Actually, if you look at actual cases, it isn't a 'classical assumption' when it comes to sexual harassment suits. They tend to be a significant uphill battle with a lot of 'she is just sensitive, she is just selective, she is just taking advantage of the law' stuff thrown in.. it has disturbing similiarities to the arguments brought up to discredit rape victims.. including the BS 'but she uses that language' argument (which they seem to be fishing for here) since that is just a recasting of one of the common defenses against rape allegations.. 'well, she was a loose woman who slept around', as if somehow because she does something privately it means someone doing it to her non-consentually is ok.
You should RTFA.
One plaintiff is suing because of the word cunt. She can be seen wearing a shirt with the word cunt on it. Various plaintiffs are suing because they were fired and can't find employment. There are messages sent between them indicating they actualyl had job offers. There are also messages between the plaintiffs detailing their interactions with the defendants, their plans to sue, etc.
This isn't victim blaming, it's bog standard evidence discovery.
I fail to see how a subpoena to Facebook and her mail provider couldn't accomplish the same thing without having to give out passwords.
Because it involves a third party and makes thing even more complicated than it should be. It is a waste of time and could be money (process fees). The plaintiff is the one who wants to use it for the suit, why not simply give the real sources. Over complicate a process often times is not a good solution but cost more on both time and money.
The DEFENDANT is the one that wants the info. They're claiming that on the internets you can find the plaintiffs:
Wearing a shirt with the word CUNT on it (one plaintiff claims the word cunt was used around her or in reference to her, and that that offends her and she needs lots of money for it) Discussing their financial situation after being fired Discussing their job prospects after being fired Discussing their interactions with the defendants Discussing the suit in general
Passwords must be given (just change it to something random and hand it to the court) so the court can appoint a reviewer to select which info is pertinent to the case. The reviewer then hands it off to the owner of the account (the plaintiffs) and they block/redact any info they say is private or unrelated. The reviewer then presents the evidence to the court (both plaintiff and defendant) and tells the judge if he thinks the owner of the account chose to block / redact any pertinent information.
Of course many of the mass extinctions in the past were caused by drastic climate change and that's the way we're headed now.
We had the greatest biomass and biodiversity in the planets history when the entire planet was JUNGLE ASS SWEAT HOT.
Notice though that the driving economies of the world are usually found in the temperate zones.
I'm sure global warming will bring an asteroid down on us. I like your line about economies though. It really exposes the fact that global warming is about money not life on this planet.
Who gives a crap about whether it is "natural" anymore? The overall effect is quite undesirable, so regardless of whether we're causing it, we damn well ought to be doing something to counteract it, if we care to survive.
Anyone who cares about nature will let it run its course and handle its own business.
The effect is only undesirable if you're afraid of change. Life got to where it is now on this planet because living was hard and dying was easy. Now one piddly-ass species is selfish enough to want to stop nature in its tracks? (And arrogant enough to think they're causing the changes or that they can halt/reverse them?)
We had the greatest biomass and biodiversity in the planets history when the entire planet was JUNGLE ASS SWEAT HOT. I, for one, encourage our planet to keep throwing life curve balls. It's the only way life improves.
shittysite.com typically serves ads via shitty.ad.farm.google.com .
If you go to shittysite.com and request shittysite.com/content and that page includes 62fG283.jpg and 7820dh3.jpg you don't know which one is the ad and which is the content you want until you look at it. Adblock can't help you there. You could blacklist 62fG283.jpg if you look at it and determine it's an ad, but on your nexdt visit you'll be dealing with 93d57w2.jpg instead.
Furthermore, it's much easier for shittysite.com to first try to serve the ad and, upon detecting you blocking the download, block the actual content. A lot of sites already do this with 3rd party ads, but it's not foolproof and it's not trivial to implement. If you wanted ABP to get you around this you'd have to download the ad. ABP could hide it for you, sure, but you're still downloading it, wasting your time, eating your data cap, and exposing you to shitty vulnerabilities.
