You're missing the point. Sixty bucks for what will end up being over 100 songs after the 20 free song download is considerably cheaper than if they just released all those songs as DLC. By making it a sequel it gives them the chance to clean up things from the original and make it a bit better, meanwhile the fans get a crapload of new songs for a good price. And if you don't want to pay that price, you can keep playing RB1 and all future DLC will still work with it. Only an idiot could actually bitch about this
I really don't understand what point you're trying to make here. If you don't understand what a self signed cert is, but do understand that your browser of choice thinks it bad, how can you possibly make a reasonable decision about whether or not to accept it? I would agree with you that there certainly are many instances where you can make good use of technology you don't fully understand, but in this case it just doesn't apply. You can use the web without understanding BGP routing, even though BGP routing is essential to web browsing. Continuing even further, one can effectively use certificates, both self signed and CA signed, without fully understanding how the underlying process works. However, if someone does not understand the difference between a self signed certificate and a CA signed certificate, there is simply no way they can make an intelligent decision as to whether or not to accept a self signed cert. Which is exactly the point of my original post.
This is blatantly untrue. First off, the RIAA was formed in 1952, making it difficult for them to go bankrupt in the 1930's. Record labels did have a fear that radio would destroy their sales for many years, which is why radio stations had to pay royalties since the medium's inception.
So lets see, you shouldn't accept self signed certificates if you don't understand them unless you A.)understand them (or EXACTLY WHAT I SAID) B.) somebody else tells you to (essentially they accept it for you) C.) You don't care about the implications (which would require you understanding what a self signed certificate is to understand the implications)
I guess I'll give you B as a counterpoint to my original point, but in the end, all 3 of your points simply enforce that Mozilla has done the right thing here. I won't even bother addressing your analogies as they couldn't be farther off the mark. Maybe try using a car? And no, you shouldn't be driving a car if you can't read a speed limit sign.
And if the couple prosecuted Google for trespassing, they would have a valid case and be well within their rights. However, suing for lost property value and mental distress is just bullshit that has nothing to do with the law
Well, I'd almost guarantee that it will have better hardware than my first computer (Apple IIe) and that didn't leave me with less of a willingness to push forward on the internet. Ultimately, I'm just kind of being a dick here, but you do have to remember that what we might consider crappy and slow, they might still consider amazing. Yeah, it sucks when it takes 2 minutes to open a web browser, but if you've never seen the web before it's still great, and if it's your only access to the web it's still worth it.
well, the original analogy does not really fail, but yours does. The OP is not complaining that he has to pay for tech support that didn't fix the issue, but the manner in which the support was given. To use your analogy, if you go to the doctor complaining of a headache, and the doctor thinks the problem is related to your ass, you can't complain of privacy violation because the doctor stuck a camera up your ass. Obviously, professional differences cause this analogy to break down fairly quickly, but the point can still be valid. It all boils down to how the OP phrased his tech support question. If he called up support and said "there's a problem with my mail" then support has every right to dig through everything on his site that could conceivably be tied to the mail system, database included. If he called up and said "there's a problem with my mail I think its tied to the XYZ system" then support can dig through the XYZ system all they want. If they find the XYZ system is fine, they could respond saying so, and claim they think the problem is with the database, at which point both parties could agree to who would look in to the database.
5 Times?!?!?!?!?! That's outrageous. Good thing your car required no energy to make and you only ever have to drive it once for 20 minutes......
Re:S-laughter is the best medicine
on
Batman Discussion
·
· Score: 1
While that list is obviously asinine, does anyone else find it interesting that all four of Christopher Nolan's major films are in the top 102?
1. 9.5 The Dark Knight (2008) 30. 8.6 Memento (2000) 88. 8.3 The Prestige (2006) 102. 8.3 Batman Begins (2005)
While I'm a big Nolan fan, I find those numbers a little hard to believe. I'm inclined to think there's a Nolan fan site or something like that spamming the list.
I'd still find it more than a little funny if every time you locked your keys in the car, you had to call up a car thief to open it for you.
Well, the more accurate analogy would be if locksmiths used tools developed by car thieves to unlock your car when you locked the keys inside. And guess what? They do.
Happy Birthday is indeed not a folk song, it is a ripoff of Good Morning To You, which was written by the Hill sisters in the 19th century. The Hills then used copyright law to claim ownership of Happy Birthday, and the copyrights are now in fact owned by Time Warner.
Well, I hit ctrl+S, but this definitely reminded me of an argument I had with a user at my company a few weeks ago who literally said to me in these exact words
"If I don't save this file, the changes I make aren't there the next day."
For the record, this is an extremely difficult point to argue with....
