A lot of pirates seem to get into piracy for the free stuff, but turn political once they realise how potentially dangerous anti-piracy efforts are. It's easy to conclude that effective copyright enforcement and freedom on the internet are mutually incompatible - and if one has to go, make it copyright.
From a business perspective, it makes perfect sense. Tablets tend to be low-margin, low-cost devices used for only a few purposes, and without an existing library of legacy software. The perfect place for linux to get in, and once in to become very successful. All it'd need would be for one major or a few minor manufacturers to support it officially. Obviously MS can't let that happen - they'd be forced to compete with free, and they just can't win that - so their best shot is to lock a potential future competitor out of the market before it gets established.
They also provoked a modest amount of outrage recently when they revealed that Windows for ARM would only be permitted to run on hardware made to be incapable of running any other OS.
Then don't blame the fat person. Blame the restraunt, for overestimating the number of people their all-you-can-eat buffet is able to serve. They have models, they should be taking the fatsos into account.
Or it's one of those parentially imagined allergies. Kid ate eggs once, got ill, parents decided it must be an allergic reaction... and absolutly refuse to accept otherwise, even if tests clearly show no allergy. Because they are the parents, and can't believe anyone else could know more about their own child than they do.
It's called overbooking, and it's actually standard practice for events like shows: You can sell a few more tickets than you have seats, because it's unlikely everyone will turn up. It only goes wrong when the business pushes the sold-to-available ratio dangerously high, which AT&T have done.
It does happen, it just happens exceptionally rarely. The airlines have elaborate models they can use to minimise the chance, but they can't eliminate it entirely.
How many scientists do studies to prove climage change now? They are onto doing the studies that might work out exactly what the implications are - who will be affected, and in what way.
And this is why several states have a clause in their constitution forbidding any non-Christian (With various definitions of Christian) from holding public office. They didn't become the *United* states for some time, remember.
The purpose of internet censorship isn't to make it impossible to gain access to prohibited information - that would be impossible. The purpose is to make that information so much trouble to get to that only a negligable number of people will be so determined.
One mans free speech can also be another's copyright infringement, incitement to racial hatred, obscenity, heresy, threat to national unity or intolerably blasphemy. There are very few people who support completly unconditional free speech - people just differ in how much they value free speech in relation to other, contradictory ideals.
It'd take more than one nuke to destroy Israel, and they have nukes of their own. Whoever attacked Israel with nukes would receive far more than they sent. The current government of Iran isn't that stupid - but maybe a future one will be. Or they just might be sensible enough to do so covertly: Send the nuke in a shipping container, no way to tell exactly who did it.
Humans are not rational creatures. If you want to feel really frustrated, try arguing with one of the anti-vaxers, the abortion-cancer link people or a creationist. Facts have no impact on them at all.
From Apple? That's expensive aluminium Foxconn crap. You may loathe Apple for their business practices, and rightly so, but they do make good quality hardware. And I'd hope so too, considering what they charge for it.
Entrenched *semi*-open competitor. Android is a lot more open than iOS, but not as open as your typical desktop OS - you still need to exploit a security hole of some kind to get root access, and device manufacturers are free to add in their own anti-tamper measures. Which they often do.
Zune was a hardware initiative - the idea being to compete with Apple's highly successful model of a music store (iTunes) and music player (iPod) closely tied together, each promoting the other, as well as to unify Microsoft's then-bewildering selection of incompatable DRM solutions supported by WMP so that customers could be sure that if they had a Zune player and brought music from the Zune store they would be compatible.
It was a commercial failure. Vestiges of the project remain in the xbox store, but the player itsself is dead.
Depends how good their marketing department is. Remember, they can afford to lose a few hundred million dollars a year in that department for however long it takes to turn it into something profitable, and they have a history of using their successful products as tools to drive users to their unsuccessful products.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of pirates seem to get into piracy for the free stuff, but turn political once they realise how potentially dangerous anti-piracy efforts are. It's easy to conclude that effective copyright enforcement and freedom on the internet are mutually incompatible - and if one has to go, make it copyright.
Barely.