"Welcome to Papa John's!" (the chorus of identical looking pizza place staffers, who conveniently can be worked like slaves with no health insurance)
You're thinking of this the wrong way.
Imagine how much easier it would be for Cold Stone Creamery to field a team of stunning 16 year old boys with blonde hair that sing whenever you drop a dime in the tip jar.
One who actually knows something might ask, which type of longhouse? There were several, all designed for different purposes... But that same person (who isn't you) would be compelled to answer - "none of them were designed for collaboration". They were designed for community, which isn't the same thing.
They were indeed designed for collaboration. The difference is your idea of collaboration is sitting on a beanbag chair sipping lattes and stroking thinly-bearded chins while discussing the best way to leverage circle jerk each other for their accomplishments of getting some digital clown to dance.
Our ancestors though of collaboration as working together to do useful things, such as having shelter, food, fire, tools, medicine, etc. That's why those longhouses were built the way they were - one main entrance, a back area for grain storage, an area for sleeping, and an area for living and working together. It is the very definition of collaboration, especially seeing as how they all collaborated to build the damned thing in the first place.
I was about to say, the idea of designing buildings for collaboration is a fairly old one as such things go. I remember reading about it back in the early/mid 90's.
But, Jobs' reality distortion field persists after his death... and now the idea will be embedded in the 'nets culture as Steve's.
90s? Try the 5990s BCE. What do you think a longhouse was?
I know I shouldn't (and for all I know the US child support system is totally screwed) but dude, those are his kids, kids cost money and effort to raise, and he needs to provide 50% of both. If he loses his job, then surely these things get re-assessed (I know they do in my country). His kids welfare matters, not his, and if they've been raised by their mother so far, then obviously a judge is going to have her continue to provide that care.
Sorry, but men's choice point over kids is at choosing to have sex, women get a little bit longer than that - but then they have a lot more invested in it. Plenty of women are maimed or die having babies, but I suspect a vanishingly small number of men risk their lives when having sex!
Things typically don't get reassessed. You have to fight long and hard to prove that you're not earning $X and thus you should have to only pay $Y. But the court will say you're willfully underemployed and throw you in jail for violating an order to get a better job. While in jail your fines continue to rack up and you'lre fucked forever.
It's always hilarious when people say women bear all the responsibility of having children when they are the ones with all the choices to drop their responsibility. Men are the ones with zero choice in the matter, even when raped, and men are the ones who are forced into slavery for children they cannot afford. If a woman has a child she cannot afford, she can abort it, kill it and claim postpartum, drop it off at a fire station, give it up for adoption, or keep it and live off the state and whatever man she can get on the hook as the presumptive father (it doesn't have to be the actual father).
If men had the ability to waive all rights to, and thus responsibility for, a child once they're formally informed of its existence, then there would be a LOT fewer unwanted children in the world. But the courts don't want that, they want to siphon off $$$ from support payments.
Stovall's attorney wants a new trial for the single charge he was convicted of, obviously. The prosecution wants a new trial for the 10/11 they failed at.
For information related to a court case, sure. This information is not at all related to the case, and is in fact an investigation looking for a crime so they can retry on the basis of a mistrial. I didn't say the judge failed to convict, the "they" obviously meant the prosecution.
No - from my reading, it was a hung jury on the 10 charges - prosecution has a right to re-try those charges. It's only double jeopardy if the prosecution attempts to re-try a charge that was already decided by a jury.
It doesn't say whether the 10 counts were undecided or not.
It's not about his speech act. It has absolutely nothing to do with what he said or where he said it. However, the act of posting may be evidence that he broke other rules/laws unrelated to speech - anonymous or otherwise.
Are you joking? It's entirely about what he said and where he said it that makes people think he was a juror.
Furthermore, the judge is just on a fishing expedition to rule the whole thing as a mistrial and get the guy retried so they can do better than 1 out of 11.
This is a severe and blatant violation of double jeopardy, and there is no indication that the juror was influenced in any way by outside sources. Furthermore, releasing the name and address of the poster is absolutely the wrong way to go about this. The site owner should be given the names and addresses of the jurors and tell the court whether or not the poster was a juror.
