Of course you probably have read the consitution and found that it was a democracy which is probably why you have read this directive and don't understand what it does or that it is temporary.
Our government is temporarily handed over to a non-elected entity...all it takes is a stroke of the pen to RADICALLY alter anything that can be altered. What, if anything, does it explicitly prevent this entity from doing while it's holding the reigns?
All he really has to do is go into the Whitehouse without a single thought of being re-elected. Doing the right thing - with the tools he'll have available - is bound to piss off a lot of people. But if he really wants to the right thing, he really has no choice.
It can be made to change - all it takes is a few million patriots with a little bit of self-discipline. What's to stop a huge number of subscribers suddenly canceling their service? Remember - they're playing with OUR money.
This should spook everyone who considers themselves an American citizen. This is also a major disappointment, because throughout this election, I don't think ANY candidates have made any mention how they intend to restore the "constitutional" part of our constitutional democracy. This response from Obama is a steaming pile. We don't want someone who will FOLLOW it, we want someone who will FIX it.
Remember this is the foyer of your company's premises to a lot of people, and people read "cheap" into a company really quickly on that first impression.
I haven't bought a single thing at Amazon over the past 11 years. Their sense of innovation when it comes to their patent portfolio is simply too much for me.
I'd advise extra care if using this approach. Marketing people are not usability experts, and users do NOT want to be sucker-punched with marketing drivel every time they visit your site. You may get their attention the first time with a slick home page, but if the implementation makes it too cumbersome to actually use the site, you can bet they'll probably never come back. It's too easy to go somewhere else.
There are so many things that require usernames and passwords now. Every site wants a set of 'registered' subscribers. Then there are banks, work logins, email accounts, etc. Password overload. And then, if you actually expend the effort to use secure passwords, it gets even worse, because even if you remember the general password (or phrase), you forget the little tricks you used.
Lack of evidence? How so? They've got the online encounter, they got clear intent expressed within the online communication, and they have video to prove that the perpetrator was both capable and willing to act. The only thing that didn't happen was the act itself.
After seeing several editions of 20/20 where they set up sting after sting, typically using an undercover female cop to pose as a much younger girl, I'm not so sure it's all that uncommon. Further, we have what seems to be an epidemic of female adults in trusted positions going after young males (13-17). I have to wonder how much of this is willing participation on the part of the "victim". It's definitely not my intent to suggest that adults should be going after kids, but kids need to wise up to the potential dangers, and parents especially need to get a damn clue about what their kids are really up to.
Interesting comment - even more when you consider that Apple products (especially since the Macintosh) have always been somewhat "locked." They had the Mac Toolbox ROM which contained all the GUI stuff, and the whole thing was very closed and proprietary compared to PC hardware. The early macs even required a special wrench to open the box.
I did a quick read on this, and if Wikipedia is correct, the IFrame first appeared in Internet Explorer 3.0. In effect, the parent makes a valid point. In this case, Microsoft did manage to come up with something that I'd call "innovative".
Where I live it's the other way - I regularly have to turn left at a busy intersection. It has a double lane for left turns, so that ought to be some indication as to the volume of traffic. At random times the green arrow lasts only TWO SECONDS, barely enough time for two cars. Meanwhile, the people needing to turn left fill up the available space in the two lanes, and spill over into the regular traffic flow, completely messing that up.
The other issue I have is light timing in general. I swear to god in some areas of the city they let a group of chimps loose on the traffic control system. How can you possibly justify timing that has EVERY light in a straight line turning red just in time for your arrival? It's an absurd waste of time, gas, patience, etc.
I boycotted it because ABC didn't just politely let you know that the premier was coming up, but instead, took every possible opportunity to shove it down your throat. Did you happen to notice the LOST logo at the bottom right of the screen, for example, that accompanied most shows that ABC aired (at least during prime time)? I can do without all of the visual detritus with which stations now pollute their regular programming. This includes the barker crap that comes on after commercials, telling you what you're watching (DUH), along with what's coming up, and other junk.
I find this topic of sexual gender awareness rather interesting. What I find particularly amazing is that despite the fact that the human brain, and the mere process of human existence - being the end product a tremendously complex series of chemical interactions - people can bring themselves to believe that there's only one correct way.
Observe any natural process - notice the infinite variation. Variation is an inherent part of nature. But somehow, when it comes to males and females, there's only one correct way. I hope people that take the time to devote some serious thought to this can come to realize just how contrived and shortsighted this is.
I beg to differ. Many of those same families routinely pay $100+ cable/dish bills. And they will pay $60/month for broadband when a) they decide they need it or b) it becomes a better entertainment value to them than cable/dish TV.
Just a note - Comcast has its Triple Play service - broadband internet, cable TV, AND phone - for about $100/mo.
And this is definitely consistent with Microsoft's tendency to buy their success, rather than derive it from innovation and products that are actually new.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course you probably have read the consitution and found that it was a democracy which is probably why you have read this directive and don't understand what it does or that it is temporary.
Our government is temporarily handed over to a non-elected entity...all it takes is a stroke of the pen to RADICALLY alter anything that can be altered. What, if anything, does it explicitly prevent this entity from doing while it's holding the reigns?
