My thought is they scraped public domain images from the LoC to "sell access" and totally missed that this was not public domain. But then they stupidly included all the scraped images in the index they sent over for copyright enforcement.
Most of the keyboards on sale even at Wal-Mart are mechanical gamer keyboards.
There are very few people that won't just stick with what came for free with their desktop. I don't understand how they can put up with that garbage. I can't stand out-of-box keyboards or mice from any major OEM.
99.99% of Windows 10 Pro users were NEVER going to mess with group policy editor to tweak those settings anyway. So ~why~ go to the trouble of disabling them.
Small businesses too small to use Enterprise but still have a domain to manage make plenty of use of Group Policy. And disabling the Microsoft Store is probably a good idea for work computers.
Did you read what I was replying to before spouting off nonsense? The post I'm replying to is a hypothetical - Getty can sell copies of public domain images.
This photographer's photos are not that - but nobody here is claiming they are.
I'm more curious how Getty ended up thinking they owned the copyright on those images.
I assume it went something like this: 1) Scrape all freely shared images from LoC, assuming they're public domain. 2) Sell licenses to access their copy of the photos without mentioning that the images were freely available elsewhere 3) "Accidentally" include these images in the index they provide to their copyright enforcement arm.
It's not strictly incorrect. It's an eggcorn that could still be considered grammatically correct, if you consider it as a "the adjective" construct with an implied subject. Like "the poor" (ones). The common man is populous - as in they breed more than the intellectual.
It really wasn't, since they could have granted posting privileges via OAuth without giving away the password. Don't pop stars have marketing teams to help them with technical details of this sort of thing?
Most phone SoC have hardware H.264 encoding on board (and screen casting uses this in all those cases). It may not always look sharp and clear, but it's definitely not high-bandwidth compared to raw.
The one benefit I see is to maintain state. You pull out your phone and start on something, realize you need something better for typing and viewing on and you can just continue to work on the expanded interface without starting over.
movies don't turn a profit, as far as the IRS is concerned.
The IRS still gets their cut, because the margins on the movie get paid out in services like special effects, distribution, production, etc. The people who lose on that are people who sign on to a movie for a cut of the movie's profits.
I couldn't even get a straight disclaimer-free answer from them about what channels I was supposed to be able to get. Comcast really, Really, REALLY HATES to give customers ANYTHING in writing, unless it's armored with disclaimers that basically say
In other words, when they're in dispute with ESPN on rates and decide to pull the plug to force a deal, they don't want to lower your fee during the dispute because no channel is promised. There's always a reason.
You reach top speed by the end, PLUS this incorporates the time it takes to get to that speed. It may just come out with a "number" at the end, that's hard to actually analyze for specifics, but I never said it was a good measure - just that it's common for this type of measurement.
since you mention those roads, they probably need paving anyway. Might as well lay some fiber under there while doing the patching that... well, that we're not going to do.
So you're saying that cities should just stop paying for roads and have ISP's and data carriers handle all road work from now on?
"fastest" also includes acceleration. That's why they give it in a form that combines both speed and acceleration into one metric, not that it makes any sense to me either.
That's not the problem with Unicode (some bias against it). The problem is all the control codes/characters that can affect objects outside the bounds of the comment box. Of course the answer is blocking those or whitelisting a wide amount of Unicode characters. And I guess Slashdot either doesn't want to dedicate the resources, or just know that it will be called censorship when they allow some, but not all, of UTF-8 or more.
Slashdot Mirror
My thought is they scraped public domain images from the LoC to "sell access" and totally missed that this was not public domain. But then they stupidly included all the scraped images in the index they sent over for copyright enforcement.
Kind of like the Family Guy gameplay footage fiasco.
They have the bigger lawyers. They'll sue you under CFAA if you try to bypass the new settings on their computer.
The Office365 runs under their awful click-to-run, which practically puts Office into a VM.
Most of the keyboards on sale even at Wal-Mart are mechanical gamer keyboards.
There are very few people that won't just stick with what came for free with their desktop. I don't understand how they can put up with that garbage. I can't stand out-of-box keyboards or mice from any major OEM.