MS is admitting to the service pack integration taking the language setting of the service pack files over the base installation's for the ballot screen (and others). This has been a problem with OEMs for over a decade. The only difference is now there are substantial consequences for someone flubbing it.
For your assertion to be correct, your post would have to be truth. However, it's not so your reply is irrelevant.
Oh, so their practice of having OEM versions of Windows that OEMs are allowed to modify is not responsible for the loads of horrible software loaded onto the typical new computer?
And that practice, if I'm not mistaken, is also dependent on the OEM towing the line and selling only systems with Microsoft software preloaded. Is this not also true?
Neither are true. Any OEM can sell you a box with an OS and other software on it. There's nothing shady about the way OEMs deal with Windows, and it certainly doesn't prevent other OSs from getting a foothold. It's just annoying when they add useless bloat.
And no OEM has to tow any line to be able to sell Windows or modify it. MS provides the tools free to anyone. Anyone in the world can install Windows, make changes, then run sysprep to have the machine trigger the OOBE on the next boot. Anyone in the world can configure any part of the OS as well as the OEMs can. No one has to pony up to get access to anything.
The "glitch" is a result of OEMs integrating the wrong version of service packs into their images. When they integrate the non-EU version of a service pack then the image won't present the "ballot screen" to the user.
1) The vast majority of Americans ARE getting substandard wages. 2) The jobs that people on H1-B visas have are not paying 3rd world rates, so your comparison is invalid.
The simple fact is that employers are looking for the best candidates.
"Best" doesn't mean "most skilled" (though Americans would largely lose out if it did). "Best" means "can do the job quickly and reliably, and is affordable".
I have exactly zero fucks to give for people who think slugging through highschool and a 4-year university warrants some sort of guarantee of gainful employment. Unless daddy owns the company / has a seat in public office, or you have more looks than self respect, you have to be useful and productive for someone to pay you to do things.
No one will upgrade from 7 to the new interface. People will upgrade from 7 to the desktop on 8. The new interface should be compared against Android, iOS, and WP7.
Here's a fun aside: Since I write software in machine code, I could release it under the GPL and provide no other "source code" but the binaries:-P
Conversely, if you know Machine Code, every (non encrypted) binary executable is Open Source!
And if you can run the binary executable, even encrypted shit is open source!
Actually that's not true. Some Intel chips have AES op-codes built in. If the decryption happens in the chip then there's no way to get at the source code -- It doesn't have to be in memory as plain-text at any point in time just when the CPU itself is operating that single instruction. Asymmetric (Public Key) cryptography means the CPU can decrypt and verify the code signatures without needing to hide a symmetric key on disk or in RAM somewhere. This will be the next step after secure boot if we allow these proprietary vendors it to continue.
So, some may think that this type of encryption combined with the boot security would lead to a 100% secure OS, because Malware code just wouldn't run! The Chip wouldn't execute any code that wasn't encrypted and signed! Ah, well that's still bullshit. I have a neat little trick up my sleeve called Return Oriented Programming. You see, it's possible to write an exploit in such a way that only EXISTING code (the stuff right before a function return) is used to cause some state change in the memory and registers, which then jumps to other existing signed and encrypted code to perform further operations. The cool thing is I don't even care exactly what the op-codes are, I just care about the results, so I just plot the results of running random points of code and build a table of outcomes and addresses. So there you have it: The most secure system is pointless if the OS itself has bugs! Lock down the OS and binaries so that the User can Never tell WTF their PC is actually doing, or run their own unblessed software, and it still can get malware if the OS has kernel level exploits -- Hell, work ALL bugs out of the OS, and the buggy 3rd party drivers will be my entry point.
Trusted computing is pointless evil draconian bullshit that's only effect will be to take power away from the users who rightfully purchase the systems.
Being physically located on dick, in RAM, or in a CPU register makes no difference. I was highlighting the absurdity of your claim.