All he really has to do is go into the Whitehouse without a single thought of being re-elected. Doing the right thing - with the tools he'll have available - is bound to piss off a lot of people. But if he really wants to the right thing, he really has no choice.
It can be made to change - all it takes is a few million patriots with a little bit of self-discipline. What's to stop a huge number of subscribers suddenly canceling their service? Remember - they're playing with OUR money.
This should spook everyone who considers themselves an American citizen. This is also a major disappointment, because throughout this election, I don't think ANY candidates have made any mention how they intend to restore the "constitutional" part of our constitutional democracy. This response from Obama is a steaming pile. We don't want someone who will FOLLOW it, we want someone who will FIX it.
Remember this is the foyer of your company's premises to a lot of people, and people read "cheap" into a company really quickly on that first impression.
I suppose that's why Google is failing so badly.
This is only true until systemic rot starts creeping in. And it has - in the form of presidential orders and the ability to create money at will.
I haven't bought a single thing at Amazon over the past 11 years. Their sense of innovation when it comes to their patent portfolio is simply too much for me.
They were trying to prevent 9/11 before it happened. Or were they...
I'd advise extra care if using this approach. Marketing people are not usability experts, and users do NOT want to be sucker-punched with marketing drivel every time they visit your site. You may get their attention the first time with a slick home page, but if the implementation makes it too cumbersome to actually use the site, you can bet they'll probably never come back. It's too easy to go somewhere else.
There are so many things that require usernames and passwords now. Every site wants a set of 'registered' subscribers. Then there are banks, work logins, email accounts, etc. Password overload. And then, if you actually expend the effort to use secure passwords, it gets even worse, because even if you remember the general password (or phrase), you forget the little tricks you used.
Lack of evidence? How so? They've got the online encounter, they got clear intent expressed within the online communication, and they have video to prove that the perpetrator was both capable and willing to act. The only thing that didn't happen was the act itself.
After seeing several editions of 20/20 where they set up sting after sting, typically using an undercover female cop to pose as a much younger girl, I'm not so sure it's all that uncommon. Further, we have what seems to be an epidemic of female adults in trusted positions going after young males (13-17). I have to wonder how much of this is willing participation on the part of the "victim". It's definitely not my intent to suggest that adults should be going after kids, but kids need to wise up to the potential dangers, and parents especially need to get a damn clue about what their kids are really up to.
Interesting comment - even more when you consider that Apple products (especially since the Macintosh) have always been somewhat "locked." They had the Mac Toolbox ROM which contained all the GUI stuff, and the whole thing was very closed and proprietary compared to PC hardware. The early macs even required a special wrench to open the box.
I have to say that I agree. Somehow "professional" sports loses its shine when you're rooting for which corporation gets the biggest payoff.
I did a quick read on this, and if Wikipedia is correct, the IFrame first appeared in Internet Explorer 3.0. In effect, the parent makes a valid point. In this case, Microsoft did manage to come up with something that I'd call "innovative".
Show me something that isn't PR.
Where I live it's the other way - I regularly have to turn left at a busy intersection. It has a double lane for left turns, so that ought to be some indication as to the volume of traffic. At random times the green arrow lasts only TWO SECONDS, barely enough time for two cars. Meanwhile, the people needing to turn left fill up the available space in the two lanes, and spill over into the regular traffic flow, completely messing that up.
The other issue I have is light timing in general. I swear to god in some areas of the city they let a group of chimps loose on the traffic control system. How can you possibly justify timing that has EVERY light in a straight line turning red just in time for your arrival? It's an absurd waste of time, gas, patience, etc.
Interesting. I wasn't aware that the $99 was for new customers only.
I boycotted it because ABC didn't just politely let you know that the premier was coming up, but instead, took every possible opportunity to shove it down your throat. Did you happen to notice the LOST logo at the bottom right of the screen, for example, that accompanied most shows that ABC aired (at least during prime time)? I can do without all of the visual detritus with which stations now pollute their regular programming. This includes the barker crap that comes on after commercials, telling you what you're watching (DUH), along with what's coming up, and other junk.
It matters because Microsoft's PR machine wants people to believe that it's an innovative company. It isn't.
I find this topic of sexual gender awareness rather interesting. What I find particularly amazing is that despite the fact that the human brain, and the mere process of human existence - being the end product a tremendously complex series of chemical interactions - people can bring themselves to believe that there's only one correct way.
Observe any natural process - notice the infinite variation. Variation is an inherent part of nature. But somehow, when it comes to males and females, there's only one correct way. I hope people that take the time to devote some serious thought to this can come to realize just how contrived and shortsighted this is.
I beg to differ. Many of those same families routinely pay $100+ cable/dish bills. And they will pay $60/month for broadband when a) they decide they need it or b) it becomes a better entertainment value to them than cable/dish TV.
Just a note - Comcast has its Triple Play service - broadband internet, cable TV, AND phone - for about $100/mo.
And this is definitely consistent with Microsoft's tendency to buy their success, rather than derive it from innovation and products that are actually new.
It wasn't Bush. He couldn't find a plane that would survive the plunge into the ocean.
Why are they shooting so low? $1.5 billion sounds more reasonable.