Well, the thing is, why don't the advertisers just advertise on whatever the users are watching? What's the problem with that?
The problem is just that the advertisers want to control what you're watching, nothing controversial or out of the mainstream, just lukewarm pabulum.
But the advertisers should not think that they are "sponsoring" Youtube videos. Rather, they are simply accessing Youtube users (regardless of what the users happen to be watching).
Google also, for all its evil parts, to its credit also does not require JavaScript to run. When I heard that they were moving to a JS based search, it annoyed me. It's one thing to give suggestions while you're typing, but what's the point of showing search results if you haven't even told them what you're searching for yet?! They could have totally broken old non-JS search, but they did not.
Also, Google Image Search works without JS. This is deliberate, because JS-based image search is totally different from non-JS. I'd argue that non-JS works better (for me) than JS-based.
Finally, they don't annoyingly hide-by-default their FAQs so that you have to have JS turned on just to be able to read a Google help answer.
>Eventually we have to come into a natural balance so that each child born is replacing a person who has died.
What are you talking about? Western countries are already there (a fertility rate of 2.1 or less). The only reason the US doesn't have less than that rate is because of immigration.
That's probably easily determined. If you have a tracker app that's showing your phone at X location, it's probably yours. Otherwise, if it's someone else's, how did you get access to their phone to install the tracker?
If you've installed Ubuntu, just install Cardapio for a drop-down menu of all programs in the familiar Accessories, Internet, Office, Games, etc. categories.
HP making PCs is what keeps their name on people's minds. Not only that, but they can offer total end to end solutions, as opposed to buying PCs from one company and servers from another.
>Before anyone starts explaining about how it is difficult not to give root access to sys admins etc, it is not exactly rocket science to have peer reviewed access control polices even for sys admins,
Would you care to share what those access control systems are?
Yeah, but look at it from the perspective of a company (say, your own):
You hire a guy who's a total generalist. You sit patiently while either you train him or he trains himself in specifics. The moment he's trained, he jumps ship for someplace else.
How do you avoid that? Since you paid for his education (training) shouldn't you get to reap the benefits?
What I find is that when you encounter a series of iptable statements, it seems obvious that the kernel is building some sort of table of data or rules (LISP: data == program).
But instead of providing the table to the system, you have to build it up, piece by excruciating piece.
Whoever thought that was a good idea should have his packets limited.
OK, I checked out your links, and they don't seem to have the text of their proposed amendment other than this vague statement:
We are calling for an amendment to the US Constitution to unequivocally state that inalienable rights belong to human beings only, and that money is not a form of protected free speech under the First Amendment and can be regulated in political campaigns.
So, then, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People cannot spend money as they choose, because as a corporation, it doesn't have any rights, correct? And for humans, speech will be limited to using your voicebox, and not distributing pamphlets?
It would be useful to review the actual Citizens United case: a group of people organized as a corporation were selling an anti-Clinton video close to an election, for which they were prosecuted. If dissing politicians is bad, what exactly is the point of the 1st Amendment?
It seems you didn't read the article. The article said if there are sites which have been replaced by a static page, fine.
But there are other sites which are serving the full content of a page, and then also showing a "We're Closed" popup obscuring the content, thus saving no web or DB costs, power, etc., serving no purpose whatsoever other than we want to be in your face that this stuff is closed, oh, and here's a preview of what you're missing.
Even with the parliamentary system, you have two houses. The lower house is supreme in matters of funding. If the House of Commons were to reject funding for Program X (whether that be the UK's involvement in Afghanistan or whatever), that would be the end of the matter.
There'd be nothing the House of Lords could do about it.
Here, the lower house has rejected funding for a certain program, and the upper house is refusing to recognize the lower house's power of the purse.
Slashdot Mirror
>Its all about the ad dollars and the advertisers
Well, the thing is, why don't the advertisers just advertise on whatever the users are watching? What's the problem with that?
The problem is just that the advertisers want to control what you're watching, nothing controversial or out of the mainstream, just lukewarm pabulum.
But the advertisers should not think that they are "sponsoring" Youtube videos. Rather, they are simply accessing Youtube users (regardless of what the users happen to be watching).
>And don't expect much success convincing users to go to a shell and type apt-get commands.
Come on, you know that Ubuntu doesn't require you do do that. You use the graphical Ubuntu Software application.
> It also doesn't need JavaScript to run
Google also, for all its evil parts, to its credit also does not require JavaScript to run. When I heard that they were moving to a JS based search, it annoyed me. It's one thing to give suggestions while you're typing, but what's the point of showing search results if you haven't even told them what you're searching for yet?! They could have totally broken old non-JS search, but they did not.