Confession: I'm a Windows/PC user. Win 7 works fine for me. I use it at work. I use it a home. I can run pretty much anything I want on it. It's stable and mostly trouble free for me.
I've yet to see a single compelling reason to move to Windows 8 for desktop/laptop. Maybe it's OK for tablets? I don't know... I use Android and I'm happy with that. Is there *any* "ohhh... gotta have that" feature in Windows 8? Looks like a usability step backwards from Windows 7 to me. Am I missing something?
-S
The return of the up arrow in Windows Explorer is reason enough to upgrade. Then there's the improved task manager and file copy dialogs. Oh, it's also buttloads faster booting and shutting down, and has a much lighter footprint. Native iso mounting is cool too.
It's definitely an upgrade. I sure as fuck won't trash my 7 install to get to 8, but the next box I build will have 8.
My assessment of the dev preview is pretty bad. I was doing some consulting for a company, and we had installed windows 8 on a PC there. Me, the IT admin, and another guy who was fairly tech-literate couldn't figure it out due to the unintuititve UI that ends up getting in the way. They have plenty of good ideas that are just poorly implemented.
So, you're just as helpless as the 42 year old who burns incense in her cubicle and requires a trackball and "ergonomic keyboard", and can never figure out how to deal with a minor change on her PC?
The start menu is different. The desktop is very slightly different.
None of the changes in the UI require more than 10 seconds to adjust to. If you ran into a stumbling block, you are retarded. You can't hate on it all you want (I sure as fuck do), but to claim that it's unintuitive is pure bullshit. It's no less intuitive than the start menu was, you're just stuck in your ways.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, if you look at actual cases, it isn't a 'classical assumption' when it comes to sexual harassment suits. They tend to be a significant uphill battle with a lot of 'she is just sensitive, she is just selective, she is just taking advantage of the law' stuff thrown in.. it has disturbing similiarities to the arguments brought up to discredit rape victims.. including the BS 'but she uses that language' argument (which they seem to be fishing for here) since that is just a recasting of one of the common defenses against rape allegations.. 'well, she was a loose woman who slept around', as if somehow because she does something privately it means someone doing it to her non-consentually is ok.
You should RTFA.
One plaintiff is suing because of the word cunt. She can be seen wearing a shirt with the word cunt on it.
Various plaintiffs are suing because they were fired and can't find employment. There are messages sent between them indicating they actualyl had job offers.
There are also messages between the plaintiffs detailing their interactions with the defendants, their plans to sue, etc.
This isn't victim blaming, it's bog standard evidence discovery.
I fail to see how a subpoena to Facebook and her mail provider couldn't accomplish the same thing without having to give out passwords.
Because it involves a third party and makes thing even more complicated than it should be. It is a waste of time and could be money (process fees). The plaintiff is the one who wants to use it for the suit, why not simply give the real sources. Over complicate a process often times is not a good solution but cost more on both time and money.
The DEFENDANT is the one that wants the info. They're claiming that on the internets you can find the plaintiffs:
Wearing a shirt with the word CUNT on it (one plaintiff claims the word cunt was used around her or in reference to her, and that that offends her and she needs lots of money for it)
Discussing their financial situation after being fired
Discussing their job prospects after being fired
Discussing their interactions with the defendants
Discussing the suit in general
Passwords must be given (just change it to something random and hand it to the court) so the court can appoint a reviewer to select which info is pertinent to the case. The reviewer then hands it off to the owner of the account (the plaintiffs) and they block/redact any info they say is private or unrelated. The reviewer then presents the evidence to the court (both plaintiff and defendant) and tells the judge if he thinks the owner of the account chose to block / redact any pertinent information.
Of course many of the mass extinctions in the past were caused by drastic climate change and that's the way we're headed now.
We had the greatest biomass and biodiversity in the planets history when the entire planet was JUNGLE ASS SWEAT HOT.
Notice though that the driving economies of the world are usually found in the temperate zones.
I'm sure global warming will bring an asteroid down on us.
I like your line about economies though. It really exposes the fact that global warming is about money not life on this planet.
