I just got a Samsung Galaxy this month, because my old WinMo 6.0 phone was crap and needed to be put down. It runs Android 1.5. There's no plans to upgrade it to 2.0. I knew this when I got it, and if I could have, I'd have waited until I could have gotten a 2.0 phone. But the platform fragments even within forks just because manufacturers don't bother to update the system. I figure in a year or so, I won't be able to find any new apps that work with my phone because they'll all be written for the newest version. Say what you will about Windows Mobile (it sucks), but at least you can rest assured that you'll be on a level playing field with other phones, app-wise. Hell, I probably could have upgraded my old phone to 6.5, if it wasn't busted. Platform solidarity and longevity are important if you want it to be a success.
The issue is, as always, EDUCATE THEM. Seriously. It's not good enough to just edumacate the young ones, so you can improve shit when they're older and the previous generation is dead. What you do is you beat it in to the damn skulls of anyone too thick to get it, or you have them sign a waiver saying they can only access their money in-branch since they cannot comply with the more stringent security measures.
Yep, and the "Olympic Movement" is given special rights under US Laws
Except he's citing a Canadian law. If he's based in Canada, then he's probably got a home-run case.
If he's *not* in Canada, dude's fucked. Just because the games are taking place here doesn't mean he'd be covered under Canadian copyright laws. Unfortunately, tfa didn't say, that I saw, and I can't be assed to look it up.
If you look past any prejudice, it's actually damned insightful. Remember the media blockage that was overcome by fucking TWITTER of all things? Being able to find the discrepancy between what you're told by your government and what your government is telling other countries is major.
Of course, the trick will be keeping the site from being blacklisted so hard that its servers implode.
In order to "spread the Word of Jesus," and "Save the souls of Heathens" they're forcing their views on people who have no interest in their religion. Look up text book debates in texas, for one thing, or the constant lobbying by Churches in politics. Just as politics is supposed to refrain from establishing an official religion of the country, so should religion refrain from excessive meddling in the politics of the country. But they're not doing that.
That you need examples rather than actually knowing this stuff shows that you're either a troll, a moron, or Christian. Probably all three.
Reminds me of an old PSA. Stupid little jingle that still gets in my head, but is probably a much better message than simply "Don't do drugs."
Thing went "Drugs drugs drugs, some are good, some are bad, drugs drugs drugs, ask your mom or ask your dad."
Also had a line "Watch it now man, it's trouble with the law." No overly scare-tactics of "you're gonna DIE!" Just explaining that there's some stuff out there that's dangerous, get more information, and be more careful, some can get you arrested. It was just a 30 second PSA aimed at kids, so they couldn't get hyper-specific or anything, but I think it was a good idea of how the issue *should* be approached.
Illicit and illegal are different. The Dayquil/Nyquil usage you mentioned would be illicit. "Contrary to normal morality." Giant horse pills of ecstasy would be the illegal bit.
It baffles me that anybody thinks it worth the time to write a blog like this. OK, you don't like xkcd? Don't visit it. There is a whole web out there, people.
Except for those of use who don't like it, we keep getting shit like slashdot today. The fawning fanboys shove it down our throats. The worst of it is every time something's mentioned in a strip, there's immediately some dumbass trying to put an "in popular culture" reference on its wikipedia page saying "OMG XKCD MENTIONED THIS!" So, no, it's not as simple as "not visiting it." Unless you're prepared for a blanket moratorium on people mentioning XKCD on the rest of the Internet. Somehow, I doubt that, so in the meantime, I'll continue to visit that blog.
Except not. There's laws to prevent law enforcement officers from doing that. There's no such restriction on private individuals. If the school saw him making a drug deal through the camera, they could freely take the evidence to the police, and the police could use it.
Even better point, GP was misrepresenting "overall." In this case, I'd assume it to be an average level of care, and even in the US, there's more poor people than rich people, meaning the statistically outlying treatment they receive wouldn't be pervasive enough to have a significant impact on the "overall."
I wouldn't exactly call Wikipedia a "success." Just because something is popular doesn't mean the world is better off for it to have been made. I submit as proof of concept: 4chan.
Wikipedia is a great source for winning internet debates. And that's about it. But people treat it like it's actually a credible source, under the delusion that any incorrect information will be crowd-source corrected.
I got news for you, the majority of people are *idiots.* Common knowledge is usually WRONG. I think the world would have been better off if wikipedia had failed too, rather than so many dumbasses taking it as gospel fact. The only saving grace it possess is it's an aggregator of source material - usually. Those "external references" can be useful sometimes. But by the same token, you still need to analyse THOSE sources yourself, too. It's not like Wikipedia cares if the source used in the article is only a half-step better than the National Enquirer. They just want A source.
Yep. Personally, I'm a big fan of the fact that we can format-shift, and make copies of friends' music, and stuff like that. I recognize the necessity to respect copyright, but the US has gone completely overboard, and few industries have any idea of the proper way to deal with it.
(In case any industry movers/shakers are reading this, the proper way isn't DRM, it's increasing ease and accessibility of your work.)
