Maybe if you shop a retail B&M, but if you're regularly paying more than $1 per disc for up to 4x blank DVD media you're paying too much. Even Riteks can be had for right around $1 in bulk. Heck if you don't mind lesser known (or slower) brands you can get it under 50 cents. Keep an eye on places like Anandtech.
Gamestop and EBGames are not the same company. EBGames is what Electronics Boutique morphed itself into and Gamestop is the former Funcoland/Software Etc/Babbages. They are, in fact, the last two competing national chains dealing in "preowned" after Gamestop absorbed all those others.
Speaking of phrases, you're a (internet) codger if you remember what "Now it's August all year round" ment.
AOL hitting Usenet... even worse than C&S spam incident.
I've never heard that phrase in my life. I was around for what the start of what I believe you're referring to though back in '93, and it's commonly called "the September that never ended."
With T-Mobile, you can. We live in Connecticut, and that's our billing address with them. My wife has two phones with T-Mobile and one has a 413 area code (Massachusetts) and the other is 805 (California, which she sent to her sister there). The reason she got the 413 instead of 860 (CT) initially was because the 860 block was full, but now we're used to it and it doesn't matter anyway. Technically you can't purchase any area code when you sign up, I guess, but if you call them, they'll switch your number to any area code you want that they have available.
Is that list available anywhere? That would be a huge deterrent to sales of stolen phones I would think. Especially if eBay (for one) cooperated and required the IMEI when listing a GSM phone for sale. Or is there some security/privacy consideration precluding listing that?
Peppercorn specifically uses content like music and video in their FAQ as examples, it's perfectly viable.
Of course it requires Windows only proprietary software to be installed (for now, anyway), though I guess that doesn't matter to many people.
The most technical link is here. Though the author avoids discussing exactly what Netgear offered the University beyond the technical team it's apparent from the solutions that they would be installing hardware. Unfortunately my original source for the statement came from a paper copy of one of those trade mags (eWeek? Network Magazine? Inforworld?) that's long since recycled.
Once that came to light Netgear themselves provided enough networking hardware to handle the traffic load and techs to support it free of charge to the university.
It's not all driving. Maybe for those people in the article, but not in general. I was watching them map downtown Hartford, CT a couple months ago. It was one guy with a PocketPC connected to a large GPS antenna on a backpack. He would take one pace, tap the screen, take another, and do this endlessly down the road. I saw him a few times in various places in the city over the next few weeks. He had a partner he would talk to on a two way radio but I don't know where he was.
Talk about tedious.
"However, a conviction may be based entirely on circumstantial evidence where the facts are 'so clearly interwoven and connected that the finger of guilt is pointed unerringly at the Defendant and the Defendant alone.'"
"The rule as to circumstantial evidence is that, assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence."
That is incorrect. See the very first question in the Legal Tender FAQ on the US Treasury web site. Any currency is considered a valid form of payment for settling a debt with a creditor. There is no Federal statute on what a merchant must accept in exchange for goods and services.
The pundits who say "most overturned court" are looking at number of cases selected by the Supreme Court, not percentages
No, sorry, you're the one playing games with numbers here. I just typed it already in a comment below, so just follow http://www.centerforindividualfreedom.org/legal/9t h_circuit.htm to see how meaningless than 75% number is. You trying to compare small circuits having one or two cases reviewed and getting 100% turnover with the 24(!) cases heard from the 9th (that's more than the next two largest circuits combined, and they're not that much smaller in terms of cases heard). It's a meaningless number. The 9th has more cases reviewed, and more cases overturned. As a percentage and as an absolute number. Period.
Do you have less ephemereal cite than "heard it on NPR"? The numbers I've found disagree (obviously the site has an agenda but they do give actual hard numbers that are verifiable or disputable by someone with the time). The 9th Circuit is the largest, but not overwhelmingly so. They decided about 17% of the federal appellate caseload last term (as of July 2003). However, 43% of the cases reviewed by the Supreme Court came from the 9th Circuit. For comparison, the second (5th) and third (11th) largest circuits decided 14%/13% of federal appellate cases yet were only reviewed 5.4%/7.1% respectively.
