It's faster. My computer takes a long time to load up, I'd rather just put it on hibernate and bring it back to life when I need it. The bootup process is frustrating.
It's different because you're given permission when you purchase a piece of software to make a copy when you install. The MPAA is arguing that you are not given permission to make a copy of a DVD when you buy it.
Congress decided the market wasn't working with respect to the handicapped. The costs were too high and the benefits accrued to too few individuals to make it worthwhile for most organizations to retrofit for handicapped accessibility. So, of course, nobody did.
If you don't care that people with wheelchairs can't get to the second floor of the Gap sometimes, then this is fine. If you do care, then it's not. Sort of a personal judgment call on how you feel about government intervention to protect the less fortunate.
Regardless of how I might feel about forcing retrofits (not a big fan), setting standards before establishments are built seems somewhat reasonable (and it's usually not all that expensive if you plan on doing it from the beginning). Having rules established ahead of time is basically the same as having building codes, and just as onerous.
With regard to the ADA and websites, it seems that the internet is not at all what was envisioned when the ADA was drafted and it should be looked at anew. If you want to set rules for website design, it has to be clear what those rules are going to be before design begins. Forcing major sites to redesign after they're established seems mean spirited and expensive. If this is something that people feel strongly about, they can go back to Congress and draft an amendment. Courts are probably wise to stay out of the way until then.
There are THOUSANDS of shirts on CafePress for Snakes on a Plane. How many of those shirts infringe on New Line's copyrighted material? And yet, does anybody doubt that New Line would have been better off not having that fan-based for-profit marketing? New Line was even smart enough to partner with CafePress so everything became more or less legally legit.
And here's the real issue. If Universal REALLY didn't want this person selling those t-shirts... just ASK them to stop. A nice letter with an explanation of why you'd like them to stop with a few official promo goodies would probably be more than enough to get someone to modify what they've been doing. Why do these companies think it's wise to open with threats as opposed to genuine dialogue?
Ok, a favorite feature of mine has changed, someone help me figure out how to change it back. Traditionally in Firefox I could type a search phrase into the location bar and firefox would take me to the top google result (the I'm Feeling Lucky result). This was great for a lot of things. Now, sadly, when I type a search phrase into the 2.0 location bar, I get the google search page. No no no. That's no good. I've already got the google search bar for that, I want the I'm feeling Lucky result.
I'm pretty sure the fact that someone is trying to sell anti-virus software to gullible people does not count as proof of viruses for Macs. I don't use a Mac and I have no idