You're right in that I could be saying that, but I think my reasoning isn't fallacious, facetious maybe, but not fallacious. It would be wrong if you could garantee no more restrictive laws based on reactionary law makers.
Patriot Act? Freedoms restricted under the guise of protecting freedoms.
I've had this talk with a number of people. They argue that if you have nothing to hide why hide? Well, what if they make something illegal that is a basic right. What if alcohol was illegal? What if being homosexual was illegal? What if being black meant you were not allowed to vote? What if being female meant you were not allowed to vote? But your right, it's not like the US has a precedent of have laws like that.
All crimes are committed by the living, therefore living is a crime (Judge Death, 2000AD)
If you introduce an ID card (basically formalising/simplifying your social security number system) and nationalise the driver's licenses the right wingers will freak and they will dedicate all their efforts in stopping it. This will allow the health care reforms to settle in and become accepted.
<analogy> If you bought a DVD player that, according to the label, would play anything and then it refused to play a DVD someone lent you would you be upset?
Probably.
The DVD you've put in contains half a dozen Divx files. Still upset?
Probably not, but most of my social group still do not understand why that would be. </analogy>
I think John Q. Public isn't going to realise that undergoing a research project, prior to buying what is rapidly become just another consumer electronics device, is required. They will want what it says on the box.
It's not that files written in in MSOffice 2007 can be opened in MSOffice 2015 that is the issue here. It's files written in MSOffice 2015 able to be opened in MSOffice 2007. IE If someone I know sends me a word document, then I shouldn't have to upgrade to be able to read it (even if it doesn't handle all of the formatting and content correctly. Of course in a perfect world, I would even need MSOffice 2007 to read it.
You are right about license fees being minimal consideration but we are talking about an office suite here. The basics are straight forward, any complex requirements might require training, but that is the same for both OpenOffice and Microsoft office and I find it hard to believe that you need and IT department to support it. Database servers and other such systems would be a different and more complex matter, but you can download OpenOffice.org and be productive with it immediately, thus TCO could end up being zero.
Many years ago when being gay was stigmatized, being gay opened you up to blackmail. That is no longer the case and if it simply boils down to "pillow talk" problems, why pick on same sex relationships. Heterosexual people have sex too and have even been known to have casual sex. Investigating partners has always been valid when it comes to "Official Secrets". You should read the Official Secrets Act in Australia, my partner had to sign it when they entered the Australian federal public service as a clerk, so I assume I have been checked too, particularly when they (my partner) got promoted to the level they have, which is just shy of executive level.
We had guinea pigs when I was a kid and five cats. The guinea pigs were given a large roaming area that was open to the world and grew very used to having cats in that area. Neither species bothered the other. When the new neighbors moved in next door with their cat, I watch with interest as it stalked the largest of our guinea pigs. It pounced and the guinea pig didn't run, it simply looked up as if to say "What?". The cat seemed to say "Your right, I have no idea what is meant to happen now.", and walked off.
This shows that guinea pigs are not hardwired to fear cats and that cats do need their prey to run.
Maybe these mice aren't such an evolutionary dead end after all.
It's not as cut and dry as all that. Let us consider one case: My wife works for the Australian Government, I work for a small company. The government employs a large number of programmers,they need to, there is a large amount of code that is specific to their sites that are not available off the shelf. If they find a bug in the office suite they use and fix it, both of us get the benefit. The government pays for it, but that is because they are big enough to fix it and we get the fix despite not being able to afford the programmers. The overall cost of the software is still (relatively) very low. If neither of us use an open source office suite then we both have to pay for bug fixes.
So we get business writing business code, not a software business writing software. The good thing about that model is that the overall cost of software remains relatively low and the wages of the programmers handling it can stay high. Everybody wins except the companies who rely on selling their software products. This is why Microsoft is worried about open source, not because it eats into their profits, it because it attacks their basic business model. All that is needed is a central authority that maintains the source, and that is funded by training and support.
It is easy to vote for third party candidates and still ensure your vote counts: Preferential voting. Makes things fairer. So, to improve the democratic process in the US you introduce preferential voting, eliminate the electoral college and make voting compulsory. This is how it works in Australia.