The 9th Circuit technically has a lower reversal rate of reviewed cases than any other circuit (which is the number you hear thrown around to defend them) but that's simply because of the gross number of their cases the Supreme Court decides to review. When they're only reviewing 1-3 cases from each of the smaller circuits of course they're likely to have a 100% reversal rate with those.
Of all the cases overturned by the Supreme Court last term 57% (8 of 14) came from the 9th Circuit.
No it doesn't. There are a couple Federal regulations on 'subliminal' messages, but neither applies to this situation. One from the FCC prohibiting broadcast stations from engaging in it, and one from the BATF prohibiting its use in advertising alcohol (this one is for wine, it appears in each section though).
That's it in the entire Code of Federal Regulations. Do you have some other source to cite for this?
SGI claims that they exhaustively did an audit of the code and that there were only 200 lines that they know of. That is not verifiable. They may be lying.
Umm, yes, I addressed that. We don't have to trust them. It is verifiable. SCO needs to merely list the infringing code. It can be verified if that was part of the code given to SGI. If it is, and it was, then we know SGI was either lying or incompetent.
SCO says 1 million, SGI says 200 lines. Who do you trust?
I don't have to trust either one. SGI's claims are verifiable. They submitted patches to remove any offending (in their opinion) code. We can look at those patches and see what they entail.
Is there any more infringing code? Maybe. But if so then SCO needs to point out what that is, don't they? In the end, the truth will come out.
As the person who submitted the story I have to say you're full of crap. This has not been done before, certainly not at someplace. What you've seen with those "KodakDigital" disposables aren't actually digital cameras, they're simply disposables with the cost of a Picture CD included in the processing.
You'd think maybe one other person in those few hundred comments would have mentioned it, too. Especially if they're supposedly at huge chains like Wal-Mart and Walgreens. There's never any shortage of "yawn, dupe" or "old news" posts in those situations. But nope, just you.
Still think you're right? Prove it, post a link. Until then I'll assume you're merely a troll.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe if you shop a retail B&M, but if you're regularly paying more than $1 per disc for up to 4x blank DVD media you're paying too much. Even Riteks can be had for right around $1 in bulk. Heck if you don't mind lesser known (or slower) brands you can get it under 50 cents. Keep an eye on places like Anandtech.
A childish as, say, posting a rant without having read the linked article first?
I can honestly say I've never seen such a thing.
Gamestop and EBGames are not the same company. EBGames is what Electronics Boutique morphed itself into and Gamestop is the former Funcoland/Software Etc/Babbages. They are, in fact, the last two competing national chains dealing in "preowned" after Gamestop absorbed all those others.
I've never heard that phrase in my life. I was around for what the start of what I believe you're referring to though back in '93, and it's commonly called "the September that never ended."
With T-Mobile, you can. We live in Connecticut, and that's our billing address with them. My wife has two phones with T-Mobile and one has a 413 area code (Massachusetts) and the other is 805 (California, which she sent to her sister there). The reason she got the 413 instead of 860 (CT) initially was because the 860 block was full, but now we're used to it and it doesn't matter anyway. Technically you can't purchase any area code when you sign up, I guess, but if you call them, they'll switch your number to any area code you want that they have available.
In Connecticut it's a taxi service as well.
Is that list available anywhere? That would be a huge deterrent to sales of stolen phones I would think. Especially if eBay (for one) cooperated and required the IMEI when listing a GSM phone for sale. Or is there some security/privacy consideration precluding listing that?
Peppercorn specifically uses content like music and video in their FAQ as examples, it's perfectly viable. Of course it requires Windows only proprietary software to be installed (for now, anyway), though I guess that doesn't matter to many people.
Does it have to be ny.us or is just .us fine? You can register a .us domain at GoDaddy for $4.95 (til the end of January), I have two of them.
It's not just that, you would also need to be one of the countries in the Visa Waiver Program.
Try using MultiSync with the SynCE plugin.
