Actually, exactly so. Not that I have even thought about it either, but granting an application access to the microphone should really be some security feature in the OS. By far none of the Windows, Linux, Mac or BSD are doing it
Mouse/keyboard activity timeout works nicely for that. I rather don't have the computer know if I'm walking near it or not. But it seems we're heading in to this "everyone, and every machine, knows where you are" every day. Thank god I'm already old and not born in to this shit.
$10 million, that's assuming she even gets the full amount, is something that Toyota makes ever 30 minutes. It amounts to.005% of their total yearly revenue.
Exactly. It doesn't hurt them in any way - it's just counted in the marketing budget - but the person thinks she has an easy way to get rich.
What is the money amount going to punish? They just calculate it into marketing budget.
You need something else than will actually punish the companies. Otherwise they just calculate the Return On Investment and include that in to them. And individuals will come and try to sue hoping an easy way to get rich (after hearing about the women who drop hot coffee on herself and sued McDonalds because they didnt warn *coffee* was *hot*)
Those nukes we're intentionally made to kill civilians and destroy normal cities - not to attack against military targets.
Your "few thousands" killed is a 'little' bit off too;
The bombs killed as many as 140,000 people in Hiroshima and 80,000 in Nagasaki by the end of 1945,[4] with roughly half of those deaths occurring on the days of the bombings. Amongst these, 15–20% died from injuries or the combined effects of flash burns, trauma, and radiation burns, compounded by illness, malnutrition and radiation sickness.[5] Since then, more have died from leukemia (231 observed) and solid cancers (334 observed) attributed to exposure to radiation released by the bombs.[6] In both cities, most of the dead were civilians.[7][8][9]
A Los Angeles woman is suing Toyota for *$10 MILLION* over a marketing campaign that she claims "punked" her into incorrectly believing she was being stalked.
She even made her longtime boyfriend sleep with a club and mace next to the bed for protection.
Yeah, you need $10 million to cover that. Only in USA.
This also makes me wonder; maybe she had something to hide because she got so scared?
Even if it's true that the Japanese only fought against other countries' militaries and avoided civilian deaths (it's not), it's irrelevant. When you go to war, you go to war completely. Which means you kill every man, woman, and child in your enemy's country.
And people with mindset like that disgust me. But don't get me wrong, killing other people does too. But you're *not* going to shoot armless, defenseless people and even more so woman and children. Even if they belong to a country of your political enemy.
Another completely retarted fight and killing of people is the fight of Jerusalem and Israel stuff. They're killing thousands of people just to fight over some goddamn land.
I bet lots of people don't care because it doesn't really concern them and it's just some random people somewhere. I do think like that too, but I still understand its fucking retarted.
Even if so, it doesn't justify killing hundreds of thousands of civilians by the other party. And even more so because it was an unneeded move, Russians we're already owning Japanese with their land attacks. But Americans had to show off too (as Cold War was already kind of starting), so they launched those nukes.
It's actually quite interesting what Chinese goverment is capable of on technical terms. Most of the goverments are quite clueless when it comes to computer and internet stuff, but Chinese seem to be on the track always.
The responsible Anti-Microsoft Troll that should have replied to this post by now is on sick leave and was unable to prepare a custom flaming reply to this particular post. In lieu of that, attached is our generic template which we use to write all our flaming responses.
1. Make a general anti-Microsoft jab 2. Blame Microsoft for it's stance against Free Software (and also for lack of network neutrality, the current state of patent laws, the Iraq war, and the extinction of the dinosaurs) 3. Accuse the poster who wrote something positive about Microsoft of being either a fanboy or a Microsoft employee. If the poster in question made a comment about Microsoft's actual support of Free Software in a particular instance, accuse the poster of being an oblivious idiot unable to see through their Embrace-Extend-Extinguish approach 4. State that the Linux revolution is inevitable 5. Finish off with another outpour of flames
We hope you will be able to infer the potential content of the post that should have been done by the respective Troll. Please accept our apologies.
While it seems like a rather silly policy, why on earth would people be taking their laptops into the movie theater? Are there that many occasions when people don't go home prior to going to a movie?
If you're not in home town, but need to kill off some hours. If you're traveling. If it's a long, useless trip to home just to drop off the laptop there. If you get off the work and the movie starts soon after that, while your friends are already waiting there. Might be lots of reasons.
Even more so because technical equipment is getting more common and common every day. They probably count in the tiny laptops into this too. Banning laptops from movies makes no sense (atleast if you're not using it)
It's funny they had no problems with mobile phones that certainly have good cameras now a days, but with a laptop. Oh well, maybe that changes soon too.
I'm just waiting them to take off our eyes while in movie theatre.
This non-consistent pricing is not only in PlayStation Store - Steam prices also change heavily based on location. It's even worse with Steam, because the prices used to be same everywhere but they changed it in 2009 (nicely hidden as "local currencies come to steam!")
I haven't personally been able to buy anything from Store because for some reason any of my credit cards don't work with it, even though they work everywhere else. Apparently they finally got the cards to stores here now (it took them what, 2-3 years?), but I haven't bothered to go get any yet.
TFA says it will not include 2,000 households living in (very) rural areas. Considering Finland is mostly forest except for some of the larger cities, this *is* for remote populations. ISP's have been already trying to cut their infrastructure in areas where density of population gets too small and tried to provide mobile internet instead (gprs, not 3G, so it wont get up to 1mbit)
This doesn't even make any sense for other than the remote population, because we can already get 100mbit's in the largest cities, and even 8mbit is the minimum in smaller cities.
That might be soon enough. Seems global warming is doing it's job, as last winter and a few before that there was maybe couple of weeks with snow - long gone are the >-20c winter days.
You must not be from Finland. This will go directly in to our already huge taxes, and will mostly be any good for maybe 1% of the population in center of nowhere.
that our ~75% tax rate is funding the worthwhile entitlement of blazing 1Mb/s connection!!
Exactly. This isn't really such an amazing news that people seem to think of it - it just means that the rest of population will need to pay the extra costs in taxes that goes into building the infrastructure for the 1-2% of people that have some stupid need to live in center of nowhere.
That and the fact that nordic countries pay shitload amounts of taxes so that the services in general are free or atleast cheap to people. Healthcare is pretty much fully paid with taxes, along with countless of other things. This is not always a good thing, because Finns need to pay a lot for shit they dont need. This also means paying the living of people who are too lazy to go to work (they get like 400-700e per month from goverment).
I guess this is another such "legal right" that is there to make sure even the ones living in centre of nowhere get the internet and everyone else pays for the infrastructure and so on. Pretty much a nanny state.
This news has been written quite loosely around the news sites - original article (in finnish) states that ISP's must be capable of offering reasonably priced, atleast 1Mb broadband to every house. During this year Finnish Communications Regulatory Authority will state who those ISP's are that must be able to provide the services (probably the largest ones). So it's not free, like many seem to think - just reasonably priced (probably around 20-50e/month)
This part yet is not really that interesting since it's already pretty much common place.
However the law also states that the speed of the line must be atleast 75% of the said one during 24 hour measurement period. And what's more interesting is that by 2015 it will be 100mbit. Even though this is already available in the largest cities, it will mean major infrastructure development from the ISP's in other areas.
Oh and btw, no ISP in Finland has transfer limits or such crap. Not even mobile operators, who offer unlimited 5Mbit 3G for something like 30e/month.
Hopefully this also means that those three-strike laws wont be possible, since getting broadband access should be a legal right.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, exactly so. Not that I have even thought about it either, but granting an application access to the microphone should really be some security feature in the OS. By far none of the Windows, Linux, Mac or BSD are doing it
Mouse/keyboard activity timeout works nicely for that. I rather don't have the computer know if I'm walking near it or not. But it seems we're heading in to this "everyone, and every machine, knows where you are" every day. Thank god I'm already old and not born in to this shit.
But you're a moron if you think the death of a man is of any less significance than the death of a woman or a child.
Not the death, but generally men have better capabilities to defense themself.
Of course we are on slashdot so thats besides the point, but still.
$10 million, that's assuming she even gets the full amount, is something that Toyota makes ever 30 minutes. It amounts to .005% of their total yearly revenue.
Exactly. It doesn't hurt them in any way - it's just counted in the marketing budget - but the person thinks she has an easy way to get rich.
What is the money amount going to punish? They just calculate it into marketing budget.
You need something else than will actually punish the companies. Otherwise they just calculate the Return On Investment and include that in to them. And individuals will come and try to sue hoping an easy way to get rich (after hearing about the women who drop hot coffee on herself and sued McDonalds because they didnt warn *coffee* was *hot*)
Those nukes we're intentionally made to kill civilians and destroy normal cities - not to attack against military targets.
Your "few thousands" killed is a 'little' bit off too;
The bombs killed as many as 140,000 people in Hiroshima and 80,000 in Nagasaki by the end of 1945,[4] with roughly half of those deaths occurring on the days of the bombings. Amongst these, 15–20% died from injuries or the combined effects of flash burns, trauma, and radiation burns, compounded by illness, malnutrition and radiation sickness.[5] Since then, more have died from leukemia (231 observed) and solid cancers (334 observed) attributed to exposure to radiation released by the bombs.[6] In both cities, most of the dead were civilians.[7][8][9]
That is a separate war. USA never went to fight with Japan because they fighted (arguably with abusive methods) with other asian countries.
They went to fight because Japan did Pearl Harbour.
Modded as troll? Please, it's all true.
A Los Angeles woman is suing Toyota for *$10 MILLION* over a marketing campaign that she claims "punked" her into incorrectly believing she was being stalked.
She even made her longtime boyfriend sleep with a club and mace next to the bed for protection.
Yeah, you need $10 million to cover that. Only in USA.
This also makes me wonder; maybe she had something to hide because she got so scared?
Even if it's true that the Japanese only fought against other countries' militaries and avoided civilian deaths (it's not), it's irrelevant. When you go to war, you go to war completely. Which means you kill every man, woman, and child in your enemy's country.
And people with mindset like that disgust me. But don't get me wrong, killing other people does too. But you're *not* going to shoot armless, defenseless people and even more so woman and children. Even if they belong to a country of your political enemy.
Another completely retarted fight and killing of people is the fight of Jerusalem and Israel stuff. They're killing thousands of people just to fight over some goddamn land.
I bet lots of people don't care because it doesn't really concern them and it's just some random people somewhere. I do think like that too, but I still understand its fucking retarted.
Even if so, it doesn't justify killing hundreds of thousands of civilians by the other party. And even more so because it was an unneeded move, Russians we're already owning Japanese with their land attacks. But Americans had to show off too (as Cold War was already kind of starting), so they launched those nukes.
Japanese fighted with military against military. Only cowards kills civilians (and on hiroshima case, hundreds of thousands of civilians)
It's actually quite interesting what Chinese goverment is capable of on technical terms. Most of the goverments are quite clueless when it comes to computer and internet stuff, but Chinese seem to be on the track always.
Dear Sir or Madam,
The responsible Anti-Microsoft Troll that should have replied to this post by now is on sick leave and was unable to prepare a custom flaming reply to this particular post. In lieu of that, attached is our generic template which we use to write all our flaming responses.
1. Make a general anti-Microsoft jab
2. Blame Microsoft for it's stance against Free Software (and also for lack of network neutrality, the current state of patent laws, the Iraq war, and the extinction of the dinosaurs)
3. Accuse the poster who wrote something positive about Microsoft of being either a fanboy or a Microsoft employee. If the poster in question made a comment about Microsoft's actual support of Free Software in a particular instance, accuse the poster of being an oblivious idiot unable to see through their Embrace-Extend-Extinguish approach
4. State that the Linux revolution is inevitable
5. Finish off with another outpour of flames
We hope you will be able to infer the potential content of the post that should have been done by the respective Troll. Please accept our apologies.
