in Firefox requires only a single step to set DuckDuckGo as the default search — while doing so in Chrome requires five
This claim from DDG is too fucking stupid to be taken seriously by anyone. It takes people one less character to type my brother's email address than mine, therefore my brother is taking advantage of this name and isn't playing fair.
True, it's not one step. But it is as few as three (two if the site's already open) (as in my post above).
Adding a search engine isn't "one click", you need to go to "manage search engines", scroll to the bottom, click "get more search engines", search for one, click "add to firefox", "allow", and then select it from the search menu. The effort in Chrome is roughly the same.
This is a fraudulent, astroturfed complaint.
FUD; I can add a search engine to Firefox much quicker than that:
I would hesitate getting Google's reality glasses because it would mean that all my data would go to Google. Instead of that, Microsoft's version would process things independently on the wrist computer. That's a huge difference and suits to people who want to keep their privacy.
Doesn't look like it:
It indicates that most of the processing work - identifying people and other objects in view, and deciding what information to show about them - would likely be carried out by remote computer servers in order to keep the equipment slimline.
So you'll probably need a.NET Passport/Windows Live ID/Microsoft Account/whatever-they're-calling-it-tomorrow to use it.
so, the government starts a saving scheme to encourage people to save.
they offer to not charge you tax on the interest on money you save. the rate is a little worse than other saving accounts but you go with that one since without the tax you make a little more interest.
then a few years later some self righteous clown comes along and says to you "very funny, you're very clever, you found a loophole, now just pay us what you owe" and gives you a bill for 5 years back taxes on the account along with interest and penalties as if they'd never offered the original deal.
is that remotely fair?
Of course not. It's also irrelevant, as it's a concrete invite by the government. Also, that money doesn't leave the national economy. Not to mention the real-world amount of tax relief is tiny.
All EU countries (except the UK) operate an 'open-border' policy with other EU countries. The only thing that tells you you've crossed a border is a single road sign.
So you want hard proof before you'll declare anything dangerous. While understandable, when it comes to road safety, I'd rather play on the cautious side. There's enough evidence to show a reasonable correlation (and plausible causation) between weed use and impaired driving, which is enough to consider drug-driving legislation.
So you'll throw out a valid study just because you don't like it. Let's also forget all the other short-term and long-term effects of usage. It worked so well for tobacco after all.
Of course, because there isn't a medical study to show it... oh wait, I just linked to one!
The results of this meta-analysis suggest that marijuana use by drivers is associated with a significantly increased risk of being involved in motor vehicle crashes.
Slashdot Mirror
Not at all, if you're willing to back it up.
Since we're talking about numbers:
in Firefox requires only a single step to set DuckDuckGo as the default search — while doing so in Chrome requires five
This claim from DDG is too fucking stupid to be taken seriously by anyone. It takes people one less character to type my brother's email address than mine, therefore my brother is taking advantage of this name and isn't playing fair.
True, it's not one step. But it is as few as three (two if the site's already open) (as in my post above).
Adding a search engine isn't "one click", you need to go to "manage search engines", scroll to the bottom, click "get more search engines", search for one, click "add to firefox", "allow", and then select it from the search menu. The effort in Chrome is roughly the same.
This is a fraudulent, astroturfed complaint.
FUD; I can add a search engine to Firefox much quicker than that:
Shill
Such eloquence, such insight! Makes me wonder why I bothered to post this... oh wait, you're being a total douche aren't you?
I would hesitate getting Google's reality glasses because it would mean that all my data would go to Google. Instead of that, Microsoft's version would process things independently on the wrist computer. That's a huge difference and suits to people who want to keep their privacy.
Doesn't look like it:
It indicates that most of the processing work - identifying people and other objects in view, and deciding what information to show about them - would likely be carried out by remote computer servers in order to keep the equipment slimline.
So you'll probably need a .NET Passport/Windows Live ID/Microsoft Account/whatever-they're-calling-it-tomorrow to use it.
Bloody Sunday
Not strictly a colour, but better than Gloomy Sunday.
Topper, is that you?
I see the Apple fanbois have got modpoints today.
History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men
FTFY Not sure where the hell you got "points up the folly of man" from. That doesn't even make sense.
In this context, I'd say there's no significant difference.
The good news is that Apple can give Samsung the original document, and they'll just copy it.
With a Xerox copier, just for the irony.
Imagine how useful youtube comments would be if the psychopaths couldn't register.
I imagine both comments would be very useful indeed.
Yes, as the BBC reports on itself without (much) bias, due to the obligations of the BBC Charter. Fox, on the other hand, has no equivalent charter.
Black Friday
Black Friday, Orange Wednesday, ... any other days with colours?
It is a pity that there is no "+1 Grammer Nazi"
Need I say more?
so, the government starts a saving scheme to encourage people to save.
they offer to not charge you tax on the interest on money you save. the rate is a little worse than other saving accounts but you go with that one since without the tax you make a little more interest.
then a few years later some self righteous clown comes along and says to you "very funny, you're very clever, you found a loophole, now just pay us what you owe" and gives you a bill for 5 years back taxes on the account along with interest and penalties as if they'd never offered the original deal.
is that remotely fair?
Of course not. It's also irrelevant, as it's a concrete invite by the government. Also, that money doesn't leave the national economy. Not to mention the real-world amount of tax relief is tiny.
They arrive eventually - mine did yesterday. Some suppliers are just shit at getting it out on time (I'm looking at you, RS Components).
From http://blogs.windows.com/windows_phone/b/wpdev/archive/2012/04/05/windows-8-and-the-windows-phone-sdk-pt-2.aspx
With regard to existing applications: today’s Windows Phone applications and games will run on the next major version of Windows Phone.
Emphasis his. So yes, XNA is supported on WP8.
Hopefully you are not from a country with adults who still believe in imaginary friends.
Imaginary friends aren't the problem, it's the people that listen to them you need to worry about.
All EU countries (except the UK) operate an 'open-border' policy with other EU countries. The only thing that tells you you've crossed a border is a single road sign.
Should have used 'hash brownie' before - that would be a better example.
Plus, I never mentioned marijuana.
Really?
So you want hard proof before you'll declare anything dangerous. While understandable, when it comes to road safety, I'd rather play on the cautious side. There's enough evidence to show a reasonable correlation (and plausible causation) between weed use and impaired driving, which is enough to consider drug-driving legislation.
So you'll throw out a valid study just because you don't like it. Let's also forget all the other short-term and long-term effects of usage. It worked so well for tobacco after all.
First I've heard of that.
What about cannabis and ground beef? Both are known as hash after all.
Of course, because there isn't a medical study to show it... oh wait, I just linked to one!
The results of this meta-analysis suggest that marijuana use by drivers is associated with a significantly increased risk of being involved in motor vehicle crashes.