Yeah instead they supply what a half dozen unarmed and a few armed ones at the airport. They still pay them they just don't have them where they actually could stop someone.
To be fair it isn't Jews for the most part that are launching rockets into or blowing up buses in Isreal. Racial profiling is perfectly reasonable when you have one race (or at least enemies that are a subset of one race) that surround you and want you harm. I'm sorry Ahmed but the synagogue is closed to day.
Yeah they might have to provide that armed agent at their expense. After all they haven't been convicted of anything so if you want to monitor their movements that is your problem.
I have a friend in the UK who in turn has a friend that works for Virgin. He gets "mates rates" around 40 pounds a month, two smart phones (a blackberry and a samsung andriod) unlimited calling, messaging etc anywhere in the UK, cable his house (with pretty much all channels but porn), VOIP home phone and I think it is around a 30Mbps internet connection. All this for about half what I pay for my 150Mbps connection. Pretty sweet. But even normal people get things a lot cheaper in the UK for this kind of stuff. 15-20 pounds a month is pretty typical for a cell phone from what I've heard.
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 1
Why use a Dell if you don't use what makes it different from countless PCs out there? Apple is a brand of PC it runs windows. If they want my money they need to make products that suit me as a customer. The 'we run windows but also have this other thing that we think is cool' only works if that other thing is in fact cool for you. Suggestion (never going to happen) give people the option of with OSX, with windows, with both or with none.
I get your point but this is Apple a company known for design. They haven't really don't a fundamental UI or hardware design in my opinion since Leopard with the 3d dock (which was still an incremental improvement) and hardware since iphone 1/mac pro/iMac went all sleek aluminum unibody. Everything since has been adding another app/dashboard with feature X on it with very much the same look and feel or a slightly lighter faster box with a higher res screen. Were is the novelty? Is there really no better way to fundamentally interact with the computer? Is there no joy even in making something mostly similar but with a subtle "this is the new thing" ala Aero/Win 8 flat look, or unity in Ubuntu on the desktop? You almost have to take out a weight scale and a ruler to tell one version of a Apple product from the previous version lately which is sad.
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 1
Stock highres monitors for one. Although you are paying a premium so probably not enough of an answer.
Since the split to Intel architecture I try to look at Apple as just another box maker since I'll probably end up wiping it and installing windows anyways. So as a box maker they fail for my needs. This goes back to earlier in this thread: the impression by Apple fanboys that you just need to find which of the 3 options Apple provides is "your mac". There are whole swaths of people that Apple is no where near having a competitive offering in their market.
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 1
That is what kills me as a Mac owner (27" iMac bought mainly for the nice screen and single box it packs into as I expected to be moving via plane in a couple months). I like my iMac but for power user stuff it kind of suffers. The ram is laptop quality ram from what I understand which hurts a bit, for some reason the disk drive is uber slow (late 2009 iMac get ~20MBps) and so hard to upgrade you might as well not bother.
The Mac Pro is ridiculously expensive. All I'd want is a quad core with 16-32GB ram a SSD drive (~512GB) and a solid video card (doesn't need to be hardcore gamer level but being able to play a popular FPS game less than a year old would be nice). I'd be looking at well over 4k for a mac with a 27" monitor vs ~$2500 for a Dell or equivalent. I'd still need windows for the games almost certainly and definitely for my development (C#/SQL Server server side stuff in my case).
In short for desktops: their low end offering is a bit underspeced even maxed out for me, their pro version pretty much makes you hand your wallet over. For laptops even their pro version is underspeced for me, Though I hate laptops generally for this reason for equivalent money for a maxed out mac book pro you can get a newer/faster CPU, GPU. The only thing that would be hard to replace (and still beat the other specs) is the retina screen as it is still pretty uncommon to get resolutions that high. But as a compensation other vendors have touch so it is a wash once you get > 1080p.
