So the statement "there is no bug" is blatantly false.
The GP you are responding to never claimed there was no bug at all. What is being said is that the bug is in the chipset controller driver or somewhere else, not in chkdsk like this FUD submission is trying to claim. Maybe next time you should learn some reading comprehension.
The mere *act* of jailbreaking a product is illegal, even if your goal is just to run the freeware EDIT on your iPhone or PS3 or whatever.
Jailbreaking your phone isn't illegal. Disseminating and producing software to jailbreak a phone, on the other hand, is illegal. You seem to have never actually read the DMCA because it only criminalizes the production and dissemination of tools to circumvent copy protections.
Because kdawson is slashdot's resident FUD artist. If he actually posted factual stories that didn't contain overblown anti-Microsoft FUD he'd be fired.
UPDATE:
After emailing back and forth with the VP Sinofsky, it was found that the chkdsk/r tool is not at fault here. It was simply a chipset controller issue. Please update you chipset drivers to the current driver from your motherboard manufacturer. I did mine, and this fixed the issue. Yes it still uses alot of physical memory, because your checking for physical damage, and errors on the Harddrive your testing. I'm currently completed the chkdsk scan with no BSODÃ(TM)s or computer sluggishness. Feel free to do this and try it for yourselves. Again, there is no Bug.
Thanks all.
No pro-nicotine article can pass without the preemptive mentioning that nicotine and smoking are bad for you.
Funny because even the doctor agrees that they shouldn't be smoking in order to treat themselves in the direct quote of his own words that I posted above. Seriously, your trolling is sloppy.
"Now, the rationale is to provide a more strategic treatment in the form of a skin patch or nasal spray to avoid the toxins in cigarette smoke. This is the way to go," he said.
Considering that the researcher says that they shouldn't be smoking due to the toxins and instead should be using a nicotine patch or nasal spray in order to stimulate the receptors, I'm going to have to say no.
"Now, the rationale is to provide a more strategic treatment in the form of a skin patch or nasal spray to avoid the toxins in cigarette smoke. This is the way to go," he said.
Except the doctor never endorsed smoking. He even says in the article:
"Now, the rationale is to provide a more strategic treatment in the form of a skin patch or nasal spray to avoid the toxins in cigarette smoke. This is the way to go," he said.
I know this is BadAnalogyGuy but that was just sloppy trolling at best.
Yes, because we all know that Jack Thompson was a noted liberal! Oh and that channel 'Fox News' that would continually have him on as a 'video game violence' expert is also well-known as being the most liberal channel on all of US cable!
All Adobe needs to do in the event of MS making them mad is to change Flash/PDF just enough that they don't work with old versions, and then refuse to port/support a Windows version.
Why would they do something that stupid? That would destroy 90% of their install base and thus ruin themselves.
As the developers / authors gradually move to the new standards, Windows gets further and further behind, and all they have is Silverlight and.doc files. That is not where MS wants to be.
No, if Adobe stopped supporting Windows, those developers would just drop it and thus Adobe would go bankrupt.
So you admit that climate scientists being paid by oil companies has no bearing on the veracity of their research?
No because that is completely different. Al Gore isn't a climate scientist an doesn't do any published research so what he says or does has no bearing on anything at all. On the other hand, the financial dealings of an actual scientist who is publishing on the subject will have a bearing on the veracity of their research.
Actually most climate scientists that I talk to openly tell me that no one has any freaking clue as to what is going on with global warming, whether it's man made or not.
Well then you must not know many, because many hundreds to thousands of them do have a clue what is going on and whether or not man has a hand in it.
Everyone else is speculating or is in someone's wallet.
There is no speculation. To try to claim that us dumping billions of tons of extra C02 in the atmosphere and claim it has no bearing on how much heat is retained by the atmosphere is to ignore physics.
The new battle ground is whether or not we're causing it and whether or not the consequences are really as dire as they want us to believe.
We know by simple physics that CO2 in the atmosphere causes a planet to retain more heat than it otherwise would. We also know that humans have been dumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere beyond what the normal carbon cycle can handle. It's a pretty simple to see that all that extra CO2 that is overwhelming the carbon cycle must be contributing to an increased retention of heat.
I agree with your points however, be careful not to make the claim that just because big oil funds research means it is biased somehow makes federally funded research unbiased.
I don't make such a claim, but one has to be somewhat suspicious that it almost never fails that a detractor has a monetary tie to a Big Oil company. I'm sorry, but that's far more of a conflict of interest than someone getting their money from NSF.