It's like they're taking their productive, flagship product and doing everything they can to turn it into an annoying toy.
And you thought Embrace, Extend, Extinguish only applied to competitors products.
99.99% of Windows 10 Pro users were NEVER going to mess with group policy editor to tweak those settings anyway. So ~why~ go to the trouble of disabling them.
Small businesses too small to use Enterprise but still have a domain to manage make plenty of use of Group Policy. And disabling the Microsoft Store is probably a good idea for work computers.
Did you read what I was replying to before spouting off nonsense? The post I'm replying to is a hypothetical - Getty can sell copies of public domain images.
This photographer's photos are not that - but nobody here is claiming they are.
I'm more curious how Getty ended up thinking they owned the copyright on those images.
I assume it went something like this:
1) Scrape all freely shared images from LoC, assuming they're public domain.
2) Sell licenses to access their copy of the photos without mentioning that the images were freely available elsewhere
3) "Accidentally" include these images in the index they provide to their copyright enforcement arm.
If they were public domain they're free from copyright so thus Getty cannot claim ownership of them anyway.
While true, they could still sell access to their copy in that case. You can still profit off of collecting and distributing public domain materials.
Credit card companies hold the private key to your credit card
And you don't. It's their card, not yours.
What do you have against freedom, anyway?
It's not strictly incorrect. It's an eggcorn that could still be considered grammatically correct, if you consider it as a "the adjective" construct with an implied subject. Like "the poor" (ones). The common man is populous - as in they breed more than the intellectual.
Most importantly, the concentration when dilluted into the air volume of a room.
That's....not how e-cigarrettes work... At least not until long after. The concentration is much higher than that at the delivery point.
And why was the password required anyway?
It really wasn't, since they could have granted posting privileges via OAuth without giving away the password. Don't pop stars have marketing teams to help them with technical details of this sort of thing?
No, it's me-devil. It's about learning about the demon inside you.
Most phone SoC have hardware H.264 encoding on board (and screen casting uses this in all those cases). It may not always look sharp and clear, but it's definitely not high-bandwidth compared to raw.
The one benefit I see is to maintain state. You pull out your phone and start on something, realize you need something better for typing and viewing on and you can just continue to work on the expanded interface without starting over.
movies don't turn a profit, as far as the IRS is concerned.
The IRS still gets their cut, because the margins on the movie get paid out in services like special effects, distribution, production, etc. The people who lose on that are people who sign on to a movie for a cut of the movie's profits.
I couldn't even get a straight disclaimer-free answer from them about what channels I was supposed to be able to get. Comcast really, Really, REALLY HATES to give customers ANYTHING in writing, unless it's armored with disclaimers that basically say
In other words, when they're in dispute with ESPN on rates and decide to pull the plug to force a deal, they don't want to lower your fee during the dispute because no channel is promised. There's always a reason.
he had to pay for his new scanner somehow
Ha...He does not understand how margins work. Charge the rate that covers your costs.
Socket wrench fee $.03
Front office air conditioning: $0.08
Receipt signature ink fee: $0.001
You reach top speed by the end, PLUS this incorporates the time it takes to get to that speed. It may just come out with a "number" at the end, that's hard to actually analyze for specifics, but I never said it was a good measure - just that it's common for this type of measurement.
since you mention those roads, they probably need paving anyway. Might as well lay some fiber under there while doing the patching that... well, that we're not going to do.
So you're saying that cities should just stop paying for roads and have ISP's and data carriers handle all road work from now on?
But the fact remains that it's still the only way to combine top speed and acceleration into one measurement that's in common use.
"fastest" also includes acceleration. That's why they give it in a form that combines both speed and acceleration into one metric, not that it makes any sense to me either.
for the entire block
I think you missed the important point. You can't get away with just patching or repaving the affected area.
That's not the problem with Unicode (some bias against it). The problem is all the control codes/characters that can affect objects outside the bounds of the comment box. Of course the answer is blocking those or whitelisting a wide amount of Unicode characters. And I guess Slashdot either doesn't want to dedicate the resources, or just know that it will be called censorship when they allow some, but not all, of UTF-8 or more.