Who gives a crap what the National Coffee Association says? What, is it carved on stone tablets?
If coffee is being served into a car, which is presumably drunk while moving, then it should not be served at a dangerous temperature. So it's not as hot as how the coffee geeks want it. Boo hoo.
1) Feature issue, not UI issue. In any case, yes, Word does have regular expressions. Hit the "more" button.
2) Are you insane? You can assign anything as a keyboard shortcut, including full-blown Macros.
3) Uh, no. Just because you don't know how to use them doesn't mean they don't work. You can create styles using the dialogue. Or just type in a new style name into the box and Voila! Instant new style. I'm not sure I even understand your complaint.
Actually, I've found that very few "geeks" want freedom, because freedom also brings with it responsibility. I've found that what many geeks really want is really lack of responsibility. Look at the various "geek issues"... it's all about doing whatever they want with no responsibility or cost. Downloading music for free. Downloading software for free. Creating viruses (it's Microsoft's fault, don't you know).
Unfortunately, a lot of them do. I got into an argument with two friends over this one day. One's the principal of a school in Austin, the other is a teacher there. They both feel that computer skills are the number one thing they need to teach to make sure that students are successful, while I believe that Math and Science are. (I'm a computer professional.)
Do you not see your own brand of blindness here? I readily admit I'm a math and science geek, and love both. But I will also say that math and science are completely useless to a LOT of people who could not care less about it, and in fact, it's OKAY that they don't care. Very few things in this world require science or high-level math past arithmetic.
Reading and writing are infinitely more important, because they underpin everything, including critical thinking. I've known a lot of people who liked math and science, but were utterly useless as thinkers. Hell, just look at Slashdot.:)
Re:Why I don't take this organization seriously...
on
Swedish Pirate Demo
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
10 million? LOL. Reduce by a couple orders of magnitude and you might be more accurate. Did you read some of the quotes? I particularly liked... 'Protestors in Vienna pleaded for "More sex, less Bush" '. Yeah, that makes me take them seriously. Then other ones, like Bush is going there to steal the oil.::rolls eyes::
Anyway, who cares? Guess what... there were massive protests about the US's involvement in WW/II. What else is new? People are always going to whine that they can't have a perfectly peaceful world. Of course, this protest had a particularly "fashionable" feel to it.
Re:Why I don't take this organization seriously...
on
Swedish Pirate Demo
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
18th Century: Sailed to the New World to escape religious persecution.
1865: People put down their lives to end slavery.
1945: Millions die to stop Hitler and preserve freedom.
1970: Massive protests for civil rights.
2004: Protest for the right to steal other's work.
Nah, this generation isn't spoiled. What makes you think so?
I am amazed by the number of people on Slashdot who consistently bitch about copyright and yet have very little basic understanding of it.
If you're going to arrogantly post a link, at least identify which part of it is relevant. As near as I can tell, none of that link (which I've read many times, actually) is relevant to my post.
Furthermore, I sincerely hope the "real commercial artist" you work with is not your friend. If he is, prepared to be strangled! Honestly! What are you going to do for your encore? Club a baby seal!?
This is a major thing when you are talking about advertizing because the effects are unknown (did all of the sales derive from the advertizement?)
...which makes it a minor thing. The burden of proof is going to be on the artist to prove that his art was instrumental in creating income. Since that's particularly absurd in this case, I doubt that he has a big pile of money waiting for him.
You can't just twist around the meaning of fairness and say "this guy is more important, so it's not allowed, but this guy is less important, so who cares." The law must be applied equally. We're all equal. There cannot be some people who are "more equal" or the whole damn system implodes.
It is applied equally. He can shut them down just like Big Name Artist. The difference is in what is actually damaged. This artist has no reputation to damage, therefore, he gets little compensation. As it should be. The law is not intended to be a lottery, it's intended to be fair, based on what is actually damaged.
What makes you say that? The have already used it. They will end up paying fair value for it, plus any lawyer fees.
