and tells us *nothing* about if we can detect potential extinction level events.
I disagree. If a rock such as Eris can go un-noticed for 75 years after a rock such as Pluto is discovered, I think it says we could be looking harder.
We're fucking overdue you twit.
No we are not
There does seem to be a lack of consensus regarding this.. if memory serves correct, some say we're not due for some time, some say we're simply due, and others say we've been overdue by up to 30 million years. Personally, I don't see that it matters. It has happened in the past, will happen in the future, and at present, we are unprepared for it. One could make the argument that "we should fix the problems here first otherwise why does it fucking matter?", but I feel that overlooks the possibility that our becoming prepared for an impact event could become the means for fixing problems on this mudball. NASA's advancements didn't just benefit the space program after all. And no, that doesn't mean focusing all of our resources on asteroid detection and impact event mitigation.
and you have a potty mouth.
And that is pertinent to the discussion because...?
Have you? If you've access to a Windows 7 box, do this.
1) Open a Firefox window, or any application.
2) Open a notepad window, or any other application that wasn't the first.
3) Open another Firefox window, or whatever application you opened in #1.
In XP, my taskbar would show the windows in the order of Firefox, notepad, Firefox. In 7, it shows them in the order of Firefox, Firefox, notepad. That is what I mean about being placed next to each other. I turned off the grouping that would combine the two Firefox windows into a single button, but it still places them next to each other. I used to use the XP method to organize my windows. I'll adapt, but that doesn't mean I'll like it.
About pinning:
1) Pin 3 different programs to the taskbar. We'll use IE, Firefox, and Chrome in this example, in that order.
2) Open a few IE windows.
3) The Firefox and Chrome icons get shifted to the right (or if you have a multi-row taskbar like me, possibly to the next row).
4) Open a few Chrome windows.
5) The Firefox button is now lost in a sea of IE/Chrome windows. Now picture a few more programs pinned to the taskbar, some open, some not. It can turn into "window window window button button window button button button window window".
Not the AC, but the quick launch still exists in Windows 7. It isn't accessible by default, but it's there.
And I disagree about pinning working better. Quicklaunch always displays its icons in the same location. Pinning shifts the bloody icons around. "What's that? You opened a new Firefox window? Well now the Chrome icon has shifted to the right / next row". No thank you. It's bad enough that all Firefox windows, all Chrome windows, all notepad windows, etc, get placed next to each other.
No it isn't. Science simply is. It is how we humans chose to use it that makes it cruel or not cruel. Note that I am not saying that there is always a non-cruel way of doing something, however...
As someone else pointed out down below, put a rabbit in an air-tight box, fill it full of nitrogen, and it will die peacefully and painlessly. While I was already aware of the painlessness of nitrogen asphyxiation, that post did cause me to wonder why the researchers chose to block the windpipe of the rabbit. Wouldn't putting the rabbit in a pure nitrogen environment be a better test for the longevity of such a treatment?
Though I suppose if what they wished to learn was how long it could keep one alive in the event that the person is unable to breathe at all...
Once you're in the wheelchair, you can easily turn around what you said -- why do THEY need to be 9 feet closer?
Just a thought, but maybe it has to do with the visibility of the person in the wheel chair? From inside a car, a person outside who is sitting down is less visible than a person standing. Placing the parking spaces at the front reduces the risk of someone backing out into them while traveling down the parking lot.
Most places implement handicapped parking by taking regular spots and putting a handicapped parking sign in front of them. It accomplishes nothing.
And that's the part that bugs me to no end. Why does being handicapped in some way entitle you to having your private parking space, preferred seating in a restaurant or other preferences? It goes without saying that there should be a ramp so people with wheelchairs can access public buildings. But where does it come in that I have to wait for an hour to get a free seat while there are some "reserved" seats waiting for you?
Well I suppose whoever is in charge of the parking lot / restaurant could dictate that all parking spaces / tables be able to handle wheelchairs, but since a wheelchair-accessible parking space / table takes up more room, you end up reducing the overall capacity of the parking lot / restaurant. And I'm fairly certain that said person would prefer to maximize occupancy as much as possible.
In all honesty, I don't know what criteria is used to determine whether a corporation's actions fall under the commerce clause. But going by the location of their headquarters vs the location of their customers at least seems to make more sense than Wickard v. Filburn.
I see. You're using mythology in a way I've not heard used before. Don't get me wrong, it makes sense, just not seen someone accept that a person who is a follower of Thor is not a coo-coo head, but is simply practicing a different religion from them (and on the flip-side, there exists parts of Christianity that can be labeled as mythology, if I am understanding you correctly).
Does it really matter if someone fighting against something they perceive as wrong has personally been harmed by what they are fighting against? To reference a discussion I had a while back with a family member who at the time was under the age of 21, and disliked the current drinking age, why is it surprising that I, a 21+ year old, would argue in support of lowering the drinking age?
