When Bush was talking about wanting search data for all US citizens, Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL handed it over without even really being asked. Google refused, and said they would not hand over any search data unless they were forced to do so by a court of law. Google has also since decided to anonymize their logs sooner and increase their privacy policies.
The only time Google has handed data over to a government agency was one case in Brazil, when they were forced to do so by a court, and even then, they didn't do it immediately when they were first ordered to do so. And that case was when Google had evidence on a child porn ring who distributed child porn via Orkut.
So please, explain to me how can you justify statements with no basis on fact?
Hey, make up a story with no basis in fact and get modded informative. Good deal! If you knew people who run things at Google you might have a different opinion. And hey, with their recent reduction in log retention time (after repeated warnings to do so by the EU), they're only holding data for what, twice as long as Yahoo?
Here's how you use gdrive, if you want to use it: encrypt.
New Belgium, the best large scale beer producer in North America, produced a substantial fraction of its operating electricity through methane collection (and burning) from its waste products. They have a few other nifty energy tricks, too. For instance, most of the time they don't run interior lighting because instead they have reflective light pipes bringing in sunlight from the roof through all the floors of their buildings.
If you know their flagship beer, it also shouldn't surprise you that a lot of the employees bike to work. Thanks to being in Colorado, that's comfortable more than 300 days a year.
The founders and heirs of Wal-Mart have made donations, just not as vocal about them. The bible teaches to give in secret. Can you verify to me your source for the.01% or did you just pull that out of the air.
I got it from a documentary on Walmart. It was called something like "The High Cost of Low Prices."
Last week video game conditioning, and some attentiveness, saved my car from being totaled and me from...who knows what. I was driving down an icy road and, to get to the point, an opposing driver was rear ended and launched directly toward me with a 60-70 mph speed differential. Keeping in mind that I was in packed snow, not asphalt, I used by awesome video game-honed reflexes to instantly but not wildly react, steering myself left and into the oncoming lanes of traffic in order to avoid the car that was launched at me, which ended up rolling across my lanes and up a sidewalk, and the giant car that launched it, which ended up spinning into the sidewalk on its own side of the street. As a bonus, I managed to confirm that a real car on snow behaves a lot like a car in GTA4 on pavement.
He is the most meaningfully philanthropic billionaire. As of a year or two ago he'd given 56% of his total accumulated wealth to charity over his lifetime. That's pretty cool, and the B&M Gates Foundation does a lot of great stuff, like pay for my local NPR and PBS stations. Compare to, oh, the Walmart heirs, who have given less than 0.01% of their wealth to philanthropic causes.
If you want to cut out the middle man but still support your favorite artists, you can always download it from TPB and then donate $15 directly to Microsoft. Or go to one of their concerts and buy a t-shirt.
That's not even close to a good troll. Like someone running a business is going to take an anonymous comment from a message board seriously and just start laying people off and shutting servers down.
Get real.
Uh...getting people running a business to fire the employees isn't the goal of a troll. Getting a lot of angry responses to a fluff post is the goal, and he's going pretty well at that.
I have a brown Zune too. When I first got it, I absolutely loved it. 30 GB of storage, ability to play photos, videos and music either in headphones or on my TV. Then a strange thing happened... Last September I wanted to get a mobile device that allowed me to surf the web. I saw my friends' iPhones and thought it was a good experience. "No problem" I thought. I'll just check out this Windows Mobile 6 stuff. I started on a hunt to find a non-iPhone that browsed the web as well as an iPhone. I went to AT&T stores (since I had their service already though my contract had expired), Verizon stores and Sprint stores. At the time, every other phone's web surfing was a J-O-K-E compared to the iPhone. A joke. I can't tell you how much it pains me to say that, since I am in reality a Microsoft fan and have used their development products professionally for over a decade and a half.