It's all about damages. This artist has no reputation to damage. You seem to think that Joe Blow's art getting used is the same as Big Name Artist's art getting used. Sorry, it's not the same.
I get the impression from your comments that you think this is a minor infraction.
As a matter of fact, it is.
I take it you are not a commercial artist?
No, but I work with a real commercial artist. Very few artists make a lot of money from their art. Sorry, but this guy is not Wyeth. His art is worth about $100, and that's if I want to buy an original using traditional mediums
Corporations are OWNED by citizens, and those same citizens provide jobs to other citizens. Laws are not enforced for the benefits of "the corporation" (that's just silly), they're enforced for citizens, some of who may own or work for a corporation.
While most would agree that all reasonable laws should be enforced, there are many antiquated laws that no longer serve their purpose.
So you want Law Enforcement to unilaterally decide which laws should be enforced and which ones shouldn't? Last I checked, that's the legislature's job.
FYI - I actually got your service to work by using my ISP's outgoing SMTP server. Apparently they are no longer requiring their own domain as the return address, which I think they used to do.
See, the smart people think out a plan... and then... they go and test it.
The issue isn't with testing a plan, the issue is with the particular plan they're testing. I'm all for testing, but at some point I think it's reasonable to ask why all these ten year plans KEEP FAILING, decade after decade.
I know, I know. It's a damn hard problem. Which is why I think that we need some new thinking about it, rather than these ten year plans that never seem to show any fruit.
I know that fusion is really hard problem. But it seems to me that if takes 10 years to just build an experiment, that should indicate that this probably isn't the way to build a practical reactor. It just screams "waste of money" to me.
I know that it makes sense to at least do something so that we continue to learn, but sometimes it seems like they need to do more thinking and less building.
Re:Not smart to sue your customers
on
Hack This, Please
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Do you seriously think they disappeared because of hackers? Please. They disappeared because they had lousy ideas. Whether they sued hackers or not was totally irrelevant.
That piece is very foolish. The point he misses is that GEEKS DON'T MATTER. It doesn't matter that he likes hackable stuff; he's only one sale. It doesn't matter what books O'Reilly sells, because O'Reilly is barely a blip in the publishing world. What matters is what the masses want, and the masses typically want stuff that "just works" with a minimum of hassle. They don't care about extreme customization.
I recall one of Steve Jobs' big failures. He created an "ultimate remote control" that did everything but get your beer for you. It was a massive failure. Why? Too complicated. People didn't want an infinitely programmable remote control.
Slashdot Mirror
Mostly because the product has nothing to do with Java, although, I have to admit I associate negative connotations to anything with Java in the name.
If coffee is being served into a car, which is presumably drunk while moving, then it should not be served at a dangerous temperature. So it's not as hot as how the coffee geeks want it. Boo hoo.
2) Are you insane? You can assign anything as a keyboard shortcut, including full-blown Macros.
3) Uh, no. Just because you don't know how to use them doesn't mean they don't work. You can create styles using the dialogue. Or just type in a new style name into the box and Voila! Instant new style. I'm not sure I even understand your complaint.
Actually, I've found that very few "geeks" want freedom, because freedom also brings with it responsibility. I've found that what many geeks really want is really lack of responsibility. Look at the various "geek issues"... it's all about doing whatever they want with no responsibility or cost. Downloading music for free. Downloading software for free. Creating viruses (it's Microsoft's fault, don't you know).
It's all short-sighted selfishness.
Unfortunately, a lot of them do. I got into an argument with two friends over this one day. One's the principal of a school in Austin, the other is a teacher there. They both feel that computer skills are the number one thing they need to teach to make sure that students are successful, while I believe that Math and Science are. (I'm a computer professional.)
Do you not see your own brand of blindness here? I readily admit I'm a math and science geek, and love both. But I will also say that math and science are completely useless to a LOT of people who could not care less about it, and in fact, it's OKAY that they don't care. Very few things in this world require science or high-level math past arithmetic.