Even if you don't believe any of it, there's a reason humans came up with mythology and why so much effort has gone into propagating it. Given the amount of effort put into mythology, understanding mythology may well have real insights into the way human intelligence works.
No, I didn't FTFY. Just pointing out that it comes out just the same. Mythology is simply religion that is no longer believed anymore (or is simply not believed by the person calling it mythology). The Norse gods, the Greek and Roman gods... you'd likely say they are parts of different culture's mythologies, but it is just as accurate to say they are parts of different culture's religions.
Anything can happen with any given lawsuit, but you'll never see a pattern of people losing suits over stuff like this.
Where people == Apple in this instance? I suppose you are right. Since there would be no way for Apple to prove that the attempted purchaser intended to turn right around and export the iPad, I figured some sort of discrimination case could be made by the attempted purchaser. But if there isn't anything in the law which forbids such discrimination, then yeah, Apple likely wouldn't lose such a lawsuit.
Still, as I said (and you seem to agree with), they've still got the court of public opinion to deal with in this situation. And, if Apple had sold the iPad and it was later shipped to Iran, since I don't see how the government would be able to prove that Apple knew that that would happen, it seems like they picked the less profitable course of action.
Joking aside, I'm afraid I don't see how saying smartphones are for people who can pay a smartphone month bill is related to saying that the 3DS a system for children.
While I see where you are coming from, it's a lot easier to prove that someone is of a particular age than it is to prove they might do something. So the way I see it, there are two ways this could have gone down.
First, the way it is going down. Refuse to sell the item, receive negative press and a possible lawsuit from the attempted purchaser.
The other way, would be to sell to the person. Now lets say that the person does export the iPad, the government finds out about it, and tracks it down to the Apple Store and the exact employee that made the sale. The government must now prove that the employee suspected that the iPad would be exported. Unless there is a recording of the employee either admitting that they suspected it, or some other real evidence showing that it is reasonable to assume that the employee suspected/knew the purchaser was going to export the iPad, then the government has got nothing, and the employee and Apple get off scot-free.
It just seems to me like selling the item and dealing with the fall-out should it get exported would be a lot better for Apple than how things are turning out for them.
Not commenting about the right or wrong of the situation, just on what would be better for Apple.
I was not aware that any sort of bounce message would have been sent back to the sender in the event that the domain was unregistered. Thanks for informing me about that.
He bought the domains with the primary aim of receiving mail that wasn't his.
FTFY. The problem with calling it "intercepting" is that it implies that the email would somehow magically make its way to the intended destination if the typoed domain wasn't registered. Now I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that an email sent to bob@gooooogle.com would not ever make it to bob@google.com, even if gooooogle.com was unregistered. Such an email would simply go no where.
So you are saying that the odds of winning the lottery are exactly the same as the odds of starting a fire by target shooting in dry, grassy conditions?
Right, because everyone will always use the exact same browser for every single site they visit. It's not like someone might use IE only to visit one particular site, but Firefox/Chrome/Safari/Opera to visit every other fucking site they go to.
Oh wait, people will do just that. I'm sorry, but the dumbass is you. Unless you are operating under a definition of market share that allows for >100% when totaling IE, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Opera, and every other browser out there. Which.. in all honesty I could see that. I mean, as I'd just said, not like people will use one browser exclusively.
My... language? I must say, I am curious exactly what you mean. I mean, I don't think I've made it a secret that I believe there are no gods, but I can't say that I see any of that in my above post. Did you just pick the above post at random?
I have no issue with them monitoring or recording calls either.
Well at least you are consistent, if a little confusing. I mean, you did just advocate banking over the phone as an alternative to banking on the internet in order to avoid snooping.
if you have something you don't want them to know do it at home.
It must be nice to be able to take a paid day off on a moment's notice on the off chance that you might get a call from your doctor, your lawyer, or your kid's school.
Look they have basically said that if you use our equipment don't expect privacy.
I'm not arguing about what they do or do not do, I'm arguing about whether it is right for them to snoop. And I feel that it isn't.
If you don't want to risk them getting access to your online banking passwords most banks do have banking options over the phone otherwise suck it up buttercup.
So you are fine with them snooping on internet traffic, but not phone traffic? It's not clear if that is what you are saying.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not even close to a impact risk
GP never claimed it was.
and tells us *nothing* about if we can detect potential extinction level events.
I disagree. If a rock such as Eris can go un-noticed for 75 years after a rock such as Pluto is discovered, I think it says we could be looking harder.
We're fucking overdue you twit.
