I'd imagine the phone was refurbished and either sold again as such (hardly an uncommon practice) or passed off as new (again hardly uncommon, but definitely naughty). Neither of these things preclude it being returned to Apple and the refurbishment performed by them.
Also, Shakespeare had trouble spelling his own name and so while arguably a literary genius should perhaps not be held up as an example of a linguistic one.
With Android, you keep dreaming of a future version that solves everything.
For me personally, that was true when I first got my HTC Desire, but only because HTC's mail app ate storage space and didn't give it back. The upgrade to 2.2 fixed that, and since then I'm perfectly happy with my phone. You may keep dreaming of a future version, but I don't. (And don't forget iPhones have been around longer than Android-based phones; just as you are stuck at 2.1, good luck upgrading an original iPhone to iOS 4)
Not true; Satan cannot control people as we all have free will. He tempts; you choose to do as he suggests. The Church cannot (and does not) use that excuse as it directly contradicts its own teachings.
(Disclaimer: I'm not a Christian, but that's what I understand from what little I do know about it)
Stop pretending just because you wrote a few lines of code you are entitled to have you hand in my pocket. This is what I mean when I deride a developers childish sense of entitlement.
Likewise, the fact that a copy can be obtained for nothing does not entitle you to it either. There appears to be a sense of entitlement on both sides, no?
Using services that cost the victim money is questionably legal, but what the victim did in the first place is also, quite questionable, seems almost fitting.
"But he did it first!" doesn't wash in the playground, it certainly shouldn't wash out here in the grown-up world.
Well for me, lately Firefox has been getting better, but in the past I've seen it using well over a gig of RAM. Perhaps it is some combination of my extensions and plugins, but that doesn't make it any less annoying when it happens.
This is a tool for repressing dissent, not for maintaining legitimate law and order.
No, it's just a tool; how it's used is down to the person using it. In this case your complaint is with the police officer(s) involved, not with the weapon.
Thank you. I generally end up writing something along these lines every time IE vs Netscape stories are published; I stuck with Netscape because I hated IE, not because it was better (or even any good). IE4 was on a par, and IE5 blew it away.
I'm glad I'm not the only one that remembers those days.
Sure, it is a few more bucks up front, but after a couple years the consumer grade laptops are junk, but the commercial ones are still kicking.
For my girlfriend's 30th I bought her an HP Pavillion laptop. It cost somewhere in the region of £900 GBP, but it was definitely a consumer-class "entertainment" notebook.
It's now almost 6 years later and it's still ticking along just fine. There's some minor case damage from when it fell out of the boot of her car, the mic hasn't worked in years, and it's recently started to think that the battery is almost empty when in fact it's been on AC for days, but I'm pretty happy with how long its lasted. (That causes it to hibernate immediately if I disconnect the AC supply, but a reboot fixes it and I very rarely do so anyway)
I am planning on buying a replacement, eventually, but as it stands I really can't justify the expense while it's still essentially fine.
If you pay me to do something and give me the means to do it, it's still my fault if I choose to act. (Though you may well be guilty of aiding and abetting or similar)
And no, that's not "supressing your desires" like most anti-Catholic people make it sound like. Self-control is never a bad thing, last I checked.
Suppressing your desire is exactly what self-control is. If you don't desire something then there is no self-control involved in the first place.
the Catholic Church's opinion on sexuality is a lot more reasonable than many people make it sound like
I don't doubt that, but in denying people the opportunity to enjoy sex except for the express purpose of procreation it is still not as reasonable as I personally believe it should be.
There are "bigots" out there like WBC, but please don't label the Catholic Church (whether or not you were) as one of them.
The Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary defines bigot as follows:
a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who thinks that anyone who does not have the same beliefs is wrong
I'm sorry, but in my opinion from what you have just said, the Catholic Church meets this definition of bigot, on this issue. The only question is whether the stance on homosexuality is "unreasonable"; again, appealing to the CALD definition:
Unreasonable: not fair or acceptable
Personally I find the Catholic Church's stance on sexuality in general to be neither fair nor acceptable; thus, I find it bigoted as per the definition above.
Actually I see it more as being indicative of a perceived need to fend off likely replies that miss the actual point of his post and concentrate solely on the "Oh, so you think being gay is a disease, do you!?" misinterpretation.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd imagine the phone was refurbished and either sold again as such (hardly an uncommon practice) or passed off as new (again hardly uncommon, but definitely naughty). Neither of these things preclude it being returned to Apple and the refurbishment performed by them.
Ok, thanks and bye are all British English.
Also, Shakespeare had trouble spelling his own name and so while arguably a literary genius should perhaps not be held up as an example of a linguistic one.
Hope that helps.
If the court says anything it is likely to be along the lines of not being held to ransom by corporate pressure.
If you want a law changed, you have to convince the lawmakers - i.e. the politicians.
And where exactly do I insert the CD in my phone? Or in my battered old laptop, the CD drive on which died years ago?
