I'll believe netflix can kill DVDs off when they have their entire catalog available for streaming.
And even that is extremely iffy. Netflix has little to no influence over the lifespan of DVDs. Now, if companies like Best Buy started phasing out DVDs for sale then you might see something.
So the premise of this article is that Netflix is separating out the DVD service in order to kill it and... makes less revenue? How does that make sense? Secondly, Netflix is a tiny player in the entertainment industry and would have negligible impact on the lifespan of DVDs anyway.
You paid for the subscription, you should own the content.
How so? You no more own the content then you own the content played on the radio. The terms of your subscription that you agree to pretty much explicitly state you don't own the content.
Yeah, cause switching to the social network run by the world's largest advertising firm is clearly going to help improve upon your data's privacy. Oh, and let's ignore the fact that Google+'s default privacy policies are just as weak and wide open as Facebook's are by default. Oh right, it's Google so they have to be defended at all costs by the Slashtard horde.
So basically you're blaming Macs for what you admit was wrongful configured AD setup that you haven't bothered to fix. *golf clap* Good game, AC. Good game.
How can you make things better when your government is essentially bankrupt, your economy has just fallen off a cliff as you got elected, you are mired in two useless wars and you are beholden to tons of corporate interests that paid to get you elected?
End the wars, default on your debt and rebuild the economy from their. It worked swimmingly for countries like Argentina. This will never happen though because you turds are going to be too proud to admit that you aren't the best country in the universe anymore.
Sorry, but you have no right to privacy from me when you are using my property. It is also perfectly fine for me to have a keylogger monitoring everything you do on my computer. If you think your privacy trumps that then only drive your own car or use your own computer, etc.
Of course not. Harping on these irrelevant red herrings is a convenient way for them to deny something without having to involve any rational thought. Trying to dispute the actual science is rather hard, it's much easier to try to point out hypocrisy in the lifestyles of Al Gore, Larry and Sergey, Barbara Streisand, etc to dismiss the theories instead.
This type of behavior on the part of AGW proponents is why people like me don't take it seriously. The behavior of prominent AGW proponents does not seem to indicate that they really believe in it either.
What these non-scientist "AGW proponents" do or say has little relevance when it comes to the veracity of the scientific research and data. In fact, most scientists would be more than welcome that this fucking idiots like Al Gore, Sergey and Larry, etc would just shut the fuck up because they are doing more harm with their activism then good.
Did you think the movie was ever going to be made otherwise? Unless some indie studio was going to pick it up, you're never going to see a movie made that appeals to a miniscule niche audience as Neuromancer would.
while treating the open source community that has grown up around it as second class.
The open source community was always second-class when it came to Android. Android was and always has been "open source" for the benefit of the OHA and the phone manufacturers. That you people still fail to realize this is rather amusing. It's amusing that Google is so worshipped as an "open source friendly" company because they will occasionally throw a bone and some scraps out yet the vast majority of their software and revenue generating products are proprietary.
The article's claim that Microsoft would have to open-up its source to allow bug bounties is rubbish.
That's because the article writer, and the many people on Slashdot who have said the same thing, are morons. For example, Ilfak Guilfanov the main developer of IDA PRO posted his own hotfix for a Windows vulnerability years ago without ever having access to "teh codez". This notion that people found security issues through staring at the code is laughably wrong and is written by idiots who are ignorant of the topic at hand.
Most people on Slashdot think he's an idiot and a criminal.
You must be new here or haven't really followed the stories of this guy much. Overwhelmingly most people think he did no wrong. It mirrored all the people who were going to such ridiculous lengths and creating conspiracy theories to defend Hans Reiser.
In case you don't realize most Slashtards have a bias in which Terry Childs could have done no wrong. It's no different to the years of people on here trying to claim that Hans Reiser was innocent and was just being arrested for being awkward. His boss and the "normies" on the jury were clearly just idiots who couldn't possibly see that he was just doing all sorts of amazing things by locking everyone but himself out of being able to admin the network, holding the keys in his head, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
So using Unix to run your server means you're not an IT professional? What are they supposed to install? BeOS?
Its pretty much holding games hostage
Yes, because Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo are forcing people to make games for their consoles contrary to their will.
I'll believe netflix can kill DVDs off when they have their entire catalog available for streaming.
And even that is extremely iffy. Netflix has little to no influence over the lifespan of DVDs. Now, if companies like Best Buy started phasing out DVDs for sale then you might see something.