No we are not
There does seem to be a lack of consensus regarding this.. if memory serves correct, some say we're not due for some time, some say we're simply due, and others say we've been overdue by up to 30 million years. Personally, I don't see that it matters. It has happened in the past, will happen in the future, and at present, we are unprepared for it. One could make the argument that "we should fix the problems here first otherwise why does it fucking matter?", but I feel that overlooks the possibility that our becoming prepared for an impact event could become the means for fixing problems on this mudball. NASA's advancements didn't just benefit the space program after all. And no, that doesn't mean focusing all of our resources on asteroid detection and impact event mitigation.
and you have a potty mouth.
And that is pertinent to the discussion because...?
Have you even used Windows 7?
Have you? If you've access to a Windows 7 box, do this.
1) Open a Firefox window, or any application.
2) Open a notepad window, or any other application that wasn't the first.
3) Open another Firefox window, or whatever application you opened in #1.
In XP, my taskbar would show the windows in the order of Firefox, notepad, Firefox. In 7, it shows them in the order of Firefox, Firefox, notepad. That is what I mean about being placed next to each other. I turned off the grouping that would combine the two Firefox windows into a single button, but it still places them next to each other. I used to use the XP method to organize my windows. I'll adapt, but that doesn't mean I'll like it.
About pinning:
1) Pin 3 different programs to the taskbar. We'll use IE, Firefox, and Chrome in this example, in that order.
2) Open a few IE windows.
3) The Firefox and Chrome icons get shifted to the right (or if you have a multi-row taskbar like me, possibly to the next row).
4) Open a few Chrome windows.
5) The Firefox button is now lost in a sea of IE/Chrome windows. Now picture a few more programs pinned to the taskbar, some open, some not. It can turn into "window window window button button window button button button window window".
Not the AC, but the quick launch still exists in Windows 7. It isn't accessible by default, but it's there.
And I disagree about pinning working better. Quicklaunch always displays its icons in the same location. Pinning shifts the bloody icons around. "What's that? You opened a new Firefox window? Well now the Chrome icon has shifted to the right / next row". No thank you. It's bad enough that all Firefox windows, all Chrome windows, all notepad windows, etc, get placed next to each other.
Science is cruel
No it isn't. Science simply is. It is how we humans chose to use it that makes it cruel or not cruel. Note that I am not saying that there is always a non-cruel way of doing something, however...
As someone else pointed out down below, put a rabbit in an air-tight box, fill it full of nitrogen, and it will die peacefully and painlessly. While I was already aware of the painlessness of nitrogen asphyxiation, that post did cause me to wonder why the researchers chose to block the windpipe of the rabbit. Wouldn't putting the rabbit in a pure nitrogen environment be a better test for the longevity of such a treatment?
Though I suppose if what they wished to learn was how long it could keep one alive in the event that the person is unable to breathe at all...
Other way around.
Devil tempts Woman (fruit of the forbidden tree).
Woman tempts Man (lust I guess).
Man exorcises Devil.
One guy is holding his car keys, so he gets arrested for Intent to DUI.
That'll teach those highschoolers to pick a designated driver!
Once you're in the wheelchair, you can easily turn around what you said -- why do THEY need to be 9 feet closer?
Just a thought, but maybe it has to do with the visibility of the person in the wheel chair? From inside a car, a person outside who is sitting down is less visible than a person standing. Placing the parking spaces at the front reduces the risk of someone backing out into them while traveling down the parking lot.
Most places implement handicapped parking by taking regular spots and putting a handicapped parking sign in front of them. It accomplishes nothing.
No argument there.
And that's the part that bugs me to no end. Why does being handicapped in some way entitle you to having your private parking space, preferred seating in a restaurant or other preferences? It goes without saying that there should be a ramp so people with wheelchairs can access public buildings. But where does it come in that I have to wait for an hour to get a free seat while there are some "reserved" seats waiting for you?
Well I suppose whoever is in charge of the parking lot / restaurant could dictate that all parking spaces / tables be able to handle wheelchairs, but since a wheelchair-accessible parking space / table takes up more room, you end up reducing the overall capacity of the parking lot / restaurant. And I'm fairly certain that said person would prefer to maximize occupancy as much as possible.
It says AMONG the states. Not inside a state.
Netflix is headquartered in Maryland?
In all honesty, I don't know what criteria is used to determine whether a corporation's actions fall under the commerce clause. But going by the location of their headquarters vs the location of their customers at least seems to make more sense than Wickard v. Filburn.
Even nerds living in their mother's basement go to conventions that are too far to drive to / be driven to.
I see. You're using mythology in a way I've not heard used before. Don't get me wrong, it makes sense, just not seen someone accept that a person who is a follower of Thor is not a coo-coo head, but is simply practicing a different religion from them (and on the flip-side, there exists parts of Christianity that can be labeled as mythology, if I am understanding you correctly).