Also, Google Image Search works without JS. This is deliberate, because JS-based image search is totally different from non-JS. I'd argue that non-JS works better (for me) than JS-based.
Finally, they don't annoyingly hide-by-default their FAQs so that you have to have JS turned on just to be able to read a Google help answer.
>Eventually we have to come into a natural balance so that each child born is replacing a person who has died.
What are you talking about? Western countries are already there (a fertility rate of 2.1 or less). The only reason the US doesn't have less than that rate is because of immigration.
That's probably easily determined. If you have a tracker app that's showing your phone at X location, it's probably yours. Otherwise, if it's someone else's, how did you get access to their phone to install the tracker?
Can you be more clear? What do you mean by a recurring fee? What is that referring to?
He is right. The business would pay VAT on a 747. Why do you say it wouldn't?
You don't have to go to Gnome.
If you've installed Ubuntu, just install Cardapio for a drop-down menu of all programs in the familiar Accessories, Internet, Office, Games, etc. categories.
HP making PCs is what keeps their name on people's minds. Not only that, but they can offer total end to end solutions, as opposed to buying PCs from one company and servers from another.
Well, the store's being closed, so it wouldn't matter about giving a reference anyway.
>Before anyone starts explaining about how it is difficult not to give root access to sys admins etc, it is not exactly rocket science to have peer reviewed access control polices even for sys admins,
Would you care to share what those access control systems are?
Erm, actually it's the same storage requirements for Google, even if they rewrite the image to be contained in the email.
E.g.: 1KB email, 40 KB image. Image stored separately, 41 KB storage space required.
1KB email, 40 KB image. Image stored in email, 41 KB storage space required.
The answer is the user can't differentiate, unless we have access to the source code.
So here's an open source flashlight app you should be using:
MrWhite: https://fdroid.org/wiki/page/org.bc_bd.mrwhite
Or Torch: https://fdroid.org/wiki/page/com.colinmcdonough.android.torch
Install them by installing the F-Droid (FOSS for Android) package manager from Google Play.
Yeah, but look at it from the perspective of a company (say, your own):
You hire a guy who's a total generalist. You sit patiently while either you train him or he trains himself in specifics. The moment he's trained, he jumps ship for someplace else.
How do you avoid that? Since you paid for his education (training) shouldn't you get to reap the benefits?
Please tell us.
What's an FBI virus? A virus released by the FBI into the wild so they can snoop on people without a warrant?
He went to Princeton, and then to Harvard Law School. While an undergraduate, he was the top debater in the national college debate circuit.
Except that I've had trouble booting CD images on thumbdrives, although "in theory" there shouldn't have been any problem.
What I find is that when you encounter a series of iptable statements, it seems obvious that the kernel is building some sort of table of data or rules (LISP: data == program).
But instead of providing the table to the system, you have to build it up, piece by excruciating piece.
Whoever thought that was a good idea should have his packets limited.
OK, I'll bite.
What do you think deprecate means?
OK, I checked out your links, and they don't seem to have the text of their proposed amendment other than this vague statement:
So, then, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People cannot spend money as they choose, because as a corporation, it doesn't have any rights, correct? And for humans, speech will be limited to using your voicebox, and not distributing pamphlets?
It would be useful to review the actual Citizens United case: a group of people organized as a corporation were selling an anti-Clinton video close to an election, for which they were prosecuted. If dissing politicians is bad, what exactly is the point of the 1st Amendment?
Erm, there's no yearly budget, and the government has been operating in this mode for a while now. Ask the Senate Majority Leader why.
It's been operating on continuing resolutions, which basically means: spend as much money as you were before, but x% extra.
It seems you didn't read the article. The article said if there are sites which have been replaced by a static page, fine.
But there are other sites which are serving the full content of a page, and then also showing a "We're Closed" popup obscuring the content, thus saving no web or DB costs, power, etc., serving no purpose whatsoever other than we want to be in your face that this stuff is closed, oh, and here's a preview of what you're missing.
Even with the parliamentary system, you have two houses. The lower house is supreme in matters of funding. If the House of Commons were to reject funding for Program X (whether that be the UK's involvement in Afghanistan or whatever), that would be the end of the matter.
There'd be nothing the House of Lords could do about it.
Here, the lower house has rejected funding for a certain program, and the upper house is refusing to recognize the lower house's power of the purse.
>It's infinitely more fare
Um, you must mean more fair, less fare.