So, go call anyone else a lazy parent. I am a seasoned, experienced parent of two well-mannered kids. I participate in every aspect of their upbringing, with love and discipline. And I still know they can be uncontrollable on ocasion.
If I sit screaming for hours on end I'll be kicked off(bus) or banned(plane), your child is not held to the same standards as me, hence I can expect the parents to make some sort of reasonable fucking effort to quiet/comfort their younger children and tell the older ones to toughen up and shut the fuck up.
The thing you chose to ignore is: the reasonable effort is sometimes not enough; hell, sometimes, even the extraordinaire effort to comfort/shut them up is not enough.
The planes are there, I have the money for the fare, I have the right to fly. I may have a good reason to fly with my kids (someone mentioned relocating intercontinentally, but going to a nice Disney vacation is a reason good enough) and I may not have someone I trust my baby with. I have the right to fly and I have the right to put myself (and my baby) to the discomfort of a 13-20 hour flight anytime my heart desires.
You fell for the "Using the services of the airlines is a privilege" line. This is really sad. You have the _right_ to come and go. Using the services of the airlines is a right, provided you can pay for them.
Notice that I didn't say "all" kids are noisy. I said that they are randomly noisy. As I put in another post, babies can be quiet or noisy -- without any parental intervention -- during and 8-hour flight. Toddlers and infants can be quiet or noisy. Even a well-educated 8yo can have inner ear pain and cry loudly and uncontrollably during a long flight.
... that you have more right to be on a plane than my 2yo daughter? News for you: you DON'T Why do you think it's a good idea to travel 3000 miles with your 2yo in a car or train? News for you: it isn't. Planes are a reasonably quick and safe way to get from A to B. Me and my kids have every right to go from A to B in a reasonably quick and safe way, provided we have paid the fare. End of story. Kids cry. Infants and toddlers cry. Even extremely well-mannered 8yo kids cry if they have some ear pain while inside a plane. And they all have the same travelling rights as you. Your options are: earplugs and earphones. Deal with it.
Actually, people that talk about their STDs in the phone are prone to talk about that in loud voice when having a public conversation, also [citation needed]. Cell phone ban will do no good.
Let me draw this picture for you: kids are randomly noisy. There is absolutely nothing parents can do about kids' noise when they are up to it. Even a duck-tape-on-the-mouth kid makes a lot of noise.:-)
If you have some smart answer in the form of "if you do X, the kid will stay put", let me give you the news: it will not work. Kids only stay quiet... if they "want" to.
Have you tought that the Hill does not want you to "listen to it"? They want you to shut up and let they pass anything their heart desires and then you have to obey it.
Besides, when some ActiveX control made IE freeze no one had any problems blaming it on Microsoft and demanding they fix it. Ditto for just about any application error or driver boo on Windows.
Yeah, they only had problems when Microsoft sat quietly and did nothing about it... until three or four years after, when you can trade your old bugs for new bugs in the process of trading your computer for another, ten times faster, that feels three times slower under the new OS.:-)
I will have to concur with GaryPatterson here: equality is treating equals equally and treating differents differently. The trick is to know who is equal (white people == black people == homosexual people) and who is different (enterprise with competition != monopolist or semi-monopolist), etc...
Why the hell shouldn't KDE swith to Gtk then? I don't like KDE and I've **NEVER** liked KDE. Ever. And its not for lack of trying or wanting to like KDE. I just can't use it for longer than 20 minutes before I get incredibly frustrated and give up. Its been that way for me for 10 years.
I'm quite content with GNOME right now, but if they switched to Qt, or tried to merge with KDE, I'd go full-time to e17 and say a pox on both their houses. But that is just me.
but even for a nonparalelizable algorithm, it will run together with the other thousands of processes running in your computer/phone without jeopardizing the performance of those...
And Medium is liable for copyright infringement. And Ghost Whisperer's copy is not a legitimate copy, so it cannot be sold or otherwise distributed.
I don't know what you are talking about here.
I understand that copyright can be used by the owner of a work to sue the producer of an unauthorized representation of that same work.
In the case of OFF, the distributor of the URL containing the instructions referring to the OFF would seem to be liable.
What is interesting, however, is that anyone who merely stores or distributes blocks in the OFF would seem, at least according to the Colour theory, not to be liable for anything.
You agreed with me in almost anything, i think: what makes Medium liable for copyright infringement is the fact that she transmitted (="distributed") the poem (="the work") to GW. So, putting blocks in the OFF is akin to make a backup copy of the poem. Making the URL available is offer to distribute (not copyright infringement in my jurisdiction, IIRC), and when some receiver make good on that offer, the sender is liable for copyright infringement (if [s]he has no legal right [first buy, fair use, express consent of the owner, etc] to do so, of course).
Slashdot Mirror
So, go call anyone else a lazy parent. I am a seasoned, experienced parent of two well-mannered kids. I participate in every aspect of their upbringing, with love and discipline. And I still know they can be uncontrollable on ocasion.
If I sit screaming for hours on end I'll be kicked off(bus) or banned(plane), your child is not held to the same standards as me, hence I can expect the parents to make some sort of reasonable fucking effort to quiet/comfort their younger children and tell the older ones to toughen up and shut the fuck up.
The thing you chose to ignore is: the reasonable effort is sometimes not enough; hell, sometimes, even the extraordinaire effort to comfort/shut them up is not enough.
The planes are there,
I have the money for the fare,
I have the right to fly.