You see, these "Games" are for kids. After all, only kids play games. So, anyone who corrupts that experience is obviously a predator, aiming at taking away the innocence of these children, and they're doing nothing more than virtually molesting the poor children by cheating at these games.
Obviously we mustn't stop cheaters, but save the children just by banning games completely! Otherwise your children will be molested by cheaters!
I agree, glitches and cheats aren't equivalent, and some are really bad for competitiveness.
On the other hand, it's hilarious when properly exploited (yes, it's story time).
Back when I was a wee youngling, at Christmas time, we went to my Grandmother's, and I brought my N64. My cousin's boyfriend (who was probably 10 years older than me) saw me playing Mario Kart, and bragged that he was the best player at his local gaming hangout. So, of course we played, and he magnanimously allowed me choice of track. Since I was aiming to put the loud-mouthed condescending twit in his place, I picked Wario Stadium.
There's a bug where you can jump over the wall right near the start, and cut half the track.
He did not take being served by a 14-year-old well.
Who gives a crap about other people's opinions? Reviewers are notorious for trashing anything that's popular, or being bought off, and I wouldn't trust most of the mouth-breathers on the internet to tell me honestly if they were human. As for asking my friends, we have wildly divergent taste in music, so that's not an option either.
That's actually not true. The premise is referred to as "The Castle Doctrine," and it's a lot more stringent than people think. It requires more than just "in fear for my life" and not shooting someone in the back. And in that's just in places that actually have Castle Doctrine laws. States that don't, you're even more fucked if you try and shoot someone on your property.
That was rather GP's point. Rather than making unqualified individuals requirements due to quota, you try and work on finding out why certain segments are unqualified and work from the bottom up, eg. from the start of schooling.
I'm pretty sure he meant that we should focus on mass transit instead of individual transit.
And that affects his response how? Again, be the first person to give up your car. Transit only improves in an area if people use it. You can't just whine at your mayor and say "Transit sucks, make it better." He'll just point back and say "We don't have enough people riding it to make investing in it a good idea."
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, no. Because my Galaxy is stuck at 1.5, so no, you cannot just easily upgrade.
I just got a Samsung Galaxy this month, because my old WinMo 6.0 phone was crap and needed to be put down. It runs Android 1.5. There's no plans to upgrade it to 2.0. I knew this when I got it, and if I could have, I'd have waited until I could have gotten a 2.0 phone. But the platform fragments even within forks just because manufacturers don't bother to update the system. I figure in a year or so, I won't be able to find any new apps that work with my phone because they'll all be written for the newest version. Say what you will about Windows Mobile (it sucks), but at least you can rest assured that you'll be on a level playing field with other phones, app-wise. Hell, I probably could have upgraded my old phone to 6.5, if it wasn't busted. Platform solidarity and longevity are important if you want it to be a success.
The issue is, as always, EDUCATE THEM. Seriously. It's not good enough to just edumacate the young ones, so you can improve shit when they're older and the previous generation is dead. What you do is you beat it in to the damn skulls of anyone too thick to get it, or you have them sign a waiver saying they can only access their money in-branch since they cannot comply with the more stringent security measures.
Fair Dealing, not Fair Use. Different concepts, different results. You'd not believe the people who push for fair use to be adopted in Canada.
You know who? Lobby groups funded by the US copyright holders. That tells me about everything I need to know about adopting Fair Use in Canada.
Yep, and the "Olympic Movement" is given special rights under US Laws
Except he's citing a Canadian law. If he's based in Canada, then he's probably got a home-run case.
If he's *not* in Canada, dude's fucked. Just because the games are taking place here doesn't mean he'd be covered under Canadian copyright laws. Unfortunately, tfa didn't say, that I saw, and I can't be assed to look it up.
If you look past any prejudice, it's actually damned insightful. Remember the media blockage that was overcome by fucking TWITTER of all things? Being able to find the discrepancy between what you're told by your government and what your government is telling other countries is major.
Of course, the trick will be keeping the site from being blacklisted so hard that its servers implode.
In order to "spread the Word of Jesus," and "Save the souls of Heathens" they're forcing their views on people who have no interest in their religion. Look up text book debates in texas, for one thing, or the constant lobbying by Churches in politics. Just as politics is supposed to refrain from establishing an official religion of the country, so should religion refrain from excessive meddling in the politics of the country. But they're not doing that.
That you need examples rather than actually knowing this stuff shows that you're either a troll, a moron, or Christian. Probably all three.
Reminds me of an old PSA. Stupid little jingle that still gets in my head, but is probably a much better message than simply "Don't do drugs."
Thing went "Drugs drugs drugs, some are good, some are bad, drugs drugs drugs, ask your mom or ask your dad."
Also had a line "Watch it now man, it's trouble with the law." No overly scare-tactics of "you're gonna DIE!" Just explaining that there's some stuff out there that's dangerous, get more information, and be more careful, some can get you arrested. It was just a 30 second PSA aimed at kids, so they couldn't get hyper-specific or anything, but I think it was a good idea of how the issue *should* be approached.