Depends what browser you use, and what version of that browser. IE6 is still around, remember.
Or Eze 23:20, if you swing the other way.
:>
The chances of a woman on slashdot seem slim
From a business perspective, it makes perfect sense. Tablets tend to be low-margin, low-cost devices used for only a few purposes, and without an existing library of legacy software. The perfect place for linux to get in, and once in to become very successful. All it'd need would be for one major or a few minor manufacturers to support it officially. Obviously MS can't let that happen - they'd be forced to compete with free, and they just can't win that - so their best shot is to lock a potential future competitor out of the market before it gets established.
They also provoked a modest amount of outrage recently when they revealed that Windows for ARM would only be permitted to run on hardware made to be incapable of running any other OS.
Then don't blame the fat person. Blame the restraunt, for overestimating the number of people their all-you-can-eat buffet is able to serve. They have models, they should be taking the fatsos into account.
Because willfully endangering other people to eliminate a tiny, tiny risk of discomfort to yourself makes you, basically, a selfish dick.
Or it's one of those parentially imagined allergies. Kid ate eggs once, got ill, parents decided it must be an allergic reaction... and absolutly refuse to accept otherwise, even if tests clearly show no allergy. Because they are the parents, and can't believe anyone else could know more about their own child than they do.
It's called overbooking, and it's actually standard practice for events like shows: You can sell a few more tickets than you have seats, because it's unlikely everyone will turn up. It only goes wrong when the business pushes the sold-to-available ratio dangerously high, which AT&T have done.
It does happen, it just happens exceptionally rarely. The airlines have elaborate models they can use to minimise the chance, but they can't eliminate it entirely.
You get a punch-up.
How many scientists do studies to prove climage change now? They are onto doing the studies that might work out exactly what the implications are - who will be affected, and in what way.
He was nice enough to specify a precise location though - and there is nothing in the spot he indicated.
Until someone realises their mobile phone can be a wifi hotspot too.
And this is why several states have a clause in their constitution forbidding any non-Christian (With various definitions of Christian) from holding public office. They didn't become the *United* states for some time, remember.
Political divide, remember. All problems are always the fault of the other side.
The purpose of internet censorship isn't to make it impossible to gain access to prohibited information - that would be impossible. The purpose is to make that information so much trouble to get to that only a negligable number of people will be so determined.
One mans free speech can also be another's copyright infringement, incitement to racial hatred, obscenity, heresy, threat to national unity or intolerably blasphemy. There are very few people who support completly unconditional free speech - people just differ in how much they value free speech in relation to other, contradictory ideals.
It'd take more than one nuke to destroy Israel, and they have nukes of their own. Whoever attacked Israel with nukes would receive far more than they sent. The current government of Iran isn't that stupid - but maybe a future one will be. Or they just might be sensible enough to do so covertly: Send the nuke in a shipping container, no way to tell exactly who did it.
Humans are not rational creatures. If you want to feel really frustrated, try arguing with one of the anti-vaxers, the abortion-cancer link people or a creationist. Facts have no impact on them at all.
From Apple? That's expensive aluminium Foxconn crap. You may loathe Apple for their business practices, and rightly so, but they do make good quality hardware. And I'd hope so too, considering what they charge for it.
Entrenched *semi*-open competitor. Android is a lot more open than iOS, but not as open as your typical desktop OS - you still need to exploit a security hole of some kind to get root access, and device manufacturers are free to add in their own anti-tamper measures. Which they often do.
Zune was a hardware initiative - the idea being to compete with Apple's highly successful model of a music store (iTunes) and music player (iPod) closely tied together, each promoting the other, as well as to unify Microsoft's then-bewildering selection of incompatable DRM solutions supported by WMP so that customers could be sure that if they had a Zune player and brought music from the Zune store they would be compatible.
It was a commercial failure. Vestiges of the project remain in the xbox store, but the player itsself is dead.
Depends how good their marketing department is. Remember, they can afford to lose a few hundred million dollars a year in that department for however long it takes to turn it into something profitable, and they have a history of using their successful products as tools to drive users to their unsuccessful products.