Plaintiff sued the Jena 6 for "Loss of My White Rights" and sought $100 million in white gold and the White House. Plaintiff alleged that defendants hung a white noose in his cell at FCI Willaimsburg, told the FCI Williamsburg dentists not to fix his white fillings, fed him tainted White Castle hamburgers, turn his cell mate into Snow White, called him the white Suge Knight, burnt him with Great Whites pyrotechnics, made him suffer whiteouts, gave him white phosphorus, subjected him to low white blood cell counts, and that Vanna White won't write. Defendants also allegedly turned plaintiff into a white collar criminal and sent Whitehouse prosecutors after his white skin.
While I certainly don't advocate the inclusion of cameras in cell phones, if the sole purpose of this device is to make phone calls, is a touch screen or linux OS really necessary?
so he's funny for misreading the headline and then making an obnoxious comment about it, but I'm a troll for properly reading his post and making an obnoxious comment?
you're completely right, and expect to continue to be disappointed. the wiimote does offer possibilities for interesting control schemes, but ultimately a true 1:1 motion to onscreen action correlation is not possible given the wii and wiimote hardware. everyone bought a wii and thought it was going to be amazing because wii sports gave the impression that such a 1:1 ratio was possible, but if you really examine how wii sports interprets motion controls, it's ultimately just a cheap trick to emulate 1:1 controls, which it only gets away with because the games are so simple. I do fully agree with you in being disappointed with the wii. my girlfriend and i bought one about a year ago, played it like crazy for a few weeks, bought 3 games within the first month, and haven't really touched it since.
It is a stupid question. Many many many people have survived a bullet or other object penetrating their brain. Bullets are often fatal, but they also do not put a single hole in the brain, instead they fragment and rattle around in the skull, shredding the brain. Also, remember the brain would be the CPU not the whole computer in your analogy. Try putting a bullet in your CPU and tell me if it still works.
How on earth is it HOLLYWOOD's fault that people talk on their cell phone during movies? Your complaint is with your local theater owners, the studios couldn't have less to do with it. I also love how that somehow FORCES you to download illegally. I really really hope you're a troll.
I don't think server power is what they were talking about. Root name servers get queried constantly, and while the request packet itself is obviously quite small, a few hundred thousand requests a second will eat up a lot of bandwidth. It seems unlikely that someone had a few gbs of bandwidth that they had no other use for. As for "maybe they forgot" since someone actively set up a root name server and advertised a route for it after ICANN took theirs down, this also seems rather unlikely.
Slashdot Mirror
You're missing the point. Sixty bucks for what will end up being over 100 songs after the 20 free song download is considerably cheaper than if they just released all those songs as DLC. By making it a sequel it gives them the chance to clean up things from the original and make it a bit better, meanwhile the fans get a crapload of new songs for a good price. And if you don't want to pay that price, you can keep playing RB1 and all future DLC will still work with it. Only an idiot could actually bitch about this
I really don't understand what point you're trying to make here. If you don't understand what a self signed cert is, but do understand that your browser of choice thinks it bad, how can you possibly make a reasonable decision about whether or not to accept it? I would agree with you that there certainly are many instances where you can make good use of technology you don't fully understand, but in this case it just doesn't apply. You can use the web without understanding BGP routing, even though BGP routing is essential to web browsing. Continuing even further, one can effectively use certificates, both self signed and CA signed, without fully understanding how the underlying process works. However, if someone does not understand the difference between a self signed certificate and a CA signed certificate, there is simply no way they can make an intelligent decision as to whether or not to accept a self signed cert. Which is exactly the point of my original post.
This is blatantly untrue. First off, the RIAA was formed in 1952, making it difficult for them to go bankrupt in the 1930's. Record labels did have a fear that radio would destroy their sales for many years, which is why radio stations had to pay royalties since the medium's inception.
So lets see, you shouldn't accept self signed certificates if you don't understand them unless you
A.)understand them (or EXACTLY WHAT I SAID)
B.) somebody else tells you to (essentially they accept it for you)
C.) You don't care about the implications (which would require you understanding what a self signed certificate is to understand the implications)
I guess I'll give you B as a counterpoint to my original point, but in the end, all 3 of your points simply enforce that Mozilla has done the right thing here. I won't even bother addressing your analogies as they couldn't be farther off the mark. Maybe try using a car? And no, you shouldn't be driving a car if you can't read a speed limit sign.
I think that's exactly the point. If you can't understand what a self signed certificate is, you shouldn't be accepting them.
I'm guessing there's a dumpster full of dead mice behind the research lab that would disagree with you....
And if the couple prosecuted Google for trespassing, they would have a valid case and be well within their rights. However, suing for lost property value and mental distress is just bullshit that has nothing to do with the law
Well, I'd almost guarantee that it will have better hardware than my first computer (Apple IIe) and that didn't leave me with less of a willingness to push forward on the internet. Ultimately, I'm just kind of being a dick here, but you do have to remember that what we might consider crappy and slow, they might still consider amazing. Yeah, it sucks when it takes 2 minutes to open a web browser, but if you've never seen the web before it's still great, and if it's your only access to the web it's still worth it.
well, the original analogy does not really fail, but yours does. The OP is not complaining that he has to pay for tech support that didn't fix the issue, but the manner in which the support was given. To use your analogy, if you go to the doctor complaining of a headache, and the doctor thinks the problem is related to your ass, you can't complain of privacy violation because the doctor stuck a camera up your ass. Obviously, professional differences cause this analogy to break down fairly quickly, but the point can still be valid. It all boils down to how the OP phrased his tech support question. If he called up support and said "there's a problem with my mail" then support has every right to dig through everything on his site that could conceivably be tied to the mail system, database included. If he called up and said "there's a problem with my mail I think its tied to the XYZ system" then support can dig through the XYZ system all they want. If they find the XYZ system is fine, they could respond saying so, and claim they think the problem is with the database, at which point both parties could agree to who would look in to the database.
And to make it even better, he was modded informative....
5 Times?!?!?!?!?! That's outrageous. Good thing your car required no energy to make and you only ever have to drive it once for 20 minutes......
While that list is obviously asinine, does anyone else find it interesting that all four of Christopher Nolan's major films are in the top 102?
1. 9.5 The Dark Knight (2008)
30. 8.6 Memento (2000)
88. 8.3 The Prestige (2006)
102. 8.3 Batman Begins (2005)
While I'm a big Nolan fan, I find those numbers a little hard to believe. I'm inclined to think there's a Nolan fan site or something like that spamming the list.
I'd still find it more than a little funny if every time you locked your keys in the car, you had to call up a car thief to open it for you.
Well, the more accurate analogy would be if locksmiths used tools developed by car thieves to unlock your car when you locked the keys inside. And guess what? They do.
Happy Birthday is indeed not a folk song, it is a ripoff of Good Morning To You, which was written by the Hill sisters in the 19th century. The Hills then used copyright law to claim ownership of Happy Birthday, and the copyrights are now in fact owned by Time Warner.
http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.asp
Well, I hit ctrl+S, but this definitely reminded me of an argument I had with a user at my company a few weeks ago who literally said to me in these exact words
"If I don't save this file, the changes I make aren't there the next day."
For the record, this is an extremely difficult point to argue with....
Really worth reading the Justia link in groklaw:
http://news.justia.com/cases/jonathan-lee-riches/
This might be my favorite
Plaintiff sued the Jena 6 for "Loss of My White Rights" and sought $100 million in white gold and the White House. Plaintiff alleged that defendants hung a white noose in his cell at FCI Willaimsburg, told the FCI Williamsburg dentists not to fix his white fillings, fed him tainted White Castle hamburgers, turn his cell mate into Snow White, called him the white Suge Knight, burnt him with Great Whites pyrotechnics, made him suffer whiteouts, gave him white phosphorus, subjected him to low white blood cell counts, and that Vanna White won't write. Defendants also allegedly turned plaintiff into a white collar criminal and sent Whitehouse prosecutors after his white skin.
This guy is definitely hilarious and not crazy.
While I certainly don't advocate the inclusion of cameras in cell phones, if the sole purpose of this device is to make phone calls, is a touch screen or linux OS really necessary?
so he's funny for misreading the headline and then making an obnoxious comment about it, but I'm a troll for properly reading his post and making an obnoxious comment?
see subject (of parents post and the article)
you're completely right, and expect to continue to be disappointed. the wiimote does offer possibilities for interesting control schemes, but ultimately a true 1:1 motion to onscreen action correlation is not possible given the wii and wiimote hardware. everyone bought a wii and thought it was going to be amazing because wii sports gave the impression that such a 1:1 ratio was possible, but if you really examine how wii sports interprets motion controls, it's ultimately just a cheap trick to emulate 1:1 controls, which it only gets away with because the games are so simple. I do fully agree with you in being disappointed with the wii. my girlfriend and i bought one about a year ago, played it like crazy for a few weeks, bought 3 games within the first month, and haven't really touched it since.
It is a stupid question. Many many many people have survived a bullet or other object penetrating their brain. Bullets are often fatal, but they also do not put a single hole in the brain, instead they fragment and rattle around in the skull, shredding the brain. Also, remember the brain would be the CPU not the whole computer in your analogy. Try putting a bullet in your CPU and tell me if it still works.
How on earth is it HOLLYWOOD's fault that people talk on their cell phone during movies? Your complaint is with your local theater owners, the studios couldn't have less to do with it. I also love how that somehow FORCES you to download illegally. I really really hope you're a troll.
you *will* make sure to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are in fact a pretentious asshole
I don't think server power is what they were talking about. Root name servers get queried constantly, and while the request packet itself is obviously quite small, a few hundred thousand requests a second will eat up a lot of bandwidth. It seems unlikely that someone had a few gbs of bandwidth that they had no other use for. As for "maybe they forgot" since someone actively set up a root name server and advertised a route for it after ICANN took theirs down, this also seems rather unlikely.
Aren't horeshoes and hand grenades two situations where close does count (as you're attempting to claim browser compliance is as well)?