If, as the poster says, the users use these tools minimally, I would lean towards just installing Open Office and not say anything, see if anyone notices. Then when the fan is hit they can say "Saved you so much."
I have this image of W looking in an atlas muttering: "Chimpland, Chimpville, Chimponia. I can't find it anywhere and we have to stop those Weapons! Oh, bugger it, tell the public they are in league with Iran and we'll just invade them."
Since the 1970's apparently, (which in my defense was the last time I looked into these) My offices must have cheap lighting (cheap ballasting at least), damn. That would explain them being abled to be dimmed as well.
Actually it'll be 50Hz in Australia. PAL TV is 50 Hz as that is our cycle on mains power. With slightly clever electronics screen frequencies have been improved, but if there is rapid movement in front of the screen you still get the strobe effect. I've now got LCD all over the place and there is no strobing on that. Back to my original question... Do CFLs have electronics to boost the frequency now? I always figured there was no need. Either way the strobing is still there though, not as intense as a CRT as you aren't that close, but can be a pain in the long term.
Physicists in Helsinki have managed to get temperatures to 1 billionth of a degree above absolute zero. I am more curious as to how you measure something that cold.
So he was told he was delisted, which is a good thing, but not why, which is a bad thing!
OK, I'll rephrase the question:
Why is it an issue that Google doesn't go into specifics?
Shouldn't the webmaster know where the problem is and which rule they violated if they put it there?
If the site was hacked(as in this case) you would simply go back to the last known good copy (I think this has come up before in this discussion). You wouldn't repair the damage, you would re-publish. Unless the only copy of the website is the website, in which case it isn't Google's job to hold the hand of foolish webmasters.
Slashdot Mirror
In The Grifters and at least one episode of Hustle.
You're right in that I could be saying that, but I think my reasoning isn't fallacious, facetious maybe, but not fallacious.
It would be wrong if you could garantee no more restrictive laws based on reactionary law makers.
Patriot Act? Freedoms restricted under the guise of protecting freedoms.
I've had this talk with a number of people. They argue that if you have nothing to hide why hide?
Well, what if they make something illegal that is a basic right.
What if alcohol was illegal?
What if being homosexual was illegal?
What if being black meant you were not allowed to vote?
What if being female meant you were not allowed to vote?
But your right, it's not like the US has a precedent of have laws like that.
All crimes are committed by the living, therefore living is a crime (Judge Death, 2000AD)
If you introduce an ID card (basically formalising/simplifying your social security number system) and nationalise the driver's licenses the right wingers will freak and they will dedicate all their efforts in stopping it. This will allow the health care reforms to settle in and become accepted.
...where in Seattle does she work?
You said it yourself, you are an IT professional.
<analogy>
If you bought a DVD player that, according to the label, would play anything and then it refused to play a DVD someone lent you would you be upset?
Probably.
The DVD you've put in contains half a dozen Divx files. Still upset?
Probably not, but most of my social group still do not understand why that would be.
</analogy>
I think John Q. Public isn't going to realise that undergoing a research project, prior to buying what is rapidly become just another consumer electronics device, is required. They will want what it says on the box.
It's not that files written in in MSOffice 2007 can be opened in MSOffice 2015 that is the issue here. It's files written in MSOffice 2015 able to be opened in MSOffice 2007. IE If someone I know sends me a word document, then I shouldn't have to upgrade to be able to read it (even if it doesn't handle all of the formatting and content correctly.
Of course in a perfect world, I would even need MSOffice 2007 to read it.
You are right about license fees being minimal consideration but we are talking about an office suite here. The basics are straight forward, any complex requirements might require training, but that is the same for both OpenOffice and Microsoft office and I find it hard to believe that you need and IT department to support it. Database servers and other such systems would be a different and more complex matter, but you can download OpenOffice.org and be productive with it immediately, thus TCO could end up being zero.
Could I make a joke about "leak"?
Many years ago when being gay was stigmatized, being gay opened you up to blackmail. That is no longer the case and if it simply boils down to "pillow talk" problems, why pick on same sex relationships. Heterosexual people have sex too and have even been known to have casual sex.