So I got the iPhone 3G. My Zune was then in the glove compartment of my car for a few months. I pulled it out a few weeks ago to try out the Zune games that seemed to be taking off. What I used to think was a sleek, intuitive interface on the Zune now looked clunky. The entire device actually felt cheap. The Zune hadn't changed though - I did. I got used to the iPhone. But anyway, I upgraded my Zune firmware, installed the Zune Games and actually tried the default ones out. Texas Hold'em was actually fun. But man, the experience is nothing - NOTHING - like the iPhone.
I guess I'll try selling my brown Zune on eBay before they become totally worthless.
The iPhone's web browsing advantage now only comes from its capacitive touch screen. Its low resolution and use of Safari cripple it compared to 640x480 phones running Opera Mobile.
Still, the capacitive touch is a big deal. It makes the iPhone feel very smooth, even as your friends' phone loads pages more correctly and faster.
I think you mean electron positron pairs instead of photons, but aside from that, very well said.
Re:Is there a way to get this with Alltel?
on
Get Out of Sprint Free
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Do any of you know of a way to escape contract with Alltel without paying the early termination fee? I'm sick of the 5-7 day delay in getting my voicemail messages! ):
Claim they're breaking the contract by not providing you with service. You're paying them to deliver messages in a timely manner, not take messages like shithead roommates.
Look for fee increases. Most carriers increase some sort of fee every couple of months. You then have a window where they're legally required to let you out of your contract.
MS search is pretty bad, yes. Google is a lot better. However, Yahoo is substantially better than Google. Go to search.yahoo.com for a clean interface if you want, and next time you actually need something, compare Yahoo and Google. I do about once a month. For the last several years, Yahoo's results have been equivalent to or vastly superior to Google's, in terms of ordering of results and lack of unrelated results. It's hard to quantify, though, and conceivably Yahoo just has an advantage when searching for the things I typically need (scientist stuff).
If you want a more easily demonstrated Yahoo advantage, compare Yahoo's map searching and Google's. Last week I stood within five blocks of a restaurant I needed help finding and searched Google maps (the app version on my phone) for its name. Every single result I got was an irrelevant location, none closer than 10 miles to my location, and they were all based on someone mentioning the place I wanted (or the type of food it makes) in a review. Half of them weren't restaurants. I have to admit, searching for something that included the word sushi and getting a pet shop as my top results was pretty funny. This is very consistent behavior with Google maps, which is a great mapping site until you need to access Google's weakness: search. Luckily, I keep yahoo maps bookmarked, and so I was able to get a map (unfortunately without GPS) that got me to dinner. As usual, searching for the name of the restaurant got me that restaurant as my top response in Yahoo maps.
When I search for something, I don't want to be ushered toward the page that the most bloggers have mentioned in posts that include my search terms. As my first result, I want the page that includes the language I entered. Yahoo gives me that a lot more than Google.
Remember that you learned this preposterous story from your son, who learned his concept of reality with you. Your acceptance of this obviously falsified or wildly embellished story as reality shows that your understanding of reality is deeply flawed. This, in turn, implies that your son's understanding of reality is similarly flawed. By the time the story gets to us through you two highly imperfect filters, it's pretty much meaningless.
So... the summary is basically saying that the problems everyone complained about with Vista, seem to be basically still there with Windows 7?
Er... this may seem like a stupid question, but what did they actually improve -- if not the things people were complaining about? Windows 7 beta seems to have had favorable reviews, so I wonder what people are basing that on, after reading this summary. (though, I note that Vista had favorable reviews on its launch too. It was just when reality bit that the knives came out. Shillery will only get you so far).
Not that I really care, since I've never used Vista and I won't be using Windows 7. XP still works fine for the one Windows box I have, and after any SP3 a Microsoft product is as good as it gets.
Basically, Vista solved almost all of its problems by the time SP1 rolled around. As long as you have 2 gigs of RAM, it's faster than your XP SP3 install, and depending on your system, it's most likely more stable. 7 is basically just UI and performance tuning to make it solidly faster than even Vista. See the/. story about zdnet benching the three OSs last week for comparison of speed.