Sincerely,
Assistant Secretary,
Anti-Microsoft Trolling Association, Ltd.
Whoooosh.
While it seems like a rather silly policy, why on earth would people be taking their laptops into the movie theater? Are there that many occasions when people don't go home prior to going to a movie?
If you're not in home town, but need to kill off some hours. If you're traveling. If it's a long, useless trip to home just to drop off the laptop there. If you get off the work and the movie starts soon after that, while your friends are already waiting there. Might be lots of reasons.
Even more so because technical equipment is getting more common and common every day. They probably count in the tiny laptops into this too. Banning laptops from movies makes no sense (atleast if you're not using it)
It's funny they had no problems with mobile phones that certainly have good cameras now a days, but with a laptop. Oh well, maybe that changes soon too.
I'm just waiting them to take off our eyes while in movie theatre.
This non-consistent pricing is not only in PlayStation Store - Steam prices also change heavily based on location. It's even worse with Steam, because the prices used to be same everywhere but they changed it in 2009 (nicely hidden as "local currencies come to steam!")
I haven't personally been able to buy anything from Store because for some reason any of my credit cards don't work with it, even though they work everywhere else. Apparently they finally got the cards to stores here now (it took them what, 2-3 years?), but I haven't bothered to go get any yet.
TFA says it will not include 2,000 households living in (very) rural areas. Considering Finland is mostly forest except for some of the larger cities, this *is* for remote populations. ISP's have been already trying to cut their infrastructure in areas where density of population gets too small and tried to provide mobile internet instead (gprs, not 3G, so it wont get up to 1mbit)
This doesn't even make any sense for other than the remote population, because we can already get 100mbit's in the largest cities, and even 8mbit is the minimum in smaller cities.
Of course. But neither one of them are free.
That might be soon enough. Seems global warming is doing it's job, as last winter and a few before that there was maybe couple of weeks with snow - long gone are the >-20c winter days.
You must not be from Finland. This will go directly in to our already huge taxes, and will mostly be any good for maybe 1% of the population in center of nowhere.
that our ~75% tax rate is funding the worthwhile entitlement of blazing 1Mb/s connection!!
Exactly. This isn't really such an amazing news that people seem to think of it - it just means that the rest of population will need to pay the extra costs in taxes that goes into building the infrastructure for the 1-2% of people that have some stupid need to live in center of nowhere.
That and the fact that nordic countries pay shitload amounts of taxes so that the services in general are free or atleast cheap to people. Healthcare is pretty much fully paid with taxes, along with countless of other things. This is not always a good thing, because Finns need to pay a lot for shit they dont need. This also means paying the living of people who are too lazy to go to work (they get like 400-700e per month from goverment).
I guess this is another such "legal right" that is there to make sure even the ones living in centre of nowhere get the internet and everyone else pays for the infrastructure and so on. Pretty much a nanny state.
Seems slashdot didn't like nordic characters - proper link
This news has been written quite loosely around the news sites - original article (in finnish) states that ISP's must be capable of offering reasonably priced, atleast 1Mb broadband to every house. During this year Finnish Communications Regulatory Authority will state who those ISP's are that must be able to provide the services (probably the largest ones). So it's not free, like many seem to think - just reasonably priced (probably around 20-50e/month)
This part yet is not really that interesting since it's already pretty much common place.
However the law also states that the speed of the line must be atleast 75% of the said one during 24 hour measurement period. And what's more interesting is that by 2015 it will be 100mbit. Even though this is already available in the largest cities, it will mean major infrastructure development from the ISP's in other areas.
Oh and btw, no ISP in Finland has transfer limits or such crap. Not even mobile operators, who offer unlimited 5Mbit 3G for something like 30e/month.
Hopefully this also means that those three-strike laws wont be possible, since getting broadband access should be a legal right.