be having trouble with reading comprehension. A spectator sport is a sport which attracts spectators e.g. Almost any mainstream sport. This is not the same as being a sports spectator. The GP was commenting on the type of sport (spectator sport) and not those watching it and saying that they suck. This seems like a blanket statement that deserved the ridicule it got!
I love the mismatch here! Conroy accuses Google of surreptitiously stealing everyone's data while simultaneously proposing a bill which does the same but on a grander scale. In some respects I'd rather a private organisation, whose sole interest is making cash, to have my data, that the government, whose sole interest is accumulating power.
[India] fears that ACTA will eventually be used against it.
I find that quite sweet actually. The whole point of excluding the next economic power house is precisely to frame laws which may delay their rise to the top. It is not if ACTA gets used against India but when.
Just because I buy a product from an exploitative company, particularly when that's the only option, doesn't make me an exploiter.
You could of course not buy the product. I know any kind of self-sacrifice is anathema nowadays but my original point remains; unless you are Robinson Crusoe sans Friday you are going to be exploiting someone. If you think my post was an apologia for exploitative capitalism (aka 'evil people') then that probably says more about you than me;)
So I guess you're a fruitarian, living in a self-built log cabin on public land utilising only sustainable, natural, locally sourced products and self-generated power. O is that a computer you're posting from . . . ?
We in the west can't help but be exploiters by dint of our wealth . ..
Slashdot Mirror
For instance I was getting worried that zombies would take over my farm. I was relieved that this book explained to me that that was a different game altogether and that they are completely separate, and the zombies from the game I had not signed up for wouldn't rise.
and while you're busy changing the world you've got time to post on slashdot?
which also perfectly illustrates how we ourselves lack freedom. Statutorily enshrined 'rights' are anathema to freedom. Great post by the way . . .
right-click -> block content and then hit the details button for fine tuning . . . I have to admit I don't use FF, so no idea how sophisticated their extension is . . .
Technically for #14, your just restarting the printer que.
and you're not going to get far with
try
I don't think 'typo' means what you think it means . . .
Aw jeez I totally missed out on an opportunity to call it "Xbooks Live" :(
Apparently not . . .
Wild guess here, but probably because someone with mod points thought it was funny.
No surprise you're posting as AC with such ludicrous leaps of logic . . .
. . .that someone over in Yugoslavia can hear my music now . . .
slightly off-topic but there's been no such thing as Yugoslavia since about 1995 and probably before (the Balkan wars of that period make an exact date for the breakup of the Yugoslav Republic difficult).
If 1 in 100,000 people cannot properly operate a device and there's a fair chance of a class action lawsuit then you can bet your ass the problem is with the person!
Bullshit that can be backed up with data truly shines.
If it can be backed up with data in what sense is it bullshit?
??
Nerds don't like heroin addiction? Shucks I've been doing it wrong!
If you sacrifice security and/or privacy for convenience, that is your problem (or in this case your sister's).
Well that's exactly the point - I didn't sacrifice my privacy, in fact I respect it enough not to have an account on either Facebook or MySpace or Bebo or any of the others. However I can not control everyone I know and the worrying thing in the example I gave was that someone else sacrificed my privacy without my consent.
As always the issue here is not the type of information (data valuable to divorce lawyers) but the context in which it is gathered (Facebook search unbeknownst to the poster). And once again the usual responses will be - a) Poster is stupid, and b) Facebook is evil.
I tend to think that so long as you are empowered to share or not to share then all is well. With Facebook this is not the case. My sister shared a reasonably embarrassing photo of me with some mutual friends (some of which I work with) which was then shared with my whole building by whatever networking effect took over - nice!. I was not in control of this. Now you can argue that she could have done this pre-social networking site era - but she couldn't simple because she is not in physical contact with 99.5% of people in my building. Social networking makes ones dis-empowerment that much more pervasive.
He said spectator sports sucked.
er you seem to be having trouble with reading comprehension. A spectator sport is a sport which attracts spectators e.g. Almost any mainstream sport. This is not the same as being a sports spectator. The GP was commenting on the type of sport (spectator sport) and not those watching it and saying that they suck. This seems like a blanket statement that deserved the ridicule it got!
I love the mismatch here! Conroy accuses Google of surreptitiously stealing everyone's data while simultaneously proposing a bill which does the same but on a grander scale. In some respects I'd rather a private organisation, whose sole interest is making cash, to have my data, that the government, whose sole interest is accumulating power.
Part of managing a company is knowing your weaknesses.
Knowing your weaknesses is not the same as having them advertised to the world by a White House advisor!
Microsoft is an incredibly successful empire built on the premise of market dominance with low-quality goods.
If he really said that I bet Microsoft execs are spewing their cornflakes as we speak!
Apple don't update other company's applications
True, when Apple sees functionality in an App they don't like they just ban the app!
I wouldn't worry too much as they think 50/50 isn't a bad first attempt. I guess they never heard of flipping a coin!
[India] fears that ACTA will eventually be used against it.
I find that quite sweet actually. The whole point of excluding the next economic power house is precisely to frame laws which may delay their rise to the top. It is not if ACTA gets used against India but when.
Javascript is not a language it is a kind of toffee apple . . .
Just because I buy a product from an exploitative company, particularly when that's the only option, doesn't make me an exploiter.
You could of course not buy the product. I know any kind of self-sacrifice is anathema nowadays but my original point remains; unless you are Robinson Crusoe sans Friday you are going to be exploiting someone. If you think my post was an apologia for exploitative capitalism (aka 'evil people') then that probably says more about you than me ;)
I am not exploiting anyone;
So I guess you're a fruitarian, living in a self-built log cabin on public land utilising only sustainable, natural, locally sourced products and self-generated power. O is that a computer you're posting from . . . ?
We in the west can't help but be exploiters by dint of our wealth . . .
I think that Apple intends on eating that difference rather than passing it on to the consumer.
You mean they don't expect their customers to pay for suicides in their manufacturing plants? Fuck me the world's full of saints!