I (foolishly, naively, but showing mostly uncrushable optimism) downloaded the beta and installed it only to be confronted what looked like Server 2008 minus the "classic" theme, perhaps "diet Vista".
Am I the only one that's more turned off by the Vista UI than the shitload of crap under the hood? I find tasks I can do simply and quickly, and with a fair amount of transparency with the "classic" UI, to be made highly opaque by the Vista (for lack of a better word) UI and involving much more effort, often MORE clicking, MORE bullshitting around. I did a Server 2008 server setup the other day (could have done 2003, but it was a small client doing filesharing only, so it was a good way to get my feet wet) and I was astonished that they had managed to make NTFS permissions editing and sharing setup involve more work with less control of the outcome than Server 2003.
Maybe I'm just getting Old And In The Way, but I'm missing the reason why they have to change the way some tasks are performed and the structure of the GUI. It seems like they're just making it different to be different and dumbing it down even dumber than it already was. Is there some sensible reason why the GUI needs to be so substantially changed?
The new task bar in 7 goes a lot further in this direction, at least in its default behavior. If you want to have more information control with fewer clicks, turn off grouping and add text back in.
Most of both groups are within two standard deviations of a norm. Your idiots are probably smarter than you think and your geniuses are probably not as smart as you'd like to believe.
The most widely used definition of genius in the US is an IQ more than 2 standard deviations above average. I submit to you that no geniuses are within 2 standard deviations of the norm.
In the early '80s there were no "older" programmers unless you were talking mainframe data processing. On microprocessor CPU systems the average age was low, as I recall. Back then we didn't blame poor software on "youthful programmers". We blamed it on idiots who didn't know what they were doing. I think it's safe to say that much hasn't changed.
I still hear stories from friends who programmed in the 80s and designed hardware in the 60s-70s about how the youthful programmers who had never touched hardware were idiots who didn't know what they were doing.
'Fast and stable, Beta 1 of Windows 7 unveils some intriguing user-interface improvements, including the much-anticipated new task bar.'
New Task Bar? Do the words "Titanic" and "rearranging the deckchairs" come to mind here?
The new task bar is the main problem with 7. It makes the difference between running programs and shortcuts to open programs much less obvious, and the default grouping is a poor way to manage windows. To get to a particular Word doc if you have 5 open, you need to click once on the Word icon, then on the particular document you want, instead of simply clicking directly on your desired document. Luckily, despite claims to the contrary a month ago, this behavior is adjustable.
Your deck chairs metaphor is interesting, though. I think it does apply, but maybe not as you intend. The doom facing MS is the bad reputation Vista has, not the actual quality of the OS. However, this isn't necessarily a fatal iceberg. Simply releasing a new OS with a new name and the early driver problems surrounding Vista fixed (and the Max vs. PC ads no longer capturing the mindshare they used to) will do a lot to fix that, though. The fact that 7's faster than Vista, which for machines with >1 gig of RAM was already faster than XP for most tasks (see the/. story a few days ago in which Win7 was given the performance crown, and Vista quietly took 2nd place, slightly ahead of XP), is icing on the cake.
The enterprise is partially driven by fashion, for instance if an executive gets fixated on the idea of switching to something new and exciting, but mostly it's driven by cost. I'm not sure how Apple would compete in a market where technical merit and cost are the driving factors instead of fashion and uniqueness.
I know a half dozen Mac users at school who are almost computer illiterate beyond their love for all things Apple. They're all obsessed with Steve Jobs. Hey, he's even been parodied as the main plot focus in a Simpsons episode. He's as well known as Bill Gates, and people actually care about him. When the Mac zealots I mentioned above don't have a Jobs, who is one of their central foci in Appledom, the cool factor is going to diminish to some extent, and some of them might start choosing a PC and more money for rent over a new Mac.
Some noble attorneys take lower paying positions as public defenders, or take on cases pro bono to help a political cause. However, many (most?) take cases based on the financial benefits to be gained. Mr. Perrelli is paid by the RIAA to represent them, he doesn't represent them because he hates file sharers or technology. And he's done a pretty good job for his clients, so hopefully he will do a good job for his new client, the DoJ.
