It sounds like you're saying that Google allows users to bypass the bloated navigation pages of a site, instead going directly to the page they want to view. Tough luck, guys. I hate dealing with every website's differing and usually annoying navigation a site offers, and use Google almost all the time to find that final page I want to view.
In other words, it's a non-zero-sum game. Google profits from these online publications, and these online publications profit from Google pointing people to them (and users profit from having easier access to the information!).
I really like this new term. It expands my vocabulary greatly. Instead of saying I want the right-sized monitor, I can say I want a Goldilocks monitor. Or instead of the right temperature in my house, I can say I want the Goldilocks temperature. Then people will have to ask me what the hell I mean, and I can enjoy answering. Of course I can't just say that it means "suitable"; I must tell a story involving bears and porridge.
So the question is whether this device detects what letter the people are thinking of, or merely some arbitrary neural firings. If it's the latter, then you can probably make it into a habit. Buf it you have to think of each letter, how can you ever speed that up? You wouldn't ever be able to do anything shorthand, because this device would be wired up to the wrong thing.
Not sure whether this is related, but I was searching target.com yesterday via Google and got lots of hits to pages for products they apparently don't sale any more. Maybe they need to first remove old pages before they up their rank...
It only takes a few watts to run the electronics and keep the Wave Glider on course. The solar panels and a rechargeable battery provide that. So there's nothing to run out of. It just keeps going.
Typical short-sighted assessment. When Earth has stopped rotating due to all these gliders in the oceans, then we'll see whether they "just keep going". Hmpf!
Forcing Verizon to do anything that isn't in their corporations best interest is morally wrong. Because we all know that large corporation are only looking out for what is best for the consumer!
Why do you think a company should be looking out for you? You are simply in it to get the most for yourself; you aren't looking out for the company. But the two balance out, the most basic form being buyers and sellers. A buyer wants to pay zero if possible, and a seller wants to charge an infinite amount, if possible. They find a common ground that's based on how much they value money and the product.
As for corporations, property law is what gives both parties equal footing. You have money, and the company has things you want. The company offers them at some price and with some contract, and you can choose whether it's worth your money. Some companies have complex contracts whose terms can change within constraints covered in the contract. You have to consider whether the terms are worth it to you, and perhaps whether you can even understand the terms. If you don't feel confident, you don't have to sign the contract; you can just walk away.
If you get a "free" phone from Verizon for your aging mother so that she can stay in contact with you more easily, well then you SHOULD have to pay the early termination fee of $350.00 for that $29.99 piece of electronics when she passes away on the 21st month of your contract.
If you signed a contract that has those terms, hell yeah you should have to pay. Why did you sign a contract you didn't intend to keep? Why should you get special treatment because your mother died? That's not preventing you from being responsible.
And while we are at it, let us remove those other pesky regulations that the goverment has placed upon these large corporations. Let us remove the one where they are required to pay a minimum wage to their employees. We all know that this is just costing us jobs.
Indeed it does cost jobs! An employee is a seller of labor, and the company is the buyer. Minimum wage laws say that an employee cannot offer his product (labor) for less than some amount. If his product is worth less than minimum wage, he cannot (legally) sell it!
Let's remove the regulation that says Verizon must provide access to their lines from other competitors as well. I don't want no stinking Sprint customer to be able to call me.
I think it's the market that dictates this. Why would someone use a cell phone provider that didn't allow you to call people using other providers? Or are you saying that people would anyway, and then ask the government to force Verizon to connect to others, when the people could have simply taken their business to other providers in the first place and left the government out of it? Why do you feel entitled to dictate what a company does with its own property?
Obviously, you missed the part about "the agreement" being intentionally and maliciously complex, to the point that it is indecipherable to the average customer.
So don't sign anything that's maliciously complex to the point of being indecipherable.
There are laws against trying to cheat customers. Hiding your draconian terms in an indecipherable "agreement" is anything but fair and honest. It should be illegal.
Even though you can easily avoid this supposed fraud?
