No, I'm suggesting one should adhere to the same standard he asks of someone with whom he disagrees. And your claim was made precisely in support of the argument that gun ownership has been declining.
Which, BTW, is incorrect. Not only is ownership not declining, but new purchases are increasing. So gun ownership is not only increasing but accelerating.
Because several-second delays in video packets will make it unwatchable (or require a lot of buffering) and a drop of a significant percentage of a phone call's UDP will make it unusable, but the effects of neither of those will be noticed by the recipient of that business email.
To me there's a significant difference between "Net Neutrality" and QOS.
Manufacturers are often (usually?) conservative with their performance claims. Still, the " will beat the crap out of any combustion engine" is ignorant and easily shown to be false, even when narrowing "combustion engines" to production automobiles.
This is insane. Forcing someone against his will to sell his team *because you don't like words he said in private and which were recorded, probably in violation of the law and almost certainly without his knowledge* and begrudging him (and his innocent wife) his profit isn't enough - you want also for the other owners to forfeit theirs too because of it?
He's a doddering, bigoted anachronism. How is that worse than violent felonies that have been committed by some NBA players? Should they be banned from the NBA?
Maybe they just charged for commercial use? Or maybe I'm confusing it with Mosaic? Either way, I'm certain that at a job I had before 1998, Netscape could be freely and legitimately obtained for use on Solaris.
Actually, in NJ they'd love to: as the article mentions, a law was passed a few years ago requiring that once such technology is available, all new handguns in NJ would be required to have it. Stupid stupid stupid.
Agree 100%. Also while I'm a geek and appreciate the ever-shrinking and ever-more-powerful computers and that they're now wrist-sized, I as much or more appreciate (also as a geek) the good-lookng watch on my wrist that keeps track of and displays everything from season and moon phase to month/day/hour/minute/second purely mechanically and powered only by incidental movement.
No, it's not a "valid point" to simply claim reduced hours = more jobs. Reduced hours with reduced pay = more jobs at lower pay. Reduced hours at same pay = shift burden and expense to employer, who will adjust and scale back work.
When I've had a job where I've felt that either wasn't what it was promised, or in which I wasn't being compensated for what I was worth, I left and found another job.
That's what you do when a transaction or arrangement is not (or no longer) acceptable to you.
Slashdot Mirror
My Audi does this. Why isn't the VW Group on the defendants list?
Still works for me
You had me at "tits and swords". Actually, you had me at "tits".
Coercive laws forbidding direct sale to consumers and requiring they be sokd through dealerships is the *opposite* of capitalism.
No, I'm suggesting one should adhere to the same standard he asks of someone with whom he disagrees. And your claim was made precisely in support of the argument that gun ownership has been declining.
Which, BTW, is incorrect. Not only is ownership not declining, but new purchases are increasing. So gun ownership is not only increasing but accelerating.
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
"it works without a network connection"?
Funny then how reservation informatoin about my friend's restaurants aren't available when they lack internet connectivity.
*They* know the difference. Most people, hearing QoS described, wouldn't.
Because several-second delays in video packets will make it unwatchable (or require a lot of buffering) and a drop of a significant percentage of a phone call's UDP will make it unusable, but the effects of neither of those will be noticed by the recipient of that business email.
To me there's a significant difference between "Net Neutrality" and QOS.
Why would you ask for a citation for his statement and not include one for yours?
Manufacturers are often (usually?) conservative with their performance claims. Still, the " will beat the crap out of any combustion engine" is ignorant and easily shown to be false, even when narrowing "combustion engines" to production automobiles.
It's quick but not quicker than "any combustion engine". I don't think it's even in the top ten.
This is insane. Forcing someone against his will to sell his team *because you don't like words he said in private and which were recorded, probably in violation of the law and almost certainly without his knowledge* and begrudging him (and his innocent wife) his profit isn't enough - you want also for the other owners to forfeit theirs too because of it?
He's a doddering, bigoted anachronism. How is that worse than violent felonies that have been committed by some NBA players? Should they be banned from the NBA?
Maybe they just charged for commercial use? Or maybe I'm confusing it with Mosaic? Either way, I'm certain that at a job I had before 1998, Netscape could be freely and legitimately obtained for use on Solaris.
Uh, its browser competition was already free - how far down could it push their price?
My first thought was: too bad they didn't find out in time to include it in the most recent AAAS report.
Can an ebarrassed Eurpoean demand an article be removed from newspaper archives? Or book-form indexes of publications?
Okay, so both spellings exist, but they're not on equal footing.
http://grammarist.com/spelling...
"linchpin"?
Actually, in NJ they'd love to: as the article mentions, a law was passed a few years ago requiring that once such technology is available, all new handguns in NJ would be required to have it. Stupid stupid stupid.
Agree 100%. Also while I'm a geek and appreciate the ever-shrinking and ever-more-powerful computers and that they're now wrist-sized, I as much or more appreciate (also as a geek) the good-lookng watch on my wrist that keeps track of and displays everything from season and moon phase to month/day/hour/minute/second purely mechanically and powered only by incidental movement.
Gravity pulls one side down; pressure pushes the other side up.
Exactly. You beat me to it.
So if it's part of the original deal, it's okay, right? This law would ... make that illegal.
No, it's not a "valid point" to simply claim reduced hours = more jobs. Reduced hours with reduced pay = more jobs at lower pay. Reduced hours at same pay = shift burden and expense to employer, who will adjust and scale back work.
When I've had a job where I've felt that either wasn't what it was promised, or in which I wasn't being compensated for what I was worth, I left and found another job.
That's what you do when a transaction or arrangement is not (or no longer) acceptable to you.