Most of what the RIAA has done in the courtroom has shown a total lack of ethics and has been judged by many (including many judges) to be illegal. That's the Bush way of running the executive, and it sickens me to see someone like this appointed by Obama.
People actually pay to install it and then manually do so. There's not a lot the OS can do when the user is specifically enthusiastic about installing the malware. That is, there's not a lot the OS can do until the malware is specifically identified for removal.
Have you done it recently? The CFLs I bought in the nineties are still working. The ones I bought last year aren't measurably any longer lasting than the few incandescents I still use.
This is almost exactly my experience. I moved into a new house a year ago and replaced about 20 incandescent bulbs here with CFLs. Unlike my previous home, which had a lot of CFLs and had never had one burn out, I've had 6 go in the last 12 months here. I think it may be that my current batch is from China, while the old bulbs weren't.
Re:The author is wrong about accupuncture
on
Trick or Treatment
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Most studies of acupuncture have been either statistically insignificant or haven't sufficiently distinguished between acupuncture's efficacy and that of a placebo. The deal with acupuncture is that 1) it's nonsense and 2) it works really well a lot of the time, because it's a placebo that almost forces you to really believe in it. Those studies which have used similarly convincing placebos instead of just, say, a sugar pill, show similar (and very positive) effects between acupuncture and the fake treatment. This leads us to understand that acupuncture itself is a fake treatment. Luckily, a ton of needles are more persuasive than a paragraph of text, so I imagine that even if you read the below article you won't lose the placebo effect acupuncture offers you.
Haake M, Müller HH, Schade-Brittinger C, et al. (2007). "German Acupuncture Trials (GERAC) for Chronic Low Back Pain: Randomized, Multicenter, Blinded, Parallel-Group Trial With 3 Groups". Arch. Intern. Med. 167 (17): 1892â"8
Slashdot Mirror
How did you get modded informative?
When Bush was talking about wanting search data for all US citizens, Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL handed it over without even really being asked. Google refused, and said they would not hand over any search data unless they were forced to do so by a court of law. Google has also since decided to anonymize their logs sooner and increase their privacy policies.
The only time Google has handed data over to a government agency was one case in Brazil, when they were forced to do so by a court, and even then, they didn't do it immediately when they were first ordered to do so. And that case was when Google had evidence on a child porn ring who distributed child porn via Orkut.
So please, explain to me how can you justify statements with no basis on fact?
Hey, make up a story with no basis in fact and get modded informative. Good deal! If you knew people who run things at Google you might have a different opinion. And hey, with their recent reduction in log retention time (after repeated warnings to do so by the EU), they're only holding data for what, twice as long as Yahoo?
Here's how you use gdrive, if you want to use it: encrypt.
New Belgium, the best large scale beer producer in North America, produced a substantial fraction of its operating electricity through methane collection (and burning) from its waste products. They have a few other nifty energy tricks, too. For instance, most of the time they don't run interior lighting because instead they have reflective light pipes bringing in sunlight from the roof through all the floors of their buildings.
If you know their flagship beer, it also shouldn't surprise you that a lot of the employees bike to work. Thanks to being in Colorado, that's comfortable more than 300 days a year.
The founders and heirs of Wal-Mart have made donations, just not as vocal about them. The bible teaches to give in secret. Can you verify to me your source for the .01% or did you just pull that out of the air.
I got it from a documentary on Walmart. It was called something like "The High Cost of Low Prices."
Last week video game conditioning, and some attentiveness, saved my car from being totaled and me from...who knows what. I was driving down an icy road and, to get to the point, an opposing driver was rear ended and launched directly toward me with a 60-70 mph speed differential. Keeping in mind that I was in packed snow, not asphalt, I used by awesome video game-honed reflexes to instantly but not wildly react, steering myself left and into the oncoming lanes of traffic in order to avoid the car that was launched at me, which ended up rolling across my lanes and up a sidewalk, and the giant car that launched it, which ended up spinning into the sidewalk on its own side of the street. As a bonus, I managed to confirm that a real car on snow behaves a lot like a car in GTA4 on pavement.
