> It presupposes a complete "Microsoft Windows" view of the world, where every application runs in exactly one window and all windows are inherently either maximized are minimized.
What version of Windows did you last use? I know for a fact that every version since 3.0 allows programs to open multiple windows and those windows can be any size, not just minimized or maximized. Hell, I can tell from screen shots that every one from 1.0 on supported Windows that weren't maximized and had multiple visible windows on the screen.
So... be honest with us. Do you you really have some crusty ass pre-1.0 beta that you're using as your point of comparison or are you just a troll making up ridiculously unbelievable shit?
1) It's legal. 2) The studios that produced the shows get some revenue which correlates to the level of interest people have in Star Trek, which encourages them to produce more material. 3) Netflix gets some revenue, which correlates to the level of interest people have in Star Trek and encourages them to continue providing Star Trek and maybe other sci-fi series. 4) The actors who worked on the series get some money via residuals, making Star Trek seem like a decent career move for other actors. 5) Paying $8 a month isn't a hardship and you're contributing to our culture by paying those who produce our entertainment rather than leeching and not giving back for what you receive.
It's a great idea, but cell phone companies don't want you to be able to re-enable tethering and the local wifi hotspot capabilities if they're disabled and the manufacturers will always bow to will of the phone companies that act as their primary sales channel.
From TFA: the city's Balboa branch - which "accounts for about six percent of the 1.3 million visitors that utilize Newport Beach Public Libraries each year" - is underutilized and "could be changed to better fit the community's needs."
"patrons could 'order' books from the large Central Library (located about four miles away)"
This isn't about closing the only library in town. This is about cutting the cost of maintaining a branch that a small percentage of people use by not buying books for that branch.
As much as I hate the idea of libraries losing their funding, I can't honestly say I would be against this if I lived there. It's about 3 miles from my house to the nearest public library and it isn't a difficult trip. It's what most people I know would consider to be within walking distance.
Why would the US government bother creating a fake version of a website, issuing a fake certificate to make that website look real, then get you to try and log in so that they can get your login details when they can simply issue a subpoena and force the website to hand over all information about you including the information you can't even access?
I suspect you have no idea what a security certificate is and this is just a knee-jerk "OMG GUBMINT BAD" reaction on your part.
Companies will always go for the cheapest sources of labor. In a few years, the starving kids in Bangladesh who have been making clothing all this time will be teenagers. When their fingers get too big, they'll have to move on programming games for ten cents a day and we'll all be out of our jobs.
Company Y sees the claims, realizes that based on statistics, person X may be progressing to condition Z.... How is this a bad scenario exactly?
You have a test and you find out that your PSA level is elevated. Your doctor tells you that, based on the lack of cancer in your family history, your age and the fact that you had severe complications the last time you had a biopsy, it would be best to just repeat the PSA test again in a year or two and not worry about it otherwise.
The elevated PSA level gets reported to Company Y, however, and their viewpoint is that the statistical chances of a person with an elevated PSA level developing expensive-to-treat cancer justifies the cost of a relatively inexpensive biopsy.. You're informed that you have to get a biopsy or you will lose your insurance.
Corporations are not trained doctors and cannot replace them. They should not be allowed to dictate required medical treatment to their customers and your scenario puts the corporation in a position to do exactly that and gives them the financial incentive to do so.
The authorizations granted to Google in this Amended Settlement Agreement are non-exclusive only, and nothing in this Amended Settlement Agreement shall be construed as limiting any Rightsholderâ(TM)s right to authorize, through the Registry or otherwise, any Person, including direct competitors of Google, to use his, her or its Books or Inserts in any way, including ways identical to those provided for under this Amended Settlement Agreement.
Google was not trying to get exclusive rights to anything. Anyone and everyone else would have been free to scan in books and sell them exactly like Google wanted to do.
Everyone posting here about how evil Google is for wanting exclusive rights to sell these books is wrong. None of them have read the proposed settlement and they have no clue what they're talking about. They're spreading FUD and you idiots are falling for it.
Granted, she's better known as creepy-chan (and she's a wee bit less seductive in that persona, but that doesn't negate the other image. It just makes the morning after a lot scarier.
Slashdot Mirror
This comment makes me wish H.P. Lovecraft had been around long enough to start reviewing video games and gadgets.
> LCD producers stopped making 4:3 screens, forcing me into a bulbous 15" widescreen
What do you think the term "bulbous" means?
Because it makes no sense whatsoever in that sentence.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/electrocute
Willful execution by electricity is only one of two valid definitions.
Hey! It's hard to name which paper you were reading when all you ever read were the comics and horoscopes. They all blur together.
Fuck. That was supposed to be plain text formatted. I really do know how to use the enter key.
See?
> It presupposes a complete "Microsoft Windows" view of the world, where every application runs in exactly one window and all windows are inherently either maximized are minimized. What version of Windows did you last use? I know for a fact that every version since 3.0 allows programs to open multiple windows and those windows can be any size, not just minimized or maximized. Hell, I can tell from screen shots that every one from 1.0 on supported Windows that weren't maximized and had multiple visible windows on the screen. So... be honest with us. Do you you really have some crusty ass pre-1.0 beta that you're using as your point of comparison or are you just a troll making up ridiculously unbelievable shit?