Who gives a crap about whether it is "natural" anymore? The overall effect is quite undesirable, so regardless of whether we're causing it, we damn well ought to be doing something to counteract it, if we care to survive.
Anyone who cares about nature will let it run its course and handle its own business.
The effect is only undesirable if you're afraid of change. Life got to where it is now on this planet because living was hard and dying was easy.
Now one piddly-ass species is selfish enough to want to stop nature in its tracks? (And arrogant enough to think they're causing the changes or that they can halt/reverse them?)
We had the greatest biomass and biodiversity in the planets history when the entire planet was JUNGLE ASS SWEAT HOT. I, for one, encourage our planet to keep throwing life curve balls. It's the only way life improves.
shittysite.com typically serves ads via shitty.ad.farm.google.com .
If you go to shittysite.com and request shittysite.com/content and that page includes 62fG283.jpg and 7820dh3.jpg you don't know which one is the ad and which is the content you want until you look at it. Adblock can't help you there. You could blacklist 62fG283.jpg if you look at it and determine it's an ad, but on your nexdt visit you'll be dealing with 93d57w2.jpg instead.
Furthermore, it's much easier for shittysite.com to first try to serve the ad and, upon detecting you blocking the download, block the actual content. A lot of sites already do this with 3rd party ads, but it's not foolproof and it's not trivial to implement. If you wanted ABP to get you around this you'd have to download the ad. ABP could hide it for you, sure, but you're still downloading it, wasting your time, eating your data cap, and exposing you to shitty vulnerabilities.
"Welcome to Papa John's!" (the chorus of identical looking pizza place staffers, who conveniently can be worked like slaves with no health insurance)
You're thinking of this the wrong way.
Imagine how much easier it would be for Cold Stone Creamery to field a team of stunning 16 year old boys with blonde hair that sing whenever you drop a dime in the tip jar.
One who actually knows something might ask, which type of longhouse? There were several, all designed for different purposes... But that same person (who isn't you) would be compelled to answer - "none of them were designed for collaboration". They were designed for community, which isn't the same thing.
They were indeed designed for collaboration.
The difference is your idea of collaboration is sitting on a beanbag chair sipping lattes and stroking thinly-bearded chins while discussing the best way to leverage circle jerk each other for their accomplishments of getting some digital clown to dance.
Our ancestors though of collaboration as working together to do useful things, such as having shelter, food, fire, tools, medicine, etc. That's why those longhouses were built the way they were - one main entrance, a back area for grain storage, an area for sleeping, and an area for living and working together. It is the very definition of collaboration, especially seeing as how they all collaborated to build the damned thing in the first place.
I was about to say, the idea of designing buildings for collaboration is a fairly old one as such things go. I remember reading about it back in the early/mid 90's.
But, Jobs' reality distortion field persists after his death... and now the idea will be embedded in the 'nets culture as Steve's.
90s? Try the 5990s BCE. What do you think a longhouse was?
I know I shouldn't (and for all I know the US child support system is totally screwed) but dude, those are his kids, kids cost money and effort to raise, and he needs to provide 50% of both. If he loses his job, then surely these things get re-assessed (I know they do in my country). His kids welfare matters, not his, and if they've been raised by their mother so far, then obviously a judge is going to have her continue to provide that care.
Sorry, but men's choice point over kids is at choosing to have sex, women get a little bit longer than that - but then they have a lot more invested in it. Plenty of women are maimed or die having babies, but I suspect a vanishingly small number of men risk their lives when having sex!
Things typically don't get reassessed.
You have to fight long and hard to prove that you're not earning $X and thus you should have to only pay $Y.
But the court will say you're willfully underemployed and throw you in jail for violating an order to get a better job.
While in jail your fines continue to rack up and you'lre fucked forever.
It's always hilarious when people say women bear all the responsibility of having children when they are the ones with all the choices to drop their responsibility. Men are the ones with zero choice in the matter, even when raped, and men are the ones who are forced into slavery for children they cannot afford. If a woman has a child she cannot afford, she can abort it, kill it and claim postpartum, drop it off at a fire station, give it up for adoption, or keep it and live off the state and whatever man she can get on the hook as the presumptive father (it doesn't have to be the actual father).
