They likely do want targeted advertisements. But the dislike of tracking wins out. Of course 90% of them signed up for a supermarket discount card and pay for everything with a credit card so they don't really care, they just think they do.
I'd rather see an ad for a video game than for tampons. Of course I'd prefer not to see an ad at all, but that's irrelevant.
I'd also prefer that any random web advertising company can't see all the things I've purchased and web sites I've visited.
That doesn't sound "un-human" to me. Sounds exactly how I would expect an animal that spent most of its history in tribal (and family) groups to behave.
The ones who do what they are told by the elite will survive better than those that do not, since even if the decisions aren't optimal the group focusing on on a suboptimal goal will do better than a group pulling in all different directions.
And of course those that kill their own group tend not to have a group that succeeds and multiplies whereas those that kill other groups have less competition and can multiply to fill more space.
Once you get past subsistence survival things change but it's all hard wired by then... Though of course now the people who don't have that "kill or be killed" outlook don't end up getting killed by those that do as much so societies view slowly changes.
There won't be new ISP's taking their place because you can't run a second set of cables throughout the city/region/whatever at a competitive price. Because the previous guys got subsidized.
Possibly you can't do so at any cost because the previous guys where granted exclusive rights or because it's politically impossible to get permission now. Though that's irrelevant due to not being able to afford it if you could anyway.
It's difficult because it depends how you "give source".
If you go for the written offer to provide source rather than just providing the source upfront then you do in fact have an obligation to provide the source to all third parties.
Really? You're shocked that Western nations have stopped using a symbol and even removed previous uses of a symbol that became synonymous with the killing of millions of people?
It was part of the agreement since that's what the law says (unless it changed in the meantime, in which case blame Congress) and the contract doesn't exist in a vacuum.
It just means the that normal way to use a zebra crossing is to make sure the car is actually slowing down and has enough space to stop before you step in front of it. Eye contact is nice especially if they haven't completely stopped...
Just like you don't go through the green light in your car when you see a truck that is going to run the red across you, even though you have right of way.
Is a one character substitution error which happens to give another word really an error in grammar as opposed to a typo (or even an error in spelling, though I would argue typos should be considered different than spelling errors)?
Which is the point. Not crossing until you have made eye contact with the driver is a reasonably common method of reducing your chances of getting run over. Obviously one that isn't available to a blind person.
That you can get run over anyway, doesn't mean that that technique doesn't reduce some of the ways that could happen.
Slashdot Mirror
Americans don't want their web usage tracked.
They likely do want targeted advertisements. But the dislike of tracking wins out. Of course 90% of them signed up for a supermarket discount card and pay for everything with a credit card so they don't really care, they just think they do.
I'd rather see an ad for a video game than for tampons. Of course I'd prefer not to see an ad at all, but that's irrelevant.
I'd also prefer that any random web advertising company can't see all the things I've purchased and web sites I've visited.
short of replacing the motherboard...
can they tell a modded Wii from an unmodded wii once it has bricked?
If I ever manage to win a game I'll know :)
Yes, too risky.
Better just not have a heart at all and drop dead now.
The judge finds for Microsoft and then on appeal the higher court says "ah no this needed to go to a jury you idiot".
So it goes to a jury, and the same judge then rules the opposite of the jury verdict and finds for Microsoft again.
Surely that's going to make for an interesting appeal...
This could be a problem.
Exactly what tile filled future have all these Scrabble games been practice for?
That doesn't sound "un-human" to me. Sounds exactly how I would expect an animal that spent most of its history in tribal (and family) groups to behave.
The ones who do what they are told by the elite will survive better than those that do not, since even if the decisions aren't optimal the group focusing on on a suboptimal goal will do better than a group pulling in all different directions.
And of course those that kill their own group tend not to have a group that succeeds and multiplies whereas those that kill other groups have less competition and can multiply to fill more space.
Once you get past subsistence survival things change but it's all hard wired by then... Though of course now the people who don't have that "kill or be killed" outlook don't end up getting killed by those that do as much so societies view slowly changes.
Possibly, that's because the *aim* is to kill the soldiers. If they don't want to be killed they can surrender or just not show up.
Must have missed out on trading it in during cash for clunkers.
France?
You mean like China?
There won't be new ISP's taking their place because you can't run a second set of cables throughout the city/region/whatever at a competitive price. Because the previous guys got subsidized.
Possibly you can't do so at any cost because the previous guys where granted exclusive rights or because it's politically impossible to get permission now. Though that's irrelevant due to not being able to afford it if you could anyway.
If you read the article you'd know they were in fact making a scientific statement of reasonable significance given what they expected to find.
Because the subjects are smarter than you and know that there's more than one type of vaccine and they aren't all attenuated vaccines.
It's difficult because it depends how you "give source".
If you go for the written offer to provide source rather than just providing the source upfront then you do in fact have an obligation to provide the source to all third parties.
Really? You're shocked that Western nations have stopped using a symbol and even removed previous uses of a symbol that became synonymous with the killing of millions of people?
I don't find that shocking at all.
It was part of the agreement since that's what the law says (unless it changed in the meantime, in which case blame Congress) and the contract doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Our old fridge lasted longer than the average rabbit.
No.
It just means the that normal way to use a zebra crossing is to make sure the car is actually slowing down and has enough space to stop before you step in front of it. Eye contact is nice especially if they haven't completely stopped...
Just like you don't go through the green light in your car when you see a truck that is going to run the red across you, even though you have right of way.
Is a one character substitution error which happens to give another word really an error in grammar as opposed to a typo (or even an error in spelling, though I would argue typos should be considered different than spelling errors)?
BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE...
No.
But since some drivers are idiots, it's nice to have a fighting chance of looking out for yourself.
And if there's a zebra crossing you can just cross blindly and never get hit! After all you have right of way.
Which is the point. Not crossing until you have made eye contact with the driver is a reasonably common method of reducing your chances of getting run over. Obviously one that isn't available to a blind person.
That you can get run over anyway, doesn't mean that that technique doesn't reduce some of the ways that could happen.
Way to fail in the first phrase.