Investigating partners has always been valid when it comes to "Official Secrets". You should read the Official Secrets Act in Australia, my partner had to sign it when they entered the Australian federal public service as a clerk, so I assume I have been checked too, particularly when they (my partner) got promoted to the level they have, which is just shy of executive level.
Could I make a joke about "opened you up"?
Even if they had worked in defense, doesn't the US defense forces have a policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" when it comes to sexual orientation?
Isn't this Neal Stephenson's idea?
We had guinea pigs when I was a kid and five cats. The guinea pigs were given a large roaming area that was open to the world and grew very used to having cats in that area. Neither species bothered the other. When the new neighbors moved in next door with their cat, I watch with interest as it stalked the largest of our guinea pigs. It pounced and the guinea pig didn't run, it simply looked up as if to say "What?". The cat seemed to say "Your right, I have no idea what is meant to happen now.", and walked off.
This shows that guinea pigs are not hardwired to fear cats and that cats do need their prey to run.
Maybe these mice aren't such an evolutionary dead end after all.
I was thinking more Aliens. Although they seem to copy the DNA of their host.
It's not as cut and dry as all that.
Let us consider one case:
My wife works for the Australian Government, I work for a small company.
The government employs a large number of programmers,they need to, there is a large amount of code that is specific to their sites that are not available off the shelf. If they find a bug in the office suite they use and fix it, both of us get the benefit. The government pays for it, but that is because they are big enough to fix it and we get the fix despite not being able to afford the programmers. The overall cost of the software is still (relatively) very low. If neither of us use an open source office suite then we both have to pay for bug fixes.
So we get business writing business code, not a software business writing software.
The good thing about that model is that the overall cost of software remains relatively low and the wages of the programmers handling it can stay high. Everybody wins except the companies who rely on selling their software products.
This is why Microsoft is worried about open source, not because it eats into their profits, it because it attacks their basic business model. All that is needed is a central authority that maintains the source, and that is funded by training and support.
It is easy to vote for third party candidates and still ensure your vote counts: Preferential voting. Makes things fairer.
So, to improve the democratic process in the US you introduce preferential voting, eliminate the electoral college and make voting compulsory.
This is how it works in Australia.
What's the point of rhetorical questions?
Neil once described himself as "the world's most famous author no one has ever heard of".
If, as the poster says, the users use these tools minimally, I would lean towards just installing Open Office and not say anything, see if anyone notices. Then when the fan is hit they can say "Saved you so much."
Better a fait accompli than a complete failure!
I have this image of W looking in an atlas muttering: "Chimpland, Chimpville, Chimponia. I can't find it anywhere and we have to stop those Weapons! Oh, bugger it, tell the public they are in league with Iran and we'll just invade them."
Since the 1970's apparently, (which in my defense was the last time I looked into these)
My offices must have cheap lighting (cheap ballasting at least), damn. That would explain them being abled to be dimmed as well.
Actually it'll be 50Hz in Australia. PAL TV is 50 Hz as that is our cycle on mains power. With slightly clever electronics screen frequencies have been improved, but if there is rapid movement in front of the screen you still get the strobe effect. I've now got LCD all over the place and there is no strobing on that.
Back to my original question...
Do CFLs have electronics to boost the frequency now?
I always figured there was no need. Either way the strobing is still there though, not as intense as a CRT as you aren't that close, but can be a pain in the long term.
You put in in an Aston Martin DB9.
Physicists in Helsinki have managed to get temperatures to 1 billionth of a degree above absolute zero.
I am more curious as to how you measure something that cold.
I should mention that that was going through a block of sodium at -272C (near absolute zero)
No, apparently not.
One university in the US (New Hampshire I think) had it down to 60km/h.
OK, I'll rephrase the question:
Why is it an issue that Google doesn't go into specifics?
Shouldn't the webmaster know where the problem is and which rule they violated if they put it there?
If the site was hacked(as in this case) you would simply go back to the last known good copy (I think this has come up before in this discussion). You wouldn't repair the damage, you would re-publish. Unless the only copy of the website is the website, in which case it isn't Google's job to hold the hand of foolish webmasters.
Does this help?