If men had the ability to waive all rights to, and thus responsibility for, a child once they're formally informed of its existence, then there would be a LOT fewer unwanted children in the world. But the courts don't want that, they want to siphon off $$$ from support payments.
And what happens to the OEM's deal with Microsoft if they sell some other OS on their box?
What deal? Show me in writing. Also, can I go along on your trip to the mid 90s? I've never been in a time traveling whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaambulance before.
Stovall's attorney wants a new trial for the single charge he was convicted of, obviously.
The prosecution wants a new trial for the 10/11 they failed at.
For information related to a court case, sure. This information is not at all related to the case, and is in fact an investigation looking for a crime so they can retry on the basis of a mistrial. I didn't say the judge failed to convict, the "they" obviously meant the prosecution.
No - from my reading, it was a hung jury on the 10 charges - prosecution has a right to re-try those charges. It's only double jeopardy if the prosecution attempts to re-try a charge that was already decided by a jury.
It doesn't say whether the 10 counts were undecided or not.
What should happen at the most is that the name is given to the newspaper, and they verify if its them or not.
Newspapers aren't empowered to conduct official investigations.
Neither are judges or courts.
Judge is a piece of shit violating people's rights because they failed to convict on 10 out of 11 charges.
Fishing expedition to "justify" putting the guy in double jeopardy. Fucking horseshit.
It's not about his speech act. It has absolutely nothing to do with what he said or where he said it. However, the act of posting may be evidence that he broke other rules/laws unrelated to speech - anonymous or otherwise.
Are you joking? It's entirely about what he said and where he said it that makes people think he was a juror.
Furthermore, the judge is just on a fishing expedition to rule the whole thing as a mistrial and get the guy retried so they can do better than 1 out of 11.
This is a severe and blatant violation of double jeopardy, and there is no indication that the juror was influenced in any way by outside sources. Furthermore, releasing the name and address of the poster is absolutely the wrong way to go about this. The site owner should be given the names and addresses of the jurors and tell the court whether or not the poster was a juror.
MS is admitting to the service pack integration taking the language setting of the service pack files over the base installation's for the ballot screen (and others).
This has been a problem with OEMs for over a decade. The only difference is now there are substantial consequences for someone flubbing it.
For your assertion to be correct, your post would have to be truth. However, it's not so your reply is irrelevant.
Oh, so their practice of having OEM versions of Windows that OEMs are allowed to modify is not responsible for the loads of horrible software loaded onto the typical new computer?
And that practice, if I'm not mistaken, is also dependent on the OEM towing the line and selling only systems with Microsoft software preloaded. Is this not also true?
Neither are true.
Any OEM can sell you a box with an OS and other software on it. There's nothing shady about the way OEMs deal with Windows, and it certainly doesn't prevent other OSs from getting a foothold. It's just annoying when they add useless bloat.
And no OEM has to tow any line to be able to sell Windows or modify it. MS provides the tools free to anyone. Anyone in the world can install Windows, make changes, then run sysprep to have the machine trigger the OOBE on the next boot. Anyone in the world can configure any part of the OS as well as the OEMs can. No one has to pony up to get access to anything.
The "glitch" is a result of OEMs integrating the wrong version of service packs into their images.
When they integrate the non-EU version of a service pack then the image won't present the "ballot screen" to the user.
Willingness to accept substandard wages?
1) The vast majority of Americans ARE getting substandard wages.
2) The jobs that people on H1-B visas have are not paying 3rd world rates, so your comparison is invalid.
The simple fact is that employers are looking for the best candidates.
"Best" doesn't mean "most skilled" (though Americans would largely lose out if it did).
"Best" means "can do the job quickly and reliably, and is affordable".
I have exactly zero fucks to give for people who think slugging through highschool and a 4-year university warrants some sort of guarantee of gainful employment. Unless daddy owns the company / has a seat in public office, or you have more looks than self respect, you have to be useful and productive for someone to pay you to do things.
If you're willing to pay for up arrow in explorer, you should consider installing classic shell. Does the same thing, free as beer.
Except I don't want classic shell.
No one will upgrade from 7 to the new interface.
People will upgrade from 7 to the desktop on 8.
The new interface should be compared against Android, iOS, and WP7.
Here's a fun aside: Since I write software in machine code, I could release it under the GPL and provide no other "source code" but the binaries :-P
Conversely, if you know Machine Code, every (non encrypted) binary executable is Open Source!
And if you can run the binary executable, even encrypted shit is open source!
Actually that's not true. Some Intel chips have AES op-codes built in. If the decryption happens in the chip then there's no way to get at the source code -- It doesn't have to be in memory as plain-text at any point in time just when the CPU itself is operating that single instruction. Asymmetric (Public Key) cryptography means the CPU can decrypt and verify the code signatures without needing to hide a symmetric key on disk or in RAM somewhere. This will be the next step after secure boot if we allow these proprietary vendors it to continue.
So, some may think that this type of encryption combined with the boot security would lead to a 100% secure OS, because Malware code just wouldn't run! The Chip wouldn't execute any code that wasn't encrypted and signed! Ah, well that's still bullshit. I have a neat little trick up my sleeve called Return Oriented Programming. You see, it's possible to write an exploit in such a way that only EXISTING code (the stuff right before a function return) is used to cause some state change in the memory and registers, which then jumps to other existing signed and encrypted code to perform further operations. The cool thing is I don't even care exactly what the op-codes are, I just care about the results, so I just plot the results of running random points of code and build a table of outcomes and addresses. So there you have it: The most secure system is pointless if the OS itself has bugs! Lock down the OS and binaries so that the User can Never tell WTF their PC is actually doing, or run their own unblessed software, and it still can get malware if the OS has kernel level exploits -- Hell, work ALL bugs out of the OS, and the buggy 3rd party drivers will be my entry point.
Trusted computing is pointless evil draconian bullshit that's only effect will be to take power away from the users who rightfully purchase the systems.
Being physically located on dick, in RAM, or in a CPU register makes no difference.
I was highlighting the absurdity of your claim.
And you responded with more absurdity.
Confession: I'm a Windows/PC user. Win 7 works fine for me. I use it at work. I use it a home. I can run pretty much anything I want on it. It's stable and mostly trouble free for me.
I've yet to see a single compelling reason to move to Windows 8 for desktop/laptop. Maybe it's OK for tablets? I don't know... I use Android and I'm happy with that. Is there *any* "ohhh... gotta have that" feature in Windows 8? Looks like a usability step backwards from Windows 7 to me. Am I missing something?
-S
The return of the up arrow in Windows Explorer is reason enough to upgrade.
Then there's the improved task manager and file copy dialogs.
Oh, it's also buttloads faster booting and shutting down, and has a much lighter footprint.
Native iso mounting is cool too.
It's definitely an upgrade. I sure as fuck won't trash my 7 install to get to 8, but the next box I build will have 8.
My assessment of the dev preview is pretty bad. I was doing some consulting for a company, and we had installed windows 8 on a PC there. Me, the IT admin, and another guy who was fairly tech-literate couldn't figure it out due to the unintuititve UI that ends up getting in the way. They have plenty of good ideas that are just poorly implemented.
So, you're just as helpless as the 42 year old who burns incense in her cubicle and requires a trackball and "ergonomic keyboard", and can never figure out how to deal with a minor change on her PC?
The start menu is different.
The desktop is very slightly different.
None of the changes in the UI require more than 10 seconds to adjust to. If you ran into a stumbling block, you are retarded. You can't hate on it all you want (I sure as fuck do), but to claim that it's unintuitive is pure bullshit. It's no less intuitive than the start menu was, you're just stuck in your ways.
(4.32 x 10^-6) / (525600 * 60)
Time isn't metric, but all you need to know is 60 seconds per minute and that song from Rent.