How is it asking valid questions being a troll but stating that many others are intentionally using bad polls and stating flat out that a polling company methods are "horribly flawed", both without offering even a shred of evidence. "Interesting"?
That assumes the problem is a router. If the source of the interference is some other device operating in the 2.4GHz band then this will not help.
Judging solely from the consistent timing of the event, I would guess that it is some sort of audio/video repeater/transmitter. I know that Radioshack sells them and they operate in the right spectrum.
Yes, do that, and when one of your customers has a problem and loses money and the press gets hold of it, and said customer sues you for not warning them about the danger, please let me know how that works out for you.
Seeing as mwandaw wants to feed the outrage machine by spinning and taking things out of context, let's take a look at the actual facts.
From the Chase FAQ:
Why are some browsers not supported? There are two primary reasons--security and popularity. There are dozens of browsers in use today, but not all offer the minimum levels of security that we require while others may not perform well with our site. The security of your accounts and private information is one of our highest priorities and some browsers, especially older versions, are simply higher security risks to use with our site.
Now, lets look at the spun summary:
The list of browsers they currently support seems outdated: Internet Explorer 6.0 and higher, Firefox 2.0 and higher, and Safari 3.0 and higher (for Macs only).
Because many people do not upgrade to the latest and greatest.
With usage of IE6 plummeting and concerns about its security well known, the inclusion of that browser seems suspect.
Which is why they mention older browsers being a security risk. Oh, and as the summary says, usage of IE6 is plummeting, but as support is existing and use is still high, it is best to support it.
On the other extreme, rising star Chrome appears to be left out, too. What does Google think of that?"
Who the fuck cares what Google thinks? Chrome is not the do-all, end-all of the internet. Chrome is not even that popular.
As for popularity, we continually monitor the types of browsers that customers use to access our site. Based on that information, we know that supported browsers are used by more than 95% of our customers. If a new browser begins to grow in popularity, we will assess and test its security and performance with our site to determine whether or not we should support its use.
Would you want to bet that Chase checked their server logs to figure out what their customers use?
And the effects not using a supported browser?
What if I continue to use a browser that is not supported? If you are using a browser that we don't support, you may not be able to access our site or you may not have the same level of performance as if you were using a supported browser.
And, about those older browsers?
How do I upgrade my browser? To upgrade, please go to the web pages listed below for each of the supported browser types. We recommend that you upgrade to the latest version available for your preferred browser.
Ok, now that the truth is out there, are you going to stop being an asshole, mwandaw?
Safari comes with every OS X install. Chrome does not. If Safari is not included, then a good portion of the Mac population may not be able to access the site.
Generally, working in IT sucks. Long hours, ignorant managers, on-call, rotating shift work, and low appreciation by management are all in the mix. Most people in IT love the tech, love the money, or both. Men are willing to put up with more shit, that is all.
In some ways, I would say this shows that women are smarter than men.
Well, you are right and you are wrong. They can't control for it, because they don't know what they are controlling for.
A woman researcher did a study and found the things you mention are not directly responsible for the difference, but rather indirectly. On average, men will take the more demanding jobs, the crappier jobs, jobs no one likes, jobs with horrible work/life balance, 75%+ travel jobs, and jobs for companies no one really wants to be associated with if the pay is right. Women don't.
Women will choose a lower paying job with a non-profit over a higher paying job in a corporation, because they will feel better about themselves working at the non-profit.
The fact is women and men are not the same. They have different motivations and different goals. Men want to get a head and get paid lots of money more than be comfortable and happy. Women want to be happy and comfortable more than they want to get ahead and get paid lots of money.
Different motivations, different goals, different outcomes.
Besides, people STILL fall for 409 scams. You don't think they would fall for this when they fall for something that has been beaten to death in the media?
So, you think making things quicker and easier for the pirates will get the MPAA a slice of the profits? I don't think so, and more importantly, the MPAA doesn't think so.
Minesweeper does not advocate violence, quite the opposite in fact. You are attempting mark destructive devices. While one can gamble on solitaire, one can not do so in the game, so it does not advocate gambling. The same goes for Mahjongg. Bubble popping is not violent. Reversi and chess teach strategy, not violence or war.