I'm usually not a huge fan of updates that are largely cosmetic (think Aero being the defining feature of Vista) but OS X really needs a face lift. It has been essentially the same for 10 years. Faux metal windows, annoyingly small open/close/minify buttons and the dashboard. I guess the metal look kind of blends in with the alumnium cases of most of their machines but still... oh hum ala Win 95.
California might have the average number of engineers but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of them concentrated in the bay area. People concentrate for resource reasons being able to hire or change jobs, being able to locate funding etc. A state the size of California (especially surrounded by low population states) are too big to look at as a whole. You need to be within commuting distance for network affects to be of any use. This is the equivalent of stating that the country side in the 19th century was equally populated with fabric mills even though that clearly wouldn't be the case since they were using water wheels on rivers for power. Zoom out far enough and everyone is average.
My understanding is the truth defense is more of a convention not a requirement. Also in Canada you have to use think it is called an affirmative defense. You are assumed to have defamed unless you can prove your speech was protected (in public interest, reasonable communication, etc). It would be for him to prove that his communication was for anything other than to harm that hotel as vengeance.
It probably only protects them while they are in the US. If they go to Canada or a country that chooses to respect Canada's judgement/law over the US judgement/law they might still collect. Lots of civil law is like that. As long as you don't go to where what you did was illegal (or have assets there) your fine. Doesn't mean you weren't found guilty just that the victim can't collect.
Would they let him stay in a women's prison? That might make it worth it: I'd imagine you are much less likely to have an unwanted rear entry when you take penises out of the equation.
I was just thinking yesterday that he gave the impression of someone that might have a little to tell but I wouldn't ask. Now it is confirmed. Is it okay to be straight and have a gaydar?
The beauty of civil suits is you don't have to have grounds. If you can keep it in the the court (or likely precourt) process long enough you can bankrupt the other guy into doing what you want. He who has the biggest wallet wins.
Also, this is Canada the truth is not an absolute defense for libel. If the purpose of your communication was malicious you can still lose.
You can be sued under canadian libel law regardless of where the publication was. You could write a nasty letter that only a few scientists living in Antarctica ever see and I could still sue you in Montreal for it.
Not to mention he now made known that he knew he was exposed to bed bugs and went to the other hotel. So if they got bedbugs they might go after him. After all did he wash all his clothes at high heat, clean out his luggage, wipe it down with rubbing alcohol, high heat steam or other things known to be fatal to bed bugs? Probably not he just threw things in the suitcase and when on over would be my guess.
You have no such protection in Canada. Truth can be part of your defense but even then it doesn't guarantee that you won't be found to have defamed the injured party. We have more leeway to criticize people in public positions but even there the Supreme Court ruled that the truth isn't a sufficient defense. If the intent of your communication was to defame the truth of your statements doesn't matter. Some random guy that is never going to go back to that hotel anyways doesn't really have much reason to shoot his mouth/keyboard off other than to punish the Hotel. It is intentionally malicious. The counter argument he'd need to use to defend I think is that even though his intent was to damage/shame the Hotel he was communicating "in the public interest".
One room infested but you get them repeatedly... hmm might be a flaw in the method. Do the hotels close that room and the adjoining room because those are the only ones infested or because they don't want to lose business by vacating the hotel and spraying the whole thing? I had them at my house for about a year because an idiot that I rented to went to his buddies for a weekend party even though he knew his friend had them.
These little critters are pretty much indestructible and can move just about as fast as an ant (not to mention could drop off someone/their bags as they are moving around the hotel). Someone reports the problem and a few hours go by before the treatment guys come around those little buggers could be anywhere. They go between walls, under wallpaper etc. The spray only kills them if they actually walk on it, what if they go into the next room over instead of coming out of the wall on the same side? You got to do the whole place at least twice about 2-3 weeks apart to kill both the adults and the eggs that hatch and become adults the next couple weeks since the poisons only kill the adults.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah instead they supply what a half dozen unarmed and a few armed ones at the airport. They still pay them they just don't have them where they actually could stop someone.
To be fair it isn't Jews for the most part that are launching rockets into or blowing up buses in Isreal. Racial profiling is perfectly reasonable when you have one race (or at least enemies that are a subset of one race) that surround you and want you harm. I'm sorry Ahmed but the synagogue is closed to day.
It prevents me from enjoying flying that is hardly nothing to me.
To be fair "innocent to proven guilty" covers a lot of ground. But I say flying shouldn't be a problem but landing should be tightly controlled.
Yeah they might have to provide that armed agent at their expense. After all they haven't been convicted of anything so if you want to monitor their movements that is your problem.
I have a friend in the UK who in turn has a friend that works for Virgin. He gets "mates rates" around 40 pounds a month, two smart phones (a blackberry and a samsung andriod) unlimited calling, messaging etc anywhere in the UK, cable his house (with pretty much all channels but porn), VOIP home phone and I think it is around a 30Mbps internet connection. All this for about half what I pay for my 150Mbps connection. Pretty sweet. But even normal people get things a lot cheaper in the UK for this kind of stuff. 15-20 pounds a month is pretty typical for a cell phone from what I've heard.
Why use a Dell if you don't use what makes it different from countless PCs out there? Apple is a brand of PC it runs windows. If they want my money they need to make products that suit me as a customer. The 'we run windows but also have this other thing that we think is cool' only works if that other thing is in fact cool for you. Suggestion (never going to happen) give people the option of with OSX, with windows, with both or with none.
I get your point but this is Apple a company known for design. They haven't really don't a fundamental UI or hardware design in my opinion since Leopard with the 3d dock (which was still an incremental improvement) and hardware since iphone 1/mac pro/iMac went all sleek aluminum unibody. Everything since has been adding another app/dashboard with feature X on it with very much the same look and feel or a slightly lighter faster box with a higher res screen. Were is the novelty? Is there really no better way to fundamentally interact with the computer? Is there no joy even in making something mostly similar but with a subtle "this is the new thing" ala Aero/Win 8 flat look, or unity in Ubuntu on the desktop? You almost have to take out a weight scale and a ruler to tell one version of a Apple product from the previous version lately which is sad.
Stock highres monitors for one. Although you are paying a premium so probably not enough of an answer.
Since the split to Intel architecture I try to look at Apple as just another box maker since I'll probably end up wiping it and installing windows anyways. So as a box maker they fail for my needs. This goes back to earlier in this thread: the impression by Apple fanboys that you just need to find which of the 3 options Apple provides is "your mac". There are whole swaths of people that Apple is no where near having a competitive offering in their market.
That is what kills me as a Mac owner (27" iMac bought mainly for the nice screen and single box it packs into as I expected to be moving via plane in a couple months). I like my iMac but for power user stuff it kind of suffers. The ram is laptop quality ram from what I understand which hurts a bit, for some reason the disk drive is uber slow (late 2009 iMac get ~20MBps) and so hard to upgrade you might as well not bother.
The Mac Pro is ridiculously expensive. All I'd want is a quad core with 16-32GB ram a SSD drive (~512GB) and a solid video card (doesn't need to be hardcore gamer level but being able to play a popular FPS game less than a year old would be nice). I'd be looking at well over 4k for a mac with a 27" monitor vs ~$2500 for a Dell or equivalent. I'd still need windows for the games almost certainly and definitely for my development (C#/SQL Server server side stuff in my case).
In short for desktops: their low end offering is a bit underspeced even maxed out for me, their pro version pretty much makes you hand your wallet over. For laptops even their pro version is underspeced for me, Though I hate laptops generally for this reason for equivalent money for a maxed out mac book pro you can get a newer/faster CPU, GPU. The only thing that would be hard to replace (and still beat the other specs) is the retina screen as it is still pretty uncommon to get resolutions that high. But as a compensation other vendors have touch so it is a wash once you get > 1080p.