Especially during the Bush years...
Except Bush was a denier and yet the people doing research with federal funds held the opposite view of him.
Oh and that doesn't even address such things like that famous list that is touted around of alleged scientists that supposedly signed some document against the scientific consensus that not only didn't even verify the identity or credentials of the supposed signers, but that it also falsely listed people who don't even agree with the document.
On April 29, 2008, environmental journalist Richard Littlemore revealed that a list of "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares"[26] distributed by the Heartland Institute included at least 45 scientists who neither knew of their inclusion as "coauthors" of the article, nor agreed with its contents.[27] Many of the scientists asked the Heartland Institute to remove their names from the list.
Sounds kind of like global warming, where the people screaming most loudly about scientific consensus are also the ones that stand to benefit the most greatly financially.
Or the ones who scream that there isn't are almost always getting the funding for their research from oil companies.
Just look at Al Gore and his carbon trading investments.
What a fucking red herring. What Al Gore and other non-scientists do or don't do have no bearing on the veracity of the research done by the actual climate scientists.
It all screams conflict of interest.
But having your funding come from someone like Exxon isn't?
Why shouldn't they be sued? They willfully defrauded people into buying their products by lying to them about the risks. Isn't this something they should have to pay retribution to their customers for?
1 : to proceed without pause from one musical number or theme to another 2 : to make a transition without interruption from one activity, topic, scene, or part to another
PS. I agree with him, and have not met anyone who likes it (out of about 5 people I have discussed it with). I revile it, probably a little less than Microsoft's crappy storage formats and the new docx.
All of 5 people? Wow, what a great sample group in order to extrapolate to all Office 2007 users. Oh wait... On the other hand I know of at least 3 dozen people where I work who all love Office 2007 and the ribbon and don't want to ever go back to anything previous. See, this is the issue with trying to make broad brush claims based on based anecdotal evidence and skewed sample groups.
Slashdot Mirror
That should be chipset controller driver.
So the statement "there is no bug" is blatantly false.
The GP you are responding to never claimed there was no bug at all. What is being said is that the bug is in the chipset controller driver or somewhere else, not in chkdsk like this FUD submission is trying to claim. Maybe next time you should learn some reading comprehension.
Except the bug was never with chdsk to begin with. It was a bug in a chipset controller. Way to fall for the FUD.
The mere *act* of jailbreaking a product is illegal, even if your goal is just to run the freeware EDIT on your iPhone or PS3 or whatever.
Jailbreaking your phone isn't illegal. Disseminating and producing software to jailbreak a phone, on the other hand, is illegal. You seem to have never actually read the DMCA because it only criminalizes the production and dissemination of tools to circumvent copy protections.
Because kdawson is slashdot's resident FUD artist. If he actually posted factual stories that didn't contain overblown anti-Microsoft FUD he'd be fired.
UPDATE: After emailing back and forth with the VP Sinofsky, it was found that the chkdsk /r tool is not at fault here. It was simply a chipset controller issue. Please update you chipset drivers to the current driver from your motherboard manufacturer. I did mine, and this fixed the issue. Yes it still uses alot of physical memory, because your checking for physical damage, and errors on the Harddrive your testing. I'm currently completed the chkdsk scan with no BSODÃ(TM)s or computer sluggishness. Feel free to do this and try it for yourselves. Again, there is no Bug.
Thanks all.
http://www.bluescreenofdeath.org/?p=94#comment-134 Yay kdawson fud articles!
No pro-nicotine article can pass without the preemptive mentioning that nicotine and smoking are bad for you.
Funny because even the doctor agrees that they shouldn't be smoking in order to treat themselves in the direct quote of his own words that I posted above. Seriously, your trolling is sloppy.
"Now, the rationale is to provide a more strategic treatment in the form of a skin patch or nasal spray to avoid the toxins in cigarette smoke. This is the way to go," he said.
Yeah, that's totally encouraging them to smoke!
"Now, the rationale is to provide a more strategic treatment in the form of a skin patch or nasal spray to avoid the toxins in cigarette smoke. This is the way to go," he said.
"Now, the rationale is to provide a more strategic treatment in the form of a skin patch or nasal spray to avoid the toxins in cigarette smoke. This is the way to go," he said.
I know this is BadAnalogyGuy but that was just sloppy trolling at best.