One does not have to do something even if one is able to do said thing. Slippery slope is a fallacy. Just because one takes one step, it does not follow that one will take any or all of the steps necessary to bring one down the slope. One can say "Here and no farther!"
You can search through the comments of older articles and find where slashdotters have said they would pay (some would pay MORE) for an unauthorized copy than give their money to the MPAA.
My bet is that this will be seen by the Supreme Court, and the SCOTUS will probably rule that retroactive is either not constitutional. Even if the retroactive implementation is ruled constitutional, infringers would have an affirmative defense, namely that the infringed work was in the public domain when the infringing work was created.
Why would a government not want to just talk? Do you believe that everyone the government has ever wanted to talk to was kidnapped, tortured, and then shot?
Do you think this is Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Khmer Rouge Vietnam, Iraq during Saddam's reign, or Iran?
Well, you know, it is a free country. If you fear and hate the American government so much, why don't you go somewhere more suited to you, like North Korea.
"Boohoohoo! The poor enemy who want to kill us all are being killed by our big bad military." Why do people like you always cry for the enemy?
No, Iraq didn't. But, you do know that they were fair game for a renewal of the First Gulf War when the kicked out the weapons inspectors, right? You do know that peace was contingent on them cooperating with the inspections, which they did not do, right? And, you do know that the reason the most of Europe was against renewing hostilities and would not help the U.S. was because they had all signed low cost oil contracts with Iraq, right?
Iraq should have been attacked back in 1992 when it violated the peace agreements of the First Gulf War. That has nothing to do with 9/11. The Bush administration just used that to get the approval and justify things. The fact is that once Iraq kicked the inspectors out the first time, Iraq became fair game. The only reason the U.N. and Europe wasn't on board with renewing the hostilities was that most of continental Europe had signed oil contracts with Saddam for when the sanctions were lifted.
You really should go read a history book or something because the reason for the First Gulf War was that Iraq invaded Kuwait and the reason the U.S. got involved was because Kuwait asked us to and we had treaties with Kuwait.
Slashdot Mirror
How is it asking valid questions being a troll but stating that many others are intentionally using bad polls and stating flat out that a polling company methods are "horribly flawed", both without offering even a shred of evidence. "Interesting"?
Exactly how long did the Daily Kos blindly spew out those poll results while someone wondered about "odd patterns he had noticed in R2K's reports"?
How long had they been featuring those results while there were questions about R2K's quality?
That assumes the problem is a router. If the source of the interference is some other device operating in the 2.4GHz band then this will not help.
Judging solely from the consistent timing of the event, I would guess that it is some sort of audio/video repeater/transmitter. I know that Radioshack sells them and they operate in the right spectrum.
Yes, do that, and when one of your customers has a problem and loses money and the press gets hold of it, and said customer sues you for not warning them about the danger, please let me know how that works out for you.
Seeing as mwandaw wants to feed the outrage machine by spinning and taking things out of context, let's take a look at the actual facts.
From the Chase FAQ:
Now, lets look at the spun summary:
Because many people do not upgrade to the latest and greatest.
Which is why they mention older browsers being a security risk. Oh, and as the summary says, usage of IE6 is plummeting, but as support is existing and use is still high, it is best to support it.
Who the fuck cares what Google thinks? Chrome is not the do-all, end-all of the internet. Chrome is not even that popular.
Would you want to bet that Chase checked their server logs to figure out what their customers use?
And the effects not using a supported browser?
And, about those older browsers?
Ok, now that the truth is out there, are you going to stop being an asshole, mwandaw?
Safari comes with every OS X install. Chrome does not. If Safari is not included, then a good portion of the Mac population may not be able to access the site.
Generally, working in IT sucks. Long hours, ignorant managers, on-call, rotating shift work, and low appreciation by management are all in the mix. Most people in IT love the tech, love the money, or both. Men are willing to put up with more shit, that is all.
In some ways, I would say this shows that women are smarter than men.
Well, you are right and you are wrong. They can't control for it, because they don't know what they are controlling for.
