I thought that they can search you because flying on a plane is not a constitutional right, and by flying you agree to be searched (within a different set of rules than the 4th amendment).
You could generate a session ID on the first page view and incorporate it into any relevant links/scripts via GET/POST as I described before, without storing anything permanent on the visitor's computer, though of course it will be rather obvious to the user that you are doing this.
There ought to be a X-Session-Token header in HTTP so that the user doesn't see this. Session tokens in URLs are ugly.
Knowing where a user came from and what they searched for is a bad way of trying to optimise your site. I can name hundreds of situations where someone was proud that they'd generated a huge volume of visits (or page views if you weren't using cookies) of users that then left straight away because it wasn't what they were looking for.
How about this? No cookies there! (the link is partly broken; click the "Traffic Stats" tab)
How many attempts to legally offer solutions to what the MPAA/RIAA have refused haven't been sued out of existence or taken control of and made useless? I can't point to a single one that is still around like that.
TPB was sued, but not yet sued out of existence...
If I send a flash app to your browser and mark it with a completely worng MIME type, should the flash plugin care? Apparently, not only does it care, but it actually executes the damn thing!
If it's really that simple then why is Adobe saying...? They're idiots! That's trivial to fix! This is why we need to move away from proprietary active-content and towards HTML5 -- because proprietary companies aren't capable/willing to do a half-assed job at keeping their tech working/secure/up-to-date.
The obvious answer is this: if the feds try to use the patriot act or something similar to suppress the findings, they are ~definitely correct. If the feds ignore them, then they probably don't care, meaning what they actually use is probably different from what the researchers used.
No, I think this is more along the lines of the hypothetical scenario wherin Fedora was/would be/willan on-be called...what am I thinking, we need a car analogy!
So this is more along the lines of silliness about how the Chevy Nova supposedly didn't sell very well in (insert spanish-speaking country here).
Fallacies are a subset of the rhetorical device set, and can be a valuable tool in debate if used with judgment. Remember, you're trying to convince people, not play hugs and cuddles with your opponent.
I'd love to say that I'm surprised by your ignorant yet superior attitude, but then I'm not new here.
If you actually have a case, you won't need fallacies... moreover, their use, assuming your audience has a clue, can only make you look bad.
[snip] Barney Frank is right that moving healthcare into the Government sector means that after putting a few toes in the water of Government run health care, we'll get used to it and eventually go in[.]
So this is going to be similar to the abandonment of the gold standard?
"How can it be optional if they are going to fine you when you say no???" She comes from the World War 2 generation, when freedom actually meant something. I don't think today's Generation Hippy, Generation X, or Generation Me have any idea of the concept. Many of them think if they want something, it's okay to ask the government to raid their neighbors' wallets and get it.
It's a lot like how the Roman Empire's government operated.
Generation Hippy is asking the government to do things? Gen. Hippy and the government are on speaking terms?? STOP THE PRESSES!!! HIPPIES AREN'T HIPPIES ANYMORE!
Apples and oranges. ISPs usually don't look at what you're downloading/uploading, and in fact they're not supposed to (ethically, not yet legally). Apple "audits" any app you can put on your iPhone. Since Apple does reject some apps, and doesn't want to say much about what they look for, it is difficult to argue that they are completely in the legal clear given that their auditing process creates a certain expectation of security in the mind of the user. If Apple cannot fulfil that expectation, they might be liable for the consequences. Note that IANAL. Finally, if Apple has some sort of disclaimer to display to the user, they probably are in the clear on this one.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone else is using sense 1 of "obliged" on that freedictionary link you gave earlier. Which sense are you using?
I thought that they can search you because flying on a plane is not a constitutional right, and by flying you agree to be searched (within a different set of rules than the 4th amendment).
You could generate a session ID on the first page view and incorporate it into any relevant links/scripts via GET/POST as I described before, without storing anything permanent on the visitor's computer, though of course it will be rather obvious to the user that you are doing this.
There ought to be a X-Session-Token header in HTTP so that the user doesn't see this. Session tokens in URLs are ugly.