I'm usually not a huge fan of updates that are largely cosmetic (think Aero being the defining feature of Vista) but OS X really needs a face lift. It has been essentially the same for 10 years. Faux metal windows, annoyingly small open/close/minify buttons and the dashboard. I guess the metal look kind of blends in with the alumnium cases of most of their machines but still ... oh hum ala Win 95.
and still most people would prefer windows 3.11 to linux.
California might have the average number of engineers but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of them concentrated in the bay area. People concentrate for resource reasons being able to hire or change jobs, being able to locate funding etc. A state the size of California (especially surrounded by low population states) are too big to look at as a whole. You need to be within commuting distance for network affects to be of any use. This is the equivalent of stating that the country side in the 19th century was equally populated with fabric mills even though that clearly wouldn't be the case since they were using water wheels on rivers for power. Zoom out far enough and everyone is average.
True. If you are going to subsidize you can't have blinders on though.
My understanding is the truth defense is more of a convention not a requirement. Also in Canada you have to use think it is called an affirmative defense. You are assumed to have defamed unless you can prove your speech was protected (in public interest, reasonable communication, etc). It would be for him to prove that his communication was for anything other than to harm that hotel as vengeance.
It probably only protects them while they are in the US. If they go to Canada or a country that chooses to respect Canada's judgement/law over the US judgement/law they might still collect. Lots of civil law is like that. As long as you don't go to where what you did was illegal (or have assets there) your fine. Doesn't mean you weren't found guilty just that the victim can't collect.
Would they let him stay in a women's prison? That might make it worth it: I'd imagine you are much less likely to have an unwanted rear entry when you take penises out of the equation.
I was just thinking yesterday that he gave the impression of someone that might have a little to tell but I wouldn't ask. Now it is confirmed. Is it okay to be straight and have a gaydar?
The beauty of civil suits is you don't have to have grounds. If you can keep it in the the court (or likely precourt) process long enough you can bankrupt the other guy into doing what you want. He who has the biggest wallet wins.
Also, this is Canada the truth is not an absolute defense for libel. If the purpose of your communication was malicious you can still lose.
You can be sued under canadian libel law regardless of where the publication was. You could write a nasty letter that only a few scientists living in Antarctica ever see and I could still sue you in Montreal for it.
Not to mention he now made known that he knew he was exposed to bed bugs and went to the other hotel. So if they got bedbugs they might go after him. After all did he wash all his clothes at high heat, clean out his luggage, wipe it down with rubbing alcohol, high heat steam or other things known to be fatal to bed bugs? Probably not he just threw things in the suitcase and when on over would be my guess.
Not in Canada.
You have no such protection in Canada. Truth can be part of your defense but even then it doesn't guarantee that you won't be found to have defamed the injured party. We have more leeway to criticize people in public positions but even there the Supreme Court ruled that the truth isn't a sufficient defense. If the intent of your communication was to defame the truth of your statements doesn't matter. Some random guy that is never going to go back to that hotel anyways doesn't really have much reason to shoot his mouth/keyboard off other than to punish the Hotel. It is intentionally malicious. The counter argument he'd need to use to defend I think is that even though his intent was to damage/shame the Hotel he was communicating "in the public interest".
One room infested but you get them repeatedly ... hmm might be a flaw in the method. Do the hotels close that room and the adjoining room because those are the only ones infested or because they don't want to lose business by vacating the hotel and spraying the whole thing? I had them at my house for about a year because an idiot that I rented to went to his buddies for a weekend party even though he knew his friend had them.
These little critters are pretty much indestructible and can move just about as fast as an ant (not to mention could drop off someone/their bags as they are moving around the hotel). Someone reports the problem and a few hours go by before the treatment guys come around those little buggers could be anywhere. They go between walls, under wallpaper etc. The spray only kills them if they actually walk on it, what if they go into the next room over instead of coming out of the wall on the same side? You got to do the whole place at least twice about 2-3 weeks apart to kill both the adults and the eggs that hatch and become adults the next couple weeks since the poisons only kill the adults.
They have to limit demand somehow and granting admission based on merit is just silly.