Yes, because we all know that Jack Thompson was a noted liberal! Oh and that channel 'Fox News' that would continually have him on as a 'video game violence' expert is also well-known as being the most liberal channel on all of US cable!
Then the manufacturer issues an update killing functionality, and you can no longer buy non-DRMed content or use it.
Since Sony can't in anyway force to install such an update all you would have to do is ignore it and live just fine with pdfs and epub books.
They are embracing fully open formats. Did you miss the part where they have epub support?
No the filing date is Jun 2002. Which means you'd have to find prior art dating before Jun 2001.
All Adobe needs to do in the event of MS making them mad is to change Flash/PDF just enough that they don't work with old versions, and then refuse to port/support a Windows version.
Why would they do something that stupid? That would destroy 90% of their install base and thus ruin themselves.
As the developers / authors gradually move to the new standards, Windows gets further and further behind, and all they have is Silverlight and .doc files. That is not where MS wants to be.
No, if Adobe stopped supporting Windows, those developers would just drop it and thus Adobe would go bankrupt.
So you admit that climate scientists being paid by oil companies has no bearing on the veracity of their research?
No because that is completely different. Al Gore isn't a climate scientist an doesn't do any published research so what he says or does has no bearing on anything at all. On the other hand, the financial dealings of an actual scientist who is publishing on the subject will have a bearing on the veracity of their research.
Actually most climate scientists that I talk to openly tell me that no one has any freaking clue as to what is going on with global warming, whether it's man made or not.
Well then you must not know many, because many hundreds to thousands of them do have a clue what is going on and whether or not man has a hand in it.
Everyone else is speculating or is in someone's wallet.
There is no speculation. To try to claim that us dumping billions of tons of extra C02 in the atmosphere and claim it has no bearing on how much heat is retained by the atmosphere is to ignore physics.
The new battle ground is whether or not we're causing it and whether or not the consequences are really as dire as they want us to believe.
We know by simple physics that CO2 in the atmosphere causes a planet to retain more heat than it otherwise would. We also know that humans have been dumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere beyond what the normal carbon cycle can handle. It's a pretty simple to see that all that extra CO2 that is overwhelming the carbon cycle must be contributing to an increased retention of heat.
I agree with your points however, be careful not to make the claim that just because big oil funds research means it is biased somehow makes federally funded research unbiased.
I don't make such a claim, but one has to be somewhat suspicious that it almost never fails that a detractor has a monetary tie to a Big Oil company. I'm sorry, but that's far more of a conflict of interest than someone getting their money from NSF.
Especially during the Bush years...
Except Bush was a denier and yet the people doing research with federal funds held the opposite view of him.
On April 29, 2008, environmental journalist Richard Littlemore revealed that a list of "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares"[26] distributed by the Heartland Institute included at least 45 scientists who neither knew of their inclusion as "coauthors" of the article, nor agreed with its contents.[27] Many of the scientists asked the Heartland Institute to remove their names from the list.
From here.
Sounds kind of like global warming, where the people screaming most loudly about scientific consensus are also the ones that stand to benefit the most greatly financially.
Or the ones who scream that there isn't are almost always getting the funding for their research from oil companies.
Just look at Al Gore and his carbon trading investments.
What a fucking red herring. What Al Gore and other non-scientists do or don't do have no bearing on the veracity of the research done by the actual climate scientists.
It all screams conflict of interest.
But having your funding come from someone like Exxon isn't?
Why shouldn't they be sued? They willfully defrauded people into buying their products by lying to them about the risks. Isn't this something they should have to pay retribution to their customers for?
Quicktime does suck. It's a bloated piece of shit player that has some of the worst performance around.
Main Entry: segue
1 : to proceed without pause from one musical number or theme to another
2 : to make a transition without interruption from one activity, topic, scene, or part to another
No, you couldn't. You seem to be confusing copyright with trademarks. You don't havce to do any maintenance to keep your copyright.
PS. I agree with him, and have not met anyone who likes it (out of about 5 people I have discussed it with). I revile it, probably a little less than Microsoft's crappy storage formats and the new docx.
All of 5 people? Wow, what a great sample group in order to extrapolate to all Office 2007 users. Oh wait... On the other hand I know of at least 3 dozen people where I work who all love Office 2007 and the ribbon and don't want to ever go back to anything previous. See, this is the issue with trying to make broad brush claims based on based anecdotal evidence and skewed sample groups.