It's ironic that someone who doesn't believe in IP (presumably because it conflicts with physical property) doesn't believe in physical property either. You signed a contract with the cell phone company. Deal with it. If you don't like such contracts, don't sign them! Nobody forced you.
These new systems will very likely have a mode to work with a normal display, where they only show one of the angles. Since you are already compatible with Real World 3D, I don't see how you'd be incompatible with this. Even red-green glasses should be usable, albeit with only one color actually visible.
Apple is anti-competitive by tying the bottom half of its computers with the top half. They should make each half work with whatever the user wants to use it with.
Apple is anti-competitive by tying its iPhone firmware to the iPhone. It should make its firmware work on any mobile phone, hell, any hardware device with flash memory.
But really, Apple is building things with its own private property, then offering them to users for a voluntary exchange with money. Users are free to decline the exchange. Why should the government be involved in any way?
Heh, reminds me of I think it was Enterprise episodes where they were talking of thousands and tens of thousands of meters from the ship. I kept wondering why they didn't say for example 3.5 kilomoeters, 20 kiliometers, etc.
Just be glad the headline wasn't "Lake On Titan Winks From a Giga Kilomoeter Away"
I'd have been freaked out if I went inside one of those things. Dark, possibly habitat to animals and insects, things that could fall on me, and did I mention dark?
Holding up the fucking express line paying by check. And not whipping the fucking checkbook out until after everything has been totaled. I mean come on, can't you start filling the damn thing out the moment you arrive at the checkout stand, rather than staring at the cashier as he scans each item, and then realizing "oh, hey, I need to fill this whole thing out!".
Agreed; I hate seeing a person's signature over and over in every message. If you create an account on Slashdot, you can turn them off. Of course people often reference their signatures, leaving one at a loss as to what they are referring to. Note to signaturephiles: not everyone even has them displayed.
This whole thing makes me want to create a black hole that sucks the entire Earth into it. Oh wait, no, I wasn't threatening to do so, wait, it was only a jo
Sir, you would be infringing on the copyright I have on my name: T H E (first, middle, last). If you wish to proceed, I can work out a licensing arrangement.
I'm not arguing against private property; in fact, I'm arguing for it. Those who argue for equal X for everyone are against private property, and voluntary exchange.
We've got a plug-in lawn mower and I can tell you that even if you run over the cord intentionally, it doesn't cut it up, since it sits at the ground level, below the top of the grass.
Slashdot Mirror
It sounds like you're saying that Google allows users to bypass the bloated navigation pages of a site, instead going directly to the page they want to view. Tough luck, guys. I hate dealing with every website's differing and usually annoying navigation a site offers, and use Google almost all the time to find that final page I want to view.
In other words, it's a non-zero-sum game. Google profits from these online publications, and these online publications profit from Google pointing people to them (and users profit from having easier access to the information!).
They merely confirmed that the rumored rumor is true; there is a rumor of an Apple tablet.
I really like this new term. It expands my vocabulary greatly. Instead of saying I want the right-sized monitor, I can say I want a Goldilocks monitor. Or instead of the right temperature in my house, I can say I want the Goldilocks temperature. Then people will have to ask me what the hell I mean, and I can enjoy answering. Of course I can't just say that it means "suitable"; I must tell a story involving bears and porridge.
As I read that linked post, I was just waiting for "I put on my robe and wizard hat". That guy would be perfect for her.
So the question is whether this device detects what letter the people are thinking of, or merely some arbitrary neural firings. If it's the latter, then you can probably make it into a habit. Buf it you have to think of each letter, how can you ever speed that up? You wouldn't ever be able to do anything shorthand, because this device would be wired up to the wrong thing.
Not sure whether this is related, but I was searching target.com yesterday via Google and got lots of hits to pages for products they apparently don't sale any more. Maybe they need to first remove old pages before they up their rank...
Hand in your geek card, dude. 9/11 is zero (or if you're a mathematician, it's a rational number).
I think he'd be better off at a TA meeting (Tourette's Anonymous).