Does it really matter if someone fighting against something they perceive as wrong has personally been harmed by what they are fighting against? To reference a discussion I had a while back with a family member who at the time was under the age of 21, and disliked the current drinking age, why is it surprising that I, a 21+ year old, would argue in support of lowering the drinking age?
Even if you don't believe any of it, there's a reason humans came up with mythology and why so much effort has gone into propagating it. Given the amount of effort put into mythology, understanding mythology may well have real insights into the way human intelligence works.
No, I didn't FTFY. Just pointing out that it comes out just the same. Mythology is simply religion that is no longer believed anymore (or is simply not believed by the person calling it mythology). The Norse gods, the Greek and Roman gods... you'd likely say they are parts of different culture's mythologies, but it is just as accurate to say they are parts of different culture's religions.
Anything can happen with any given lawsuit, but you'll never see a pattern of people losing suits over stuff like this.
Where people == Apple in this instance? I suppose you are right. Since there would be no way for Apple to prove that the attempted purchaser intended to turn right around and export the iPad, I figured some sort of discrimination case could be made by the attempted purchaser. But if there isn't anything in the law which forbids such discrimination, then yeah, Apple likely wouldn't lose such a lawsuit.
Still, as I said (and you seem to agree with), they've still got the court of public opinion to deal with in this situation. And, if Apple had sold the iPad and it was later shipped to Iran, since I don't see how the government would be able to prove that Apple knew that that would happen, it seems like they picked the less profitable course of action.
It always fascinates me how people dismiss any game/system they don't like as being for younger audiences.
Smartphones are for people who can pay a smartphone's monthly bill. Kids in grade school can't.
You wouldn't happen to be Ilkka Raiskinen, would you? :P
Joking aside, I'm afraid I don't see how saying smartphones are for people who can pay a smartphone month bill is related to saying that the 3DS a system for children.
While I see where you are coming from, it's a lot easier to prove that someone is of a particular age than it is to prove they might do something. So the way I see it, there are two ways this could have gone down.
First, the way it is going down. Refuse to sell the item, receive negative press and a possible lawsuit from the attempted purchaser.
The other way, would be to sell to the person. Now lets say that the person does export the iPad, the government finds out about it, and tracks it down to the Apple Store and the exact employee that made the sale. The government must now prove that the employee suspected that the iPad would be exported. Unless there is a recording of the employee either admitting that they suspected it, or some other real evidence showing that it is reasonable to assume that the employee suspected/knew the purchaser was going to export the iPad, then the government has got nothing, and the employee and Apple get off scot-free.
It just seems to me like selling the item and dealing with the fall-out should it get exported would be a lot better for Apple than how things are turning out for them.
Not commenting about the right or wrong of the situation, just on what would be better for Apple.
I was not aware that any sort of bounce message would have been sent back to the sender in the event that the domain was unregistered. Thanks for informing me about that.
He bought the domains with the primary aim of receiving mail that wasn't his.
FTFY. The problem with calling it "intercepting" is that it implies that the email would somehow magically make its way to the intended destination if the typoed domain wasn't registered. Now I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that an email sent to bob@gooooogle.com would not ever make it to bob@google.com, even if gooooogle.com was unregistered. Such an email would simply go no where.
So you are saying that the odds of winning the lottery are exactly the same as the odds of starting a fire by target shooting in dry, grassy conditions?
Nothing. But seems like it'd do more to attract men to the field.
Right, because everyone will always use the exact same browser for every single site they visit. It's not like someone might use IE only to visit one particular site, but Firefox/Chrome/Safari/Opera to visit every other fucking site they go to.
Oh wait, people will do just that. I'm sorry, but the dumbass is you. Unless you are operating under a definition of market share that allows for >100% when totaling IE, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Opera, and every other browser out there. Which.. in all honesty I could see that. I mean, as I'd just said, not like people will use one browser exclusively.
My... language? I must say, I am curious exactly what you mean. I mean, I don't think I've made it a secret that I believe there are no gods, but I can't say that I see any of that in my above post. Did you just pick the above post at random?
I have no issue with them monitoring or recording calls either.
Well at least you are consistent, if a little confusing. I mean, you did just advocate banking over the phone as an alternative to banking on the internet in order to avoid snooping.
if you have something you don't want them to know do it at home.
It must be nice to be able to take a paid day off on a moment's notice on the off chance that you might get a call from your doctor, your lawyer, or your kid's school.
Look they have basically said that if you use our equipment don't expect privacy.
I'm not arguing about what they do or do not do, I'm arguing about whether it is right for them to snoop. And I feel that it isn't.
If you don't want to risk them getting access to your online banking passwords most banks do have banking options over the phone otherwise suck it up buttercup.
So you are fine with them snooping on internet traffic, but not phone traffic? It's not clear if that is what you are saying.
Personally, my thoughts were of a hobo fighting a stray cat for a meal of a mouse. >.>