He is the most meaningfully philanthropic billionaire. As of a year or two ago he'd given 56% of his total accumulated wealth to charity over his lifetime. That's pretty cool, and the B&M Gates Foundation does a lot of great stuff, like pay for my local NPR and PBS stations. Compare to, oh, the Walmart heirs, who have given less than 0.01% of their wealth to philanthropic causes.
I, for one, won't be buying it.
If you want to cut out the middle man but still support your favorite artists, you can always download it from TPB and then donate $15 directly to Microsoft. Or go to one of their concerts and buy a t-shirt.
That's not even close to a good troll. Like someone running a business is going to take an anonymous comment from a message board seriously and just start laying people off and shutting servers down.
Get real.
Uh...getting people running a business to fire the employees isn't the goal of a troll. Getting a lot of angry responses to a fluff post is the goal, and he's going pretty well at that.
I have a brown Zune too. When I first got it, I absolutely loved it. 30 GB of storage, ability to play photos, videos and music either in headphones or on my TV. Then a strange thing happened... Last September I wanted to get a mobile device that allowed me to surf the web. I saw my friends' iPhones and thought it was a good experience. "No problem" I thought. I'll just check out this Windows Mobile 6 stuff. I started on a hunt to find a non-iPhone that browsed the web as well as an iPhone. I went to AT&T stores (since I had their service already though my contract had expired), Verizon stores and Sprint stores. At the time, every other phone's web surfing was a J-O-K-E compared to the iPhone. A joke. I can't tell you how much it pains me to say that, since I am in reality a Microsoft fan and have used their development products professionally for over a decade and a half.
So I got the iPhone 3G. My Zune was then in the glove compartment of my car for a few months. I pulled it out a few weeks ago to try out the Zune games that seemed to be taking off. What I used to think was a sleek, intuitive interface on the Zune now looked clunky. The entire device actually felt cheap. The Zune hadn't changed though - I did. I got used to the iPhone. But anyway, I upgraded my Zune firmware, installed the Zune Games and actually tried the default ones out. Texas Hold'em was actually fun. But man, the experience is nothing - NOTHING - like the iPhone.
I guess I'll try selling my brown Zune on eBay before they become totally worthless.
The iPhone's web browsing advantage now only comes from its capacitive touch screen. Its low resolution and use of Safari cripple it compared to 640x480 phones running Opera Mobile.
Still, the capacitive touch is a big deal. It makes the iPhone feel very smooth, even as your friends' phone loads pages more correctly and faster.
I think you mean electron positron pairs instead of photons, but aside from that, very well said.
Do any of you know of a way to escape contract with Alltel without paying the early termination fee? I'm sick of the 5-7 day delay in getting my voicemail messages! ):
Claim they're breaking the contract by not providing you with service. You're paying them to deliver messages in a timely manner, not take messages like shithead roommates.
Look for fee increases. Most carriers increase some sort of fee every couple of months. You then have a window where they're legally required to let you out of your contract.
MS search is pretty bad, yes. Google is a lot better. However, Yahoo is substantially better than Google. Go to search.yahoo.com for a clean interface if you want, and next time you actually need something, compare Yahoo and Google. I do about once a month. For the last several years, Yahoo's results have been equivalent to or vastly superior to Google's, in terms of ordering of results and lack of unrelated results. It's hard to quantify, though, and conceivably Yahoo just has an advantage when searching for the things I typically need (scientist stuff).