I may have a good reason to fly with my kids (someone mentioned relocating intercontinentally, but going to a nice Disney vacation is a reason good enough) and I may not have someone I trust my baby with.
I have the right to fly and I have the right to put myself (and my baby) to the discomfort of a 13-20 hour flight anytime my heart desires.
You fell for the "Using the services of the airlines is a privilege" line. This is really sad. You have the _right_ to come and go. Using the services of the airlines is a right, provided you can pay for them.
beating them usually gets the noise louder :-)
Notice that I didn't say "all" kids are noisy. I said that they are randomly noisy. As I put in another post, babies can be quiet or noisy -- without any parental intervention -- during and 8-hour flight. Toddlers and infants can be quiet or noisy. Even a well-educated 8yo can have inner ear pain and cry loudly and uncontrollably during a long flight.
Feel free to take it and leave the planes for people with or without kids.
... that you have more right to be on a plane than my 2yo daughter?
News for you: you DON'T
Why do you think it's a good idea to travel 3000 miles with your 2yo in a car or train?
News for you: it isn't.
Planes are a reasonably quick and safe way to get from A to B. Me and my kids have every right to go from A to B in a reasonably quick and safe way, provided we have paid the fare. End of story.
Kids cry.
Infants and toddlers cry.
Even extremely well-mannered 8yo kids cry if they have some ear pain while inside a plane.
And they all have the same travelling rights as you.
Your options are: earplugs and earphones. Deal with it.
Good luck removing the battery from an iPhone :-)
Actually, people that talk about their STDs in the phone are prone to talk about that in loud voice when having a public conversation, also [citation needed]. Cell phone ban will do no good.
that will probably never procreate. :-)
Let me draw this picture for you: kids are randomly noisy. There is absolutely nothing parents can do about kids' noise when they are up to it. Even a duck-tape-on-the-mouth kid makes a lot of noise. :-)
If you have some smart answer in the form of "if you do X, the kid will stay put", let me give you the news: it will not work. Kids only stay quiet... if they "want" to.
Have you tought that the Hill does not want you to "listen to it"? They want you to shut up and let they pass anything their heart desires and then you have to obey it.
Users don't care about that.
Besides, when some ActiveX control made IE freeze no one had any problems blaming it on Microsoft and demanding they fix it. Ditto for just about any application error or driver boo on Windows.
Yeah, they only had problems when Microsoft sat quietly and did nothing about it... until three or four years after, when you can trade your old bugs for new bugs in the process of trading your computer for another, ten times faster, that feels three times slower under the new OS. :-)
Just copy it from nspluginviewer :-)
IIRC Konqueror does that (runs each plugin under nspluginviewer).
Fixing buggy closed-source plugins is _hard_.
And _expensive_.
Granted nobody wants the horribly pixelated and low quality files on youtube, and that is their protection.
Actually, some of their "high-quality" files are quite good, to be seen in a 40" LCD TV (1080p capable) full-screen with AppleTV.
... in the enrollment papers:
"Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes."
Like blocking anyone that wanted to ever sell a system with MacOS(X)? installed? Via lawsuit?
I will have to concur with GaryPatterson here: equality is treating equals equally and treating differents differently. The trick is to know who is equal (white people == black people == homosexual people) and who is different (enterprise with competition != monopolist or semi-monopolist), etc...
that nobody (outside MS) has that kind of skill wrt windows, at all. And that complaining rarely helps, if ever.
that if a printer does not work in Linux (CUPS) it will much probably also not work in OSX (CUPS) :-)
Won't it be Dr. Doogie Horrible, then? :-)
Why the hell shouldn't KDE swith to Gtk then? I don't like KDE and I've **NEVER** liked KDE. Ever. And its not for lack of trying or wanting to like KDE. I just can't use it for longer than 20 minutes before I get incredibly frustrated and give up. Its been that way for me for 10 years.
I'm quite content with GNOME right now, but if they switched to Qt, or tried to merge with KDE, I'd go full-time to e17 and say a pox on both their houses. But that is just me.
s/KDE/blabs/g;
s/GNOME/KDE/g;
s/blabs/GNOME/g;
s/Qt/blabs/g;
s/Gtk/Qt/g;
s/blabs/Gtk/g;
So, it's really a matter of taste. And choice.
1080p with XvMC and which codec? I thought XvMC didn't do x264, for instance.
IIRC XvMC is only MPEG2 and not AVC (=x264?), VC-1, more common HD codecs.
but even for a nonparalelizable algorithm, it will run together with the other thousands of processes running in your computer/phone without jeopardizing the performance of those...
And Medium is liable for copyright infringement. And Ghost Whisperer's
copy is not a legitimate copy, so it cannot be sold or otherwise
distributed.
I don't know what you are talking about here.
I understand that copyright can be used by the owner of a work to sue
the producer of an unauthorized representation of that same work.
In the case of OFF, the distributor of the URL containing the
instructions referring to the OFF would seem to be liable.
What is interesting, however, is that anyone who merely stores or
distributes blocks in the OFF would seem, at least according to the
Colour theory, not to be liable for anything.
You agreed with me in almost anything, i think: what makes Medium liable for copyright infringement is the fact that she transmitted (="distributed") the poem (="the work") to GW. So, putting blocks in the OFF is akin to make a backup copy of the poem. Making the URL available is offer to distribute (not copyright infringement in my jurisdiction, IIRC), and when some receiver make good on that offer, the sender is liable for copyright infringement (if [s]he has no legal right [first buy, fair use, express consent of the owner, etc] to do so, of course).
IANAL, was a paralegal for two years, YMMV.