Schizophrenia is a hell of a disease.
They called Anonymous "very professional, highly sophisticated"
And for the highest level of security, will the computer require you to toss its salad before letting you access your data?
So what does that make me?
(probably anarchist since I think most politicians should be given long prison terms)
> This has nothing to do with "normal computers", it's about a Windows specific SDK
So.... Windows specific SDKs only apply to abnormal computers?
> Not sure what netflix has over my NAS
1) It's legal.
2) The studios that produced the shows get some revenue which correlates to the level of interest people have in Star Trek, which encourages them to produce more material.
3) Netflix gets some revenue, which correlates to the level of interest people have in Star Trek and encourages them to continue providing Star Trek and maybe other sci-fi series.
4) The actors who worked on the series get some money via residuals, making Star Trek seem like a decent career move for other actors.
5) Paying $8 a month isn't a hardship and you're contributing to our culture by paying those who produce our entertainment rather than leeching and not giving back for what you receive.
It's a great idea, but cell phone companies don't want you to be able to re-enable tethering and the local wifi hotspot capabilities if they're disabled and the manufacturers will always bow to will of the phone companies that act as their primary sales channel.
From TFA:
the city's Balboa branch - which "accounts for about six percent of the 1.3 million visitors that utilize Newport Beach Public Libraries each year" - is underutilized and "could be changed to better fit the community's needs."
"patrons could 'order' books from the large Central Library (located about four miles away)"
This isn't about closing the only library in town. This is about cutting the cost of maintaining a branch that a small percentage of people use by not buying books for that branch.
As much as I hate the idea of libraries losing their funding, I can't honestly say I would be against this if I lived there. It's about 3 miles from my house to the nearest public library and it isn't a difficult trip. It's what most people I know would consider to be within walking distance.
Why would the US government bother creating a fake version of a website, issuing a fake certificate to make that website look real, then get you to try and log in so that they can get your login details when they can simply issue a subpoena and force the website to hand over all information about you including the information you can't even access?
I suspect you have no idea what a security certificate is and this is just a knee-jerk "OMG GUBMINT BAD" reaction on your part.
My guess would be that the writer is clueless and easily impressed by something like this:
http://www.premierfishing.co.uk/humminbird---1198cx-si-combo---side-scan-sonar--gps-436-p.asp
Leave out the world sonar and there you have it... side-scan GPS.
Companies will always go for the cheapest sources of labor. In a few years, the starving kids in Bangladesh who have been making clothing all this time will be teenagers. When their fingers get too big, they'll have to move on programming games for ten cents a day and we'll all be out of our jobs.
Company Y sees the claims, realizes that based on statistics, person X may be progressing to condition Z. ...
How is this a bad scenario exactly?
You have a test and you find out that your PSA level is elevated. Your doctor tells you that, based on the lack of cancer in your family history, your age and the fact that you had severe complications the last time you had a biopsy, it would be best to just repeat the PSA test again in a year or two and not worry about it otherwise.
The elevated PSA level gets reported to Company Y, however, and their viewpoint is that the statistical chances of a person with an elevated PSA level developing expensive-to-treat cancer justifies the cost of a relatively inexpensive biopsy.. You're informed that you have to get a biopsy or you will lose your insurance.
Corporations are not trained doctors and cannot replace them. They should not be allowed to dictate required medical treatment to their customers and your scenario puts the corporation in a position to do exactly that and gives them the financial incentive to do so.
So basically he's about 4 years ahead in development.
Most kids don't start thinking they know everything until they're 16, after all, and he's only 12.
OMG... I haven't adopted a standard that almost nobody else has adopted either. I'm... I'm... NORMAL!
*breaks down in tears*
The man has held a sixty year grudge over doughnuts and gets worked up about it. Have you considered the possibility that senility might be a factor?
I'm not saying that doughnuts aren't good, but come on.
How many commercial applications can copy songs to an iPod?
There aren't many, but there are some. Winamp has been able to since the 5.55 release in March of 2009. It works well, too, I might add.
No, of course not. Slashdotters have no trouble understanding sarcasm.
2.4 Non-Exclusivity of Authorizations.
The authorizations granted to Google in this Amended Settlement Agreement are non-exclusive only, and nothing in this Amended Settlement Agreement shall be construed as limiting any Rightsholderâ(TM)s right to authorize, through the Registry or otherwise, any Person, including direct competitors of Google, to use his, her or its Books or Inserts in any way, including ways identical to those provided for under this Amended Settlement Agreement.
Google was not trying to get exclusive rights to anything. Anyone and everyone else would have been free to scan in books and sell them exactly like Google wanted to do.
Everyone posting here about how evil Google is for wanting exclusive rights to sell these books is wrong. None of them have read the proposed settlement and they have no clue what they're talking about. They're spreading FUD and you idiots are falling for it.
a girl who hangs out on 4chan and watches anime is not capable of seducing anybody.
Really? Meet Allison Harvard
Granted, she's better known as creepy-chan (and she's a wee bit less seductive in that persona, but that doesn't negate the other image. It just makes the morning after a lot scarier.