Knowing where a user came from and what they searched for is a bad way of trying to optimise your site. I can name hundreds of situations where someone was proud that they'd generated a huge volume of visits (or page views if you weren't using cookies) of users that then left straight away because it wasn't what they were looking for.
How about this? No cookies there! (the link is partly broken; click the "Traffic Stats" tab)
How many attempts to legally offer solutions to what the MPAA/RIAA have refused haven't been sued out of existence or taken control of and made useless? I can't point to a single one that is still around like that.
TPB was sued, but not yet sued out of existence...
Why should I, the consumer, have to agree to a fscking EULA every time I want to watch a stupid movie?
RTFGP!
If I send a flash app to your browser and mark it with a completely worng MIME type, should the flash plugin care? Apparently, not only does it care, but it actually executes the damn thing!
If it's really that simple then why is Adobe saying...? They're idiots! That's trivial to fix! This is why we need to move away from proprietary active-content and towards HTML5 -- because proprietary companies aren't capable/willing to do a half-assed job at keeping their tech working/secure/up-to-date.
End of rant.
We don't need your help, thanks!
It is version 10.0.Æ.21.
Don't try to count using for fingers.
you need a Scientific Calculator
Why Æ?
The obvious answer is this: if the feds try to use the patriot act or something similar to suppress the findings, they are ~definitely correct. If the feds ignore them, then they probably don't care, meaning what they actually use is probably different from what the researchers used.
Hmm, now where have I heard "brillant" before...
http://thedailywtf.com/articles/the_brillant_paula_bean.aspx
No, I think this is more along the lines of the hypothetical scenario wherin Fedora was/would be/willan on-be called...what am I thinking, we need a car analogy!
So this is more along the lines of silliness about how the Chevy Nova supposedly didn't sell very well in (insert spanish-speaking country here).
As someone else in a nearby thread noted, there are lots of germs all over your skin (and everyone else's for that matter), so why can't you see them?
I think said angular acceleration is drowned out by the Earth's gravity, which has a much greater physical effect on us and our world.
It's a bit of a stretch to consider this to be part of touch.
Have a look at this also.
I always thought the existing seven senses were:
I don't work 24/7. Different hours of the day come with different opportunity costs based on what I would be doing were I not innovating.
Fallacies are a subset of the rhetorical device set, and can be a valuable tool in debate if used with judgment. Remember, you're trying to convince people, not play hugs and cuddles with your opponent.
I'd love to say that I'm surprised by your ignorant yet superior attitude, but then I'm not new here.
If you actually have a case, you won't need fallacies... moreover, their use, assuming your audience has a clue, can only make you look bad.
[snip] Barney Frank is right that moving healthcare into the Government sector means that after putting a few toes in the water of Government run health care, we'll get used to it and eventually go in[.]
So this is going to be similar to the abandonment of the gold standard?
You sound like my 80-something mother.
"How can it be optional if they are going to fine you when you say no???" She comes from the World War 2 generation, when freedom actually meant something. I don't think today's Generation Hippy, Generation X, or Generation Me have any idea of the concept. Many of them think if they want something, it's okay to ask the government to raid their neighbors' wallets and get it.
It's a lot like how the Roman Empire's government operated.
Generation Hippy is asking the government to do things? Gen. Hippy and the government are on speaking terms?? STOP THE PRESSES!!! HIPPIES AREN'T HIPPIES ANYMORE!
Exactly.
Apple is playing both sides here. Either their app store is safe, or it isn't.
If it isn't safe, 90% of their excuse for not allowing people to download apps from anyone is nonsense.
Other 10% (in 2% increments):
1) Money
2) MONEY
3) Mo-ney
4) ???
5) Profit!
Apples and oranges. ISPs usually don't look at what you're downloading/uploading, and in fact they're not supposed to (ethically, not yet legally). Apple "audits" any app you can put on your iPhone. Since Apple does reject some apps, and doesn't want to say much about what they look for, it is difficult to argue that they are completely in the legal clear given that their auditing process creates a certain expectation of security in the mind of the user. If Apple cannot fulfil that expectation, they might be liable for the consequences. Note that IANAL. Finally, if Apple has some sort of disclaimer to display to the user, they probably are in the clear on this one.
whoosh!