Illicit and illegal are different. The Dayquil/Nyquil usage you mentioned would be illicit. "Contrary to normal morality." Giant horse pills of ecstasy would be the illegal bit.
It baffles me that anybody thinks it worth the time to write a blog like this. OK, you don't like xkcd? Don't visit it. There is a whole web out there, people.
Except for those of use who don't like it, we keep getting shit like slashdot today. The fawning fanboys shove it down our throats. The worst of it is every time something's mentioned in a strip, there's immediately some dumbass trying to put an "in popular culture" reference on its wikipedia page saying "OMG XKCD MENTIONED THIS!" So, no, it's not as simple as "not visiting it." Unless you're prepared for a blanket moratorium on people mentioning XKCD on the rest of the Internet. Somehow, I doubt that, so in the meantime, I'll continue to visit that blog.
Except not. There's laws to prevent law enforcement officers from doing that. There's no such restriction on private individuals. If the school saw him making a drug deal through the camera, they could freely take the evidence to the police, and the police could use it.
You're right.
They'll just jack up the cost of the plan to the employer, who passes it on to the employees, unless you're fired and then you lose coverage.
Even better point, GP was misrepresenting "overall." In this case, I'd assume it to be an average level of care, and even in the US, there's more poor people than rich people, meaning the statistically outlying treatment they receive wouldn't be pervasive enough to have a significant impact on the "overall."
I wouldn't exactly call Wikipedia a "success." Just because something is popular doesn't mean the world is better off for it to have been made. I submit as proof of concept: 4chan.
Wikipedia is a great source for winning internet debates. And that's about it. But people treat it like it's actually a credible source, under the delusion that any incorrect information will be crowd-source corrected.
I got news for you, the majority of people are *idiots.* Common knowledge is usually WRONG. I think the world would have been better off if wikipedia had failed too, rather than so many dumbasses taking it as gospel fact. The only saving grace it possess is it's an aggregator of source material - usually. Those "external references" can be useful sometimes. But by the same token, you still need to analyse THOSE sources yourself, too. It's not like Wikipedia cares if the source used in the article is only a half-step better than the National Enquirer. They just want A source.
Yep. Personally, I'm a big fan of the fact that we can format-shift, and make copies of friends' music, and stuff like that. I recognize the necessity to respect copyright, but the US has gone completely overboard, and few industries have any idea of the proper way to deal with it.
(In case any industry movers/shakers are reading this, the proper way isn't DRM, it's increasing ease and accessibility of your work.)
Canada likes America. We just think you're mostly all insane. But after putting up with Quebec for so long, that's not a big deal.
Except that Valve's servers are free. And there's still other options (such as non-VAC servers), so there's less than no case.
No no, it makes perfect sense.
You see, these "Games" are for kids. After all, only kids play games. So, anyone who corrupts that experience is obviously a predator, aiming at taking away the innocence of these children, and they're doing nothing more than virtually molesting the poor children by cheating at these games.
Obviously we mustn't stop cheaters, but save the children just by banning games completely! Otherwise your children will be molested by cheaters!
I agree, glitches and cheats aren't equivalent, and some are really bad for competitiveness.
On the other hand, it's hilarious when properly exploited (yes, it's story time).
Back when I was a wee youngling, at Christmas time, we went to my Grandmother's, and I brought my N64. My cousin's boyfriend (who was probably 10 years older than me) saw me playing Mario Kart, and bragged that he was the best player at his local gaming hangout. So, of course we played, and he magnanimously allowed me choice of track. Since I was aiming to put the loud-mouthed condescending twit in his place, I picked Wario Stadium.
There's a bug where you can jump over the wall right near the start, and cut half the track.
He did not take being served by a 14-year-old well.
Late in the life? Cheating happened almost instantly on D1. It took me over a year to find out that the Grandfather wasn't actually 1-handed.
Who gives a crap about other people's opinions? Reviewers are notorious for trashing anything that's popular, or being bought off, and I wouldn't trust most of the mouth-breathers on the internet to tell me honestly if they were human. As for asking my friends, we have wildly divergent taste in music, so that's not an option either.
So in the US anyhow his statement works.
That's actually not true. The premise is referred to as "The Castle Doctrine," and it's a lot more stringent than people think. It requires more than just "in fear for my life" and not shooting someone in the back. And in that's just in places that actually have Castle Doctrine laws. States that don't, you're even more fucked if you try and shoot someone on your property.
[ Please people, don't reply with good advice, I'm not asking for it. ]
How about bad advice? I suggest filling it with peanut butter and threatening allergic people with it.
That was rather GP's point. Rather than making unqualified individuals requirements due to quota, you try and work on finding out why certain segments are unqualified and work from the bottom up, eg. from the start of schooling.
Baka!
Fail.
I'm pretty sure he meant that we should focus on mass transit instead of individual transit.
And that affects his response how? Again, be the first person to give up your car. Transit only improves in an area if people use it. You can't just whine at your mayor and say "Transit sucks, make it better." He'll just point back and say "We don't have enough people riding it to make investing in it a good idea."