If you want a more easily demonstrated Yahoo advantage, compare Yahoo's map searching and Google's. Last week I stood within five blocks of a restaurant I needed help finding and searched Google maps (the app version on my phone) for its name. Every single result I got was an irrelevant location, none closer than 10 miles to my location, and they were all based on someone mentioning the place I wanted (or the type of food it makes) in a review. Half of them weren't restaurants. I have to admit, searching for something that included the word sushi and getting a pet shop as my top results was pretty funny. This is very consistent behavior with Google maps, which is a great mapping site until you need to access Google's weakness: search. Luckily, I keep yahoo maps bookmarked, and so I was able to get a map (unfortunately without GPS) that got me to dinner. As usual, searching for the name of the restaurant got me that restaurant as my top response in Yahoo maps.
When I search for something, I don't want to be ushered toward the page that the most bloggers have mentioned in posts that include my search terms. As my first result, I want the page that includes the language I entered. Yahoo gives me that a lot more than Google.
Remember that you learned this preposterous story from your son, who learned his concept of reality with you. Your acceptance of this obviously falsified or wildly embellished story as reality shows that your understanding of reality is deeply flawed. This, in turn, implies that your son's understanding of reality is similarly flawed. By the time the story gets to us through you two highly imperfect filters, it's pretty much meaningless.
So... the summary is basically saying that the problems everyone complained about with Vista, seem to be basically still there with Windows 7?
Er... this may seem like a stupid question, but what did they actually improve -- if not the things people were complaining about? Windows 7 beta seems to have had favorable reviews, so I wonder what people are basing that on, after reading this summary. (though, I note that Vista had favorable reviews on its launch too. It was just when reality bit that the knives came out. Shillery will only get you so far).
Not that I really care, since I've never used Vista and I won't be using Windows 7. XP still works fine for the one Windows box I have, and after any SP3 a Microsoft product is as good as it gets.
Basically, Vista solved almost all of its problems by the time SP1 rolled around. As long as you have 2 gigs of RAM, it's faster than your XP SP3 install, and depending on your system, it's most likely more stable. 7 is basically just UI and performance tuning to make it solidly faster than even Vista. See the /. story about zdnet benching the three OSs last week for comparison of speed.
I (foolishly, naively, but showing mostly uncrushable optimism) downloaded the beta and installed it only to be confronted what looked like Server 2008 minus the "classic" theme, perhaps "diet Vista".
Am I the only one that's more turned off by the Vista UI than the shitload of crap under the hood? I find tasks I can do simply and quickly, and with a fair amount of transparency with the "classic" UI, to be made highly opaque by the Vista (for lack of a better word) UI and involving much more effort, often MORE clicking, MORE bullshitting around. I did a Server 2008 server setup the other day (could have done 2003, but it was a small client doing filesharing only, so it was a good way to get my feet wet) and I was astonished that they had managed to make NTFS permissions editing and sharing setup involve more work with less control of the outcome than Server 2003.
Maybe I'm just getting Old And In The Way, but I'm missing the reason why they have to change the way some tasks are performed and the structure of the GUI. It seems like they're just making it different to be different and dumbing it down even dumber than it already was. Is there some sensible reason why the GUI needs to be so substantially changed?
The new task bar in 7 goes a lot further in this direction, at least in its default behavior. If you want to have more information control with fewer clicks, turn off grouping and add text back in.
Feelings don't count when measuring speed.
Yeah, so go look at the /. story from last week about 7 being faster than Vista and XP on both new and very old systems.
>There are geniuses and idiots in all groups.
Most of both groups are within two standard deviations of a norm. Your idiots are probably smarter than you think and your geniuses are probably not as smart as you'd like to believe.
The most widely used definition of genius in the US is an IQ more than 2 standard deviations above average. I submit to you that no geniuses are within 2 standard deviations of the norm.
In the early '80s there were no "older" programmers unless you were talking mainframe data processing. On microprocessor CPU systems the average age was low, as I recall. Back then we didn't blame poor software on "youthful programmers". We blamed it on idiots who didn't know what they were doing. I think it's safe to say that much hasn't changed.
I still hear stories from friends who programmed in the 80s and designed hardware in the 60s-70s about how the youthful programmers who had never touched hardware were idiots who didn't know what they were doing.
New Task Bar? Do the words "Titanic" and "rearranging the deckchairs" come to mind here?