With Android, you keep dreaming of a future version that solves everything.
For me personally, that was true when I first got my HTC Desire, but only because HTC's mail app ate storage space and didn't give it back. The upgrade to 2.2 fixed that, and since then I'm perfectly happy with my phone. You may keep dreaming of a future version, but I don't. (And don't forget iPhones have been around longer than Android-based phones; just as you are stuck at 2.1, good luck upgrading an original iPhone to iOS 4)
Libel; slander is spoken.
Also, it's fewer countries, not less.
Was the apostrophe misuse an intentional, subtle demonstration of your point, or a genuine mistake?
essentially the same design
I know I'm picking nits, but those bones were not designed.
By the way, how is this news for nerds?
Because it's a) on the Internet and b) painting an organised religion in a bad light (or can be spun that way), that's why.
In fact, it does not approve of sexual abuse whatsoever and theyr'e trying to get rid of it.
Perhaps we're simply not aware of their efforts, but from the outside it really doesn't look like they're trying very hard.
Not true; Satan cannot control people as we all have free will. He tempts; you choose to do as he suggests. The Church cannot (and does not) use that excuse as it directly contradicts its own teachings.
(Disclaimer: I'm not a Christian, but that's what I understand from what little I do know about it)
I've had Sophos at work flag entirely innocent programs as possible trojans.
Stop pretending just because you wrote a few lines of code you are entitled to have you hand in my pocket. This is what I mean when I deride a developers childish sense of entitlement.
Likewise, the fact that a copy can be obtained for nothing does not entitle you to it either. There appears to be a sense of entitlement on both sides, no?
Using services that cost the victim money is questionably legal, but what the victim did in the first place is also, quite questionable, seems almost fitting.
"But he did it first!" doesn't wash in the playground, it certainly shouldn't wash out here in the grown-up world.
Well for me, lately Firefox has been getting better, but in the past I've seen it using well over a gig of RAM. Perhaps it is some combination of my extensions and plugins, but that doesn't make it any less annoying when it happens.
This is a tool for repressing dissent, not for maintaining legitimate law and order.
No, it's just a tool; how it's used is down to the person using it. In this case your complaint is with the police officer(s) involved, not with the weapon.
Yes, exactly - once they've stopped charging for the engine they release it for free.
They make damn sure they make their money first.
With a username like that, you're surprised?
Thank you. I generally end up writing something along these lines every time IE vs Netscape stories are published; I stuck with Netscape because I hated IE, not because it was better (or even any good). IE4 was on a par, and IE5 blew it away.
I'm glad I'm not the only one that remembers those days.
Nit-picking, but you mean impartial, not partial.
Sure, it is a few more bucks up front, but after a couple years the consumer grade laptops are junk, but the commercial ones are still kicking.
For my girlfriend's 30th I bought her an HP Pavillion laptop. It cost somewhere in the region of £900 GBP, but it was definitely a consumer-class "entertainment" notebook.
It's now almost 6 years later and it's still ticking along just fine. There's some minor case damage from when it fell out of the boot of her car, the mic hasn't worked in years, and it's recently started to think that the battery is almost empty when in fact it's been on AC for days, but I'm pretty happy with how long its lasted. (That causes it to hibernate immediately if I disconnect the AC supply, but a reboot fixes it and I very rarely do so anyway)
I am planning on buying a replacement, eventually, but as it stands I really can't justify the expense while it's still essentially fine.
If you pay me to do something and give me the means to do it, it's still my fault if I choose to act. (Though you may well be guilty of aiding and abetting or similar)
Here you go. No need to thank me.
Actually I believe that Windows should only be putting user data in the \users\$username directory tree.
Non-conforming third-party apps on the other hand are a different matter.
And no, that's not "supressing your desires" like most anti-Catholic people make it sound like. Self-control is never a bad thing, last I checked.
Suppressing your desire is exactly what self-control is. If you don't desire something then there is no self-control involved in the first place.
the Catholic Church's opinion on sexuality is a lot more reasonable than many people make it sound like
I don't doubt that, but in denying people the opportunity to enjoy sex except for the express purpose of procreation it is still not as reasonable as I personally believe it should be.
There are "bigots" out there like WBC, but please don't label the Catholic Church (whether or not you were) as one of them.
The Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary defines bigot as follows:
a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who thinks that anyone who does not have the same beliefs is wrong
I'm sorry, but in my opinion from what you have just said, the Catholic Church meets this definition of bigot, on this issue. The only question is whether the stance on homosexuality is "unreasonable"; again, appealing to the CALD definition:
Unreasonable: not fair or acceptable
Personally I find the Catholic Church's stance on sexuality in general to be neither fair nor acceptable; thus, I find it bigoted as per the definition above.
Actually I see it more as being indicative of a perceived need to fend off likely replies that miss the actual point of his post and concentrate solely on the "Oh, so you think being gay is a disease, do you!?" misinterpretation.