A woman researcher did a study and found the things you mention are not directly responsible for the difference, but rather indirectly. On average, men will take the more demanding jobs, the crappier jobs, jobs no one likes, jobs with horrible work/life balance, 75%+ travel jobs, and jobs for companies no one really wants to be associated with if the pay is right. Women don't.
Women will choose a lower paying job with a non-profit over a higher paying job in a corporation, because they will feel better about themselves working at the non-profit.
The fact is women and men are not the same. They have different motivations and different goals. Men want to get a head and get paid lots of money more than be comfortable and happy. Women want to be happy and comfortable more than they want to get ahead and get paid lots of money.
Different motivations, different goals, different outcomes.
Having experienced the internet for the last two decades, I can confidently say that nothing of value will be lost.
I saw this two or three years ago on the Discovery Channel.
Now, reverse your perspective and try again.
Besides, people STILL fall for 409 scams. You don't think they would fall for this when they fall for something that has been beaten to death in the media?
Ah, and here I was thinking religion == superstition.
As these sites do not look questionable, why wouldn't they?
I mean, come on, it is not like the site is named "Illegal-movie-copies.com" nor does the "about us" page say "Proud subsidiary of the Russian mob."
So, what the pirates do is download the DRM-free copy and then "share" it as being the DRM-free copy from the service.
So, you think making things quicker and easier for the pirates will get the MPAA a slice of the profits? I don't think so, and more importantly, the MPAA doesn't think so.
Minesweeper does not advocate violence, quite the opposite in fact. You are attempting mark destructive devices.
While one can gamble on solitaire, one can not do so in the game, so it does not advocate gambling. The same goes for Mahjongg.
Bubble popping is not violent.
Reversi and chess teach strategy, not violence or war.
One does not have to do something even if one is able to do said thing.
Slippery slope is a fallacy. Just because one takes one step, it does not follow that one will take any or all of the steps necessary to bring one down the slope. One can say "Here and no farther!"
This from a country that forbids the depiction of skeletons?
You must be new here.
You can search through the comments of older articles and find where slashdotters have said they would pay (some would pay MORE) for an unauthorized copy than give their money to the MPAA.
My bet is that this will be seen by the Supreme Court, and the SCOTUS will probably rule that retroactive is either not constitutional. Even if the retroactive implementation is ruled constitutional, infringers would have an affirmative defense, namely that the infringed work was in the public domain when the infringing work was created.
Copies of which would end up on every file sharing site within minutes thus destroying the market for said DRM-less downloads.
Seeing as most people using the internet do not respect copyright, why would the MPAA think anything other than that would happen?
Why would a government not want to just talk? Do you believe that everyone the government has ever wanted to talk to was kidnapped, tortured, and then shot?
Do you think this is Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Khmer Rouge Vietnam, Iraq during Saddam's reign, or Iran?
Your tin-foil hat must be loose.
Well, you know, it is a free country. If you fear and hate the American government so much, why don't you go somewhere more suited to you, like North Korea.
"Boohoohoo! The poor enemy who want to kill us all are being killed by our big bad military."
Why do people like you always cry for the enemy?
No, Iraq didn't. But, you do know that they were fair game for a renewal of the First Gulf War when the kicked out the weapons inspectors, right? You do know that peace was contingent on them cooperating with the inspections, which they did not do, right? And, you do know that the reason the most of Europe was against renewing hostilities and would not help the U.S. was because they had all signed low cost oil contracts with Iraq, right?
A few minutes? Try over 15 minutes of footage.
Iraq should have been attacked back in 1992 when it violated the peace agreements of the First Gulf War. That has nothing to do with 9/11. The Bush administration just used that to get the approval and justify things. The fact is that once Iraq kicked the inspectors out the first time, Iraq became fair game. The only reason the U.N. and Europe wasn't on board with renewing the hostilities was that most of continental Europe had signed oil contracts with Saddam for when the sanctions were lifted.
You really should go read a history book or something because the reason for the First Gulf War was that Iraq invaded Kuwait and the reason the U.S. got involved was because Kuwait asked us to and we had treaties with Kuwait.