Add in the fact that they'll probably start slipping forced arbitration clauses in their contracts like a lot of companies are doing and I can't see this going wrong at all
Generally speaking, I'd like some sort of diagnostic tests beyond a conversation and a limited visual inspection via streaming with questionable resolution.
The supreme court has already ruled that a company's ToS can legally require you to forgo class action lawsuits in favor of individual arbitration, so apparently they feel that there's still some method of achieving compensation, despite the fact that a class action lawsuit is made up of a lot of small claims which no lawyer would have any interest in representing on an individual basis.
And how many different devices with Android are on the market at the same time? There's a difference between doing 2 major updates for one specific piece of hardware on one (now two) carriers, and doing multiple updates on dozens of different phones, all with different hardware, across multiple carriers. Although this is also why people have been complaining that google needs to force manufacturers to conform to some kind of spec if they want to use android.
All I know is that the UI on the WD live tv recently changed to more closely match the travesty that they turned their webpage into, and whoever is designing their UIs needs a kick in the head.
I'm trying to figure out how requiring the school district to enact it instead of it being enacted directly by the state makes it better, or how the school districts having a year to draft the policy makes it better. Those aren't even relevant to the conversation and you act as though the outcry hinges upon who's enacting the policy and the timeframe in which they will do so.
I changed my subscription from 3 dvds + streaming to streaming only. Not to teach Netflix a lesson or because I was angry with them, but because the price increase made me really look at whether I wanted to continue paying that kind of price. If there'd been no price increase I probably wouldn't have given it any real thought and continued at my current subscription level indefinitely. Significant price percentage increases have the negative effect of making people actually stop to think about how much they're paying and for what, and most subscription services will end up the worse for that scrutiny.
Since when does patent infringement result in a ban on import rather than a fine and order to pay royalties for the patented item? Is it because HTC isn't a US company?
It's a pretty poor rebellion that is seeking to fight the army of the opposing side.
"Rebellion, uprising or insurrection, is a refusal of obedience or order.[1] It may, therefore, be seen as encompassing a range of behaviors aimed at destroying or replacing an established authority such as a government or a head of state"
But it does absolutely nothing about the issues, both real and perceived, that caused Al Qaeda to exist in the first place. It's attacking the symptoms and ignoring the cause. So how long will it be before there's another group comprised of exactly the same disenfranchised people under the same ideology?
"In order to get into that position, that one station must have out competed the others to attain more money."
Cause absolutely no one who owns a station STARTED with any money, it was only accrued through them being the most successful station. You're advocating hard for letting those with money do whatever they want to those without.
"In her brief, the ex-wife said “the authority, alluded to by oppositor-appellant, the ‘Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders DSM-IV-TR,’ was taken from an Internet website commonly known as Wikipedia.”"
It makes it sound as though the DSM only exists in the fairytale land of Wikipedia. Unless he SAID "from this article about the DSM on wikipedia", in which case he's just a dumbass
The implication is that a large part of the deterrent is the belief that the US can determine exactly where the nuke came from, and reply in kind. By announcing that that ability is decaying, that deterrent is completely undermined.
While obviously it's better if we can actually do what we say we can, it's the belief that we can that (theoretically) keeps people in check.
Because Google is putting out an article/official statement regarding vulnerability fix timelines and public disclosure with his name in the byline. The implication is that they fully support his view on the matter, though the timeline that's being touted as acceptable in the article is not one he stuck to. It's a lot of "do as I say, not as I do."
So google is defending the actions of an engineer who posted attack code on a Windows vulnerability 5 days after he reported it to Microsoft by saying that 60 days is more than enough time to fix a critical vulnerability...how exactly does that reasoning work?
Slashdot Mirror
Add in the fact that they'll probably start slipping forced arbitration clauses in their contracts like a lot of companies are doing and I can't see this going wrong at all
It says it needs 30GB during the install, it only downloads about 10.
"Pavegen To Tap Pedestrians For Power In the UK" I've seen this movie trilogy. It didn't end well. No, seriously, it REALLY didn't end well
Also, what happens if their advice is just "You'll need to go to the doctor's office/emergency room"? Does the $45 get refunded?