Reading and writing are infinitely more important, because they underpin everything, including critical thinking. I've known a lot of people who liked math and science, but were utterly useless as thinkers. Hell, just look at Slashdot. :)
Anyway, who cares? Guess what... there were massive protests about the US's involvement in WW/II. What else is new? People are always going to whine that they can't have a perfectly peaceful world. Of course, this protest had a particularly "fashionable" feel to it.
1865: People put down their lives to end slavery.
1945: Millions die to stop Hitler and preserve freedom.
1970: Massive protests for civil rights.
2004: Protest for the right to steal other's work.
Nah, this generation isn't spoiled. What makes you think so?
I am amazed by the number of people on Slashdot who consistently bitch about copyright and yet have very little basic understanding of it.
If you're going to arrogantly post a link, at least identify which part of it is relevant. As near as I can tell, none of that link (which I've read many times, actually) is relevant to my post.
Furthermore, I sincerely hope the "real commercial artist" you work with is not your friend. If he is, prepared to be strangled! Honestly! What are you going to do for your encore? Club a baby seal!?
What are you talking about?
...which makes it a minor thing. The burden of proof is going to be on the artist to prove that his art was instrumental in creating income. Since that's particularly absurd in this case, I doubt that he has a big pile of money waiting for him.
It is applied equally. He can shut them down just like Big Name Artist. The difference is in what is actually damaged. This artist has no reputation to damage, therefore, he gets little compensation. As it should be. The law is not intended to be a lottery, it's intended to be fair, based on what is actually damaged.
What makes you say that? The have already used it. They will end up paying fair value for it, plus any lawyer fees.
It's all about damages. This artist has no reputation to damage. You seem to think that Joe Blow's art getting used is the same as Big Name Artist's art getting used. Sorry, it's not the same.
I get the impression from your comments that you think this is a minor infraction.
As a matter of fact, it is.
I take it you are not a commercial artist?
No, but I work with a real commercial artist. Very few artists make a lot of money from their art. Sorry, but this guy is not Wyeth. His art is worth about $100, and that's if I want to buy an original using traditional mediums
Winning lawsuit != instant millionaire.
The most he would get is removal of the images, and if he was lucky, repayment of his attorney's fees.
Guess what? Shareholders are citizens, too.
So you want Law Enforcement to unilaterally decide which laws should be enforced and which ones shouldn't? Last I checked, that's the legislature's job.
"Why are my tax dollars being spent giving me a speeding ticket when there are real crime organizations out there killing people?"
Because ALL laws should be enforced.
You mean, serving the citizens of their countries, who are trying to make money by selling software? You mean, enforcing the law?
How dare they! It would make much more sense for them to start working for the software pirates. ::rolls eyes::
But thanks for the alternate method as well.
I don't suppose it supports a non-standard SMTP port, does it? My !@#%!%# cable provider blocks port 25 for anti-virus purposes.
Who the hell decorated that office? The same person who decorated my kid's preschool? Whoever it was, they were clearly color blind.
In "world terms", there are only two major sports: soccer and basketball.
They didn't spend decades and billions of dollars (or the equivalent) to build a single airplane prototype.
The issue isn't with testing a plan, the issue is with the particular plan they're testing. I'm all for testing, but at some point I think it's reasonable to ask why all these ten year plans KEEP FAILING, decade after decade.
I know, I know. It's a damn hard problem. Which is why I think that we need some new thinking about it, rather than these ten year plans that never seem to show any fruit.
I know that it makes sense to at least do something so that we continue to learn, but sometimes it seems like they need to do more thinking and less building.
Do you seriously think they disappeared because of hackers? Please. They disappeared because they had lousy ideas. Whether they sued hackers or not was totally irrelevant.
I recall one of Steve Jobs' big failures. He created an "ultimate remote control" that did everything but get your beer for you. It was a massive failure. Why? Too complicated. People didn't want an infinitely programmable remote control.