The most technical link is here. Though the author avoids discussing exactly what Netgear offered the University beyond the technical team it's apparent from the solutions that they would be installing hardware. Unfortunately my original source for the statement came from a paper copy of one of those trade mags (eWeek? Network Magazine? Inforworld?) that's long since recycled.
Once that came to light Netgear themselves provided enough networking hardware to handle the traffic load and techs to support it free of charge to the university.
It's not all driving. Maybe for those people in the article, but not in general. I was watching them map downtown Hartford, CT a couple months ago. It was one guy with a PocketPC connected to a large GPS antenna on a backpack. He would take one pace, tap the screen, take another, and do this endlessly down the road. I saw him a few times in various places in the city over the next few weeks. He had a partner he would talk to on a two way radio but I don't know where he was. Talk about tedious.
And of course, seven minutes after this story hit the Zelda bundle became official.
You are completely wrong. There must be witnesses? That's absolutely ludicrous. Do you have any idea how many crimes have no witnesses?
Brief Google just for a couple examples of statements relating to circumstantial evidence:
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
"Moreover, this Court has established that circumstantial evidence alone can be sufficient to convict a person of a crime."
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire upholding a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence.
"When the evidence presented is circumstantial, it must exclude all rational conclusions except guilt in order to be sufficient to convict."
The Tennessee Appeals Court
"However, a conviction may be based entirely on circumstantial evidence where the facts are 'so clearly interwoven and connected that the finger of guilt is pointed unerringly at the Defendant and the Defendant alone.'"
The Louisana Appeals Court
"The rule as to circumstantial evidence is that, assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence."
That is incorrect. See the very first question in the Legal Tender FAQ on the US Treasury web site. Any currency is considered a valid form of payment for settling a debt with a creditor. There is no Federal statute on what a merchant must accept in exchange for goods and services.
No, sorry, you're the one playing games with numbers here. I just typed it already in a comment below, so just follow http://www.centerforindividualfreedom.org/legal/9t h_circuit.htm to see how meaningless than 75% number is. You trying to compare small circuits having one or two cases reviewed and getting 100% turnover with the 24(!) cases heard from the 9th (that's more than the next two largest circuits combined, and they're not that much smaller in terms of cases heard). It's a meaningless number. The 9th has more cases reviewed, and more cases overturned. As a percentage and as an absolute number. Period.
The 9th Circuit technically has a lower reversal rate of reviewed cases than any other circuit (which is the number you hear thrown around to defend them) but that's simply because of the gross number of their cases the Supreme Court decides to review. When they're only reviewing 1-3 cases from each of the smaller circuits of course they're likely to have a 100% reversal rate with those.
Of all the cases overturned by the Supreme Court last term 57% (8 of 14) came from the 9th Circuit.
No it doesn't. There are a couple Federal regulations on 'subliminal' messages, but neither applies to this situation. One from the FCC prohibiting broadcast stations from engaging in it, and one from the BATF prohibiting its use in advertising alcohol (this one is for wine, it appears in each section though). That's it in the entire Code of Federal Regulations. Do you have some other source to cite for this?
Umm, yes, I addressed that. We don't have to trust them. It is verifiable. SCO needs to merely list the infringing code. It can be verified if that was part of the code given to SGI. If it is, and it was, then we know SGI was either lying or incompetent.
SCO doesn't want it to be verified, that's all.
I don't have to trust either one. SGI's claims are verifiable. They submitted patches to remove any offending (in their opinion) code. We can look at those patches and see what they entail.
Is there any more infringing code? Maybe. But if so then SCO needs to point out what that is, don't they? In the end, the truth will come out.
Also a dead giveaway, the asterisk next to their name.
As the person who submitted the story I have to say you're full of crap. This has not been done before, certainly not at someplace. What you've seen with those "KodakDigital" disposables aren't actually digital cameras, they're simply disposables with the cost of a Picture CD included in the processing.
You'd think maybe one other person in those few hundred comments would have mentioned it, too. Especially if they're supposedly at huge chains like Wal-Mart and Walgreens. There's never any shortage of "yawn, dupe" or "old news" posts in those situations. But nope, just you.
Still think you're right? Prove it, post a link. Until then I'll assume you're merely a troll.