Generally speaking, I'd like some sort of diagnostic tests beyond a conversation and a limited visual inspection via streaming with questionable resolution.
Pretty sure if the service is successful it'll just illustrate that $45/10m is the cost that people are willing to bear, and it won't change.
The supreme court has already ruled that a company's ToS can legally require you to forgo class action lawsuits in favor of individual arbitration, so apparently they feel that there's still some method of achieving compensation, despite the fact that a class action lawsuit is made up of a lot of small claims which no lawyer would have any interest in representing on an individual basis.
And how many different devices with Android are on the market at the same time? There's a difference between doing 2 major updates for one specific piece of hardware on one (now two) carriers, and doing multiple updates on dozens of different phones, all with different hardware, across multiple carriers. Although this is also why people have been complaining that google needs to force manufacturers to conform to some kind of spec if they want to use android.
All I know is that the UI on the WD live tv recently changed to more closely match the travesty that they turned their webpage into, and whoever is designing their UIs needs a kick in the head.
I'm trying to figure out how requiring the school district to enact it instead of it being enacted directly by the state makes it better, or how the school districts having a year to draft the policy makes it better. Those aren't even relevant to the conversation and you act as though the outcry hinges upon who's enacting the policy and the timeframe in which they will do so.
So your convenience trumps their right to peaceably assemble?
So just close your eyes, keep your mouth shut, and pretend not to see all abuses of authority because it's not a REAL fascist state.
How bad does it need to become, in your view, before people are allowed to object?
...now I kind of want to be able to rent board games.
I changed my subscription from 3 dvds + streaming to streaming only. Not to teach Netflix a lesson or because I was angry with them, but because the price increase made me really look at whether I wanted to continue paying that kind of price. If there'd been no price increase I probably wouldn't have given it any real thought and continued at my current subscription level indefinitely. Significant price percentage increases have the negative effect of making people actually stop to think about how much they're paying and for what, and most subscription services will end up the worse for that scrutiny.
Since when does patent infringement result in a ban on import rather than a fine and order to pay royalties for the patented item? Is it because HTC isn't a US company?
It's a pretty poor rebellion that is seeking to fight the army of the opposing side.
"Rebellion, uprising or insurrection, is a refusal of obedience or order.[1] It may, therefore, be seen as encompassing a range of behaviors aimed at destroying or replacing an established authority such as a government or a head of state"
So it's terrorism because it's not QUITE oppressive enough, but there's a certain tipping point where it becomes rebellion? I
But it does absolutely nothing about the issues, both real and perceived, that caused Al Qaeda to exist in the first place. It's attacking the symptoms and ignoring the cause. So how long will it be before there's another group comprised of exactly the same disenfranchised people under the same ideology?
"In order to get into that position, that one station must have out competed the others to attain more money."
Cause absolutely no one who owns a station STARTED with any money, it was only accrued through them being the most successful station. You're advocating hard for letting those with money do whatever they want to those without.
Have Fark open in the other tab so I'm getting a kick, etc.
Not that I needed much of an excuse to re-watch TNG and DS9, but it's nice to have one.
Yeah, the wording is confusing.
"In her brief, the ex-wife said “the authority, alluded to by oppositor-appellant, the ‘Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders DSM-IV-TR,’ was taken from an Internet website commonly known as Wikipedia.”"
It makes it sound as though the DSM only exists in the fairytale land of Wikipedia. Unless he SAID "from this article about the DSM on wikipedia", in which case he's just a dumbass
The implication is that a large part of the deterrent is the belief that the US can determine exactly where the nuke came from, and reply in kind. By announcing that that ability is decaying, that deterrent is completely undermined.
While obviously it's better if we can actually do what we say we can, it's the belief that we can that (theoretically) keeps people in check.
Because Google is putting out an article/official statement regarding vulnerability fix timelines and public disclosure with his name in the byline. The implication is that they fully support his view on the matter, though the timeline that's being touted as acceptable in the article is not one he stuck to. It's a lot of "do as I say, not as I do."
So google is defending the actions of an engineer who posted attack code on a Windows vulnerability 5 days after he reported it to Microsoft by saying that 60 days is more than enough time to fix a critical vulnerability...how exactly does that reasoning work?