The new task bar is the main problem with 7. It makes the difference between running programs and shortcuts to open programs much less obvious, and the default grouping is a poor way to manage windows. To get to a particular Word doc if you have 5 open, you need to click once on the Word icon, then on the particular document you want, instead of simply clicking directly on your desired document. Luckily, despite claims to the contrary a month ago, this behavior is adjustable.
Your deck chairs metaphor is interesting, though. I think it does apply, but maybe not as you intend. The doom facing MS is the bad reputation Vista has, not the actual quality of the OS. However, this isn't necessarily a fatal iceberg. Simply releasing a new OS with a new name and the early driver problems surrounding Vista fixed (and the Max vs. PC ads no longer capturing the mindshare they used to) will do a lot to fix that, though. The fact that 7's faster than Vista, which for machines with >1 gig of RAM was already faster than XP for most tasks (see the /. story a few days ago in which Win7 was given the performance crown, and Vista quietly took 2nd place, slightly ahead of XP), is icing on the cake.
I agree, but for reference, the flu search thing is child's play. Also, "predict" isn't really accurate here. What they mean is "identify."
The enterprise is partially driven by fashion, for instance if an executive gets fixated on the idea of switching to something new and exciting, but mostly it's driven by cost. I'm not sure how Apple would compete in a market where technical merit and cost are the driving factors instead of fashion and uniqueness.
I know a half dozen Mac users at school who are almost computer illiterate beyond their love for all things Apple. They're all obsessed with Steve Jobs. Hey, he's even been parodied as the main plot focus in a Simpsons episode. He's as well known as Bill Gates, and people actually care about him. When the Mac zealots I mentioned above don't have a Jobs, who is one of their central foci in Appledom, the cool factor is going to diminish to some extent, and some of them might start choosing a PC and more money for rent over a new Mac.
Some noble attorneys take lower paying positions as public defenders, or take on cases pro bono to help a political cause. However, many (most?) take cases based on the financial benefits to be gained. Mr. Perrelli is paid by the RIAA to represent them, he doesn't represent them because he hates file sharers or technology. And he's done a pretty good job for his clients, so hopefully he will do a good job for his new client, the DoJ.
Most of what the RIAA has done in the courtroom has shown a total lack of ethics and has been judged by many (including many judges) to be illegal. That's the Bush way of running the executive, and it sickens me to see someone like this appointed by Obama.
People actually pay to install it and then manually do so. There's not a lot the OS can do when the user is specifically enthusiastic about installing the malware. That is, there's not a lot the OS can do until the malware is specifically identified for removal.
> You're doing it wrong.
Have you done it recently? The CFLs I bought in the nineties are still working. The ones I bought last year aren't measurably any longer lasting than the few incandescents I still use.
This is almost exactly my experience. I moved into a new house a year ago and replaced about 20 incandescent bulbs here with CFLs. Unlike my previous home, which had a lot of CFLs and had never had one burn out, I've had 6 go in the last 12 months here. I think it may be that my current batch is from China, while the old bulbs weren't.
Most studies of acupuncture have been either statistically insignificant or haven't sufficiently distinguished between acupuncture's efficacy and that of a placebo. The deal with acupuncture is that 1) it's nonsense and 2) it works really well a lot of the time, because it's a placebo that almost forces you to really believe in it. Those studies which have used similarly convincing placebos instead of just, say, a sugar pill, show similar (and very positive) effects between acupuncture and the fake treatment. This leads us to understand that acupuncture itself is a fake treatment. Luckily, a ton of needles are more persuasive than a paragraph of text, so I imagine that even if you read the below article you won't lose the placebo effect acupuncture offers you.
Haake M, Müller HH, Schade-Brittinger C, et al. (2007). "German Acupuncture Trials (GERAC) for Chronic Low Back Pain: Randomized, Multicenter, Blinded, Parallel-Group Trial With 3 Groups". Arch. Intern. Med. 167 (17): 1892â"8