So the premise of this article is that Netflix is separating out the DVD service in order to kill it and... makes less revenue? How does that make sense? Secondly, Netflix is a tiny player in the entertainment industry and would have negligible impact on the lifespan of DVDs anyway.
You paid for the subscription, you should own the content.
How so? You no more own the content then you own the content played on the radio. The terms of your subscription that you agree to pretty much explicitly state you don't own the content.
Yeah, cause switching to the social network run by the world's largest advertising firm is clearly going to help improve upon your data's privacy. Oh, and let's ignore the fact that Google+'s default privacy policies are just as weak and wide open as Facebook's are by default. Oh right, it's Google so they have to be defended at all costs by the Slashtard horde.
So basically you're blaming Macs for what you admit was wrongful configured AD setup that you haven't bothered to fix. *golf clap* Good game, AC. Good game.
The judge in this case is not against software patents. To read that into his statements is to make shit up.
No. And some of those invalidations are also in appeal.
Just like Google Wave and Orkut, right?
Sound like Google is desperate to keep Google+ in the spotlight if they are dredging up ho bags like Lady Gaga to push it.
How can you make things better when your government is essentially bankrupt, your economy has just fallen off a cliff as you got elected, you are mired in two useless wars and you are beholden to tons of corporate interests that paid to get you elected?
End the wars, default on your debt and rebuild the economy from their. It worked swimmingly for countries like Argentina. This will never happen though because you turds are going to be too proud to admit that you aren't the best country in the universe anymore.
Sorry, but you have no right to privacy from me when you are using my property. It is also perfectly fine for me to have a keylogger monitoring everything you do on my computer. If you think your privacy trumps that then only drive your own car or use your own computer, etc.
Why is it an awful ruling? If you own the vehicle you have the right to put a tracking device on it. I'm failing to see what is so awful about that.
Because that is a fucking stupid way to base your decision on the veracity of the science?
Of course not. Harping on these irrelevant red herrings is a convenient way for them to deny something without having to involve any rational thought. Trying to dispute the actual science is rather hard, it's much easier to try to point out hypocrisy in the lifestyles of Al Gore, Larry and Sergey, Barbara Streisand, etc to dismiss the theories instead.
This type of behavior on the part of AGW proponents is why people like me don't take it seriously. The behavior of prominent AGW proponents does not seem to indicate that they really believe in it either.
What these non-scientist "AGW proponents" do or say has little relevance when it comes to the veracity of the scientific research and data. In fact, most scientists would be more than welcome that this fucking idiots like Al Gore, Sergey and Larry, etc would just shut the fuck up because they are doing more harm with their activism then good.
Would you tote around a laptop w/ no firewall or AV?
Yes, I do all the time.
Did you think the movie was ever going to be made otherwise? Unless some indie studio was going to pick it up, you're never going to see a movie made that appeals to a miniscule niche audience as Neuromancer would.
while treating the open source community that has grown up around it as second class.
The open source community was always second-class when it came to Android. Android was and always has been "open source" for the benefit of the OHA and the phone manufacturers. That you people still fail to realize this is rather amusing. It's amusing that Google is so worshipped as an "open source friendly" company because they will occasionally throw a bone and some scraps out yet the vast majority of their software and revenue generating products are proprietary.
This just in: Movie studios attempt to make their movies appeal to the people who make up the vast majority of the paying movie goers. Film at 11.
The article's claim that Microsoft would have to open-up its source to allow bug bounties is rubbish.
That's because the article writer, and the many people on Slashdot who have said the same thing, are morons. For example, Ilfak Guilfanov the main developer of IDA PRO posted his own hotfix for a Windows vulnerability years ago without ever having access to "teh codez". This notion that people found security issues through staring at the code is laughably wrong and is written by idiots who are ignorant of the topic at hand.
Most people on Slashdot think he's an idiot and a criminal.
You must be new here or haven't really followed the stories of this guy much. Overwhelmingly most people think he did no wrong. It mirrored all the people who were going to such ridiculous lengths and creating conspiracy theories to defend Hans Reiser.
In case you don't realize most Slashtards have a bias in which Terry Childs could have done no wrong. It's no different to the years of people on here trying to claim that Hans Reiser was innocent and was just being arrested for being awkward. His boss and the "normies" on the jury were clearly just idiots who couldn't possibly see that he was just doing all sorts of amazing things by locking everyone but himself out of being able to admin the network, holding the keys in his head, etc.
No one is against the product itself just the crappy Packt books that are constantly being shilled for on this site.