Typical short-sighted assessment. When Earth has stopped rotating due to all these gliders in the oceans, then we'll see whether they "just keep going". Hmpf!
Why do you think a company should be looking out for you? You are simply in it to get the most for yourself; you aren't looking out for the company. But the two balance out, the most basic form being buyers and sellers. A buyer wants to pay zero if possible, and a seller wants to charge an infinite amount, if possible. They find a common ground that's based on how much they value money and the product.
As for corporations, property law is what gives both parties equal footing. You have money, and the company has things you want. The company offers them at some price and with some contract, and you can choose whether it's worth your money. Some companies have complex contracts whose terms can change within constraints covered in the contract. You have to consider whether the terms are worth it to you, and perhaps whether you can even understand the terms. If you don't feel confident, you don't have to sign the contract; you can just walk away.
If you signed a contract that has those terms, hell yeah you should have to pay. Why did you sign a contract you didn't intend to keep? Why should you get special treatment because your mother died? That's not preventing you from being responsible.
Indeed it does cost jobs! An employee is a seller of labor, and the company is the buyer. Minimum wage laws say that an employee cannot offer his product (labor) for less than some amount. If his product is worth less than minimum wage, he cannot (legally) sell it!
I think it's the market that dictates this. Why would someone use a cell phone provider that didn't allow you to call people using other providers? Or are you saying that people would anyway, and then ask the government to force Verizon to connect to others, when the people could have simply taken their business to other providers in the first place and left the government out of it? Why do you feel entitled to dictate what a company does with its own property?
So don't sign anything that's maliciously complex to the point of being indecipherable.
Even though you can easily avoid this supposed fraud?
It's ironic that someone who doesn't believe in IP (presumably because it conflicts with physical property) doesn't believe in physical property either. You signed a contract with the cell phone company. Deal with it. If you don't like such contracts, don't sign them! Nobody forced you.
Yes, who would have.
These new systems will very likely have a mode to work with a normal display, where they only show one of the angles. Since you are already compatible with Real World 3D, I don't see how you'd be incompatible with this. Even red-green glasses should be usable, albeit with only one color actually visible.
Apple is anti-competitive by tying the bottom half of its computers with the top half. They should make each half work with whatever the user wants to use it with.
Apple is anti-competitive by tying its iPhone firmware to the iPhone. It should make its firmware work on any mobile phone, hell, any hardware device with flash memory.
But really, Apple is building things with its own private property, then offering them to users for a voluntary exchange with money. Users are free to decline the exchange. Why should the government be involved in any way?
Just be glad the headline wasn't "Lake On Titan Winks From a Giga Kilomoeter Away"
I'd have been freaked out if I went inside one of those things. Dark, possibly habitat to animals and insects, things that could fall on me, and did I mention dark?
Holding up the fucking express line paying by check. And not whipping the fucking checkbook out until after everything has been totaled. I mean come on, can't you start filling the damn thing out the moment you arrive at the checkout stand, rather than staring at the cashier as he scans each item, and then realizing "oh, hey, I need to fill this whole thing out!".
Agreed; I hate seeing a person's signature over and over in every message. If you create an account on Slashdot, you can turn them off. Of course people often reference their signatures, leaving one at a loss as to what they are referring to. Note to signaturephiles: not everyone even has them displayed.
I'm sorry, I'm not a horse expert. Can you put that in terms of a car analogy, perhaps with spikes on the road and wheelies or something?
This whole thing makes me want to create a black hole that sucks the entire Earth into it. Oh wait, no, I wasn't threatening to do so, wait, it was only a jo
Sir, you would be infringing on the copyright I have on my name: T H E (first, middle, last). If you wish to proceed, I can work out a licensing arrangement.
I'm not arguing against private property; in fact, I'm arguing for it. Those who argue for equal X for everyone are against private property, and voluntary exchange.
We've got a plug-in lawn mower and I can tell you that even if you run over the cord intentionally, it doesn't cut it up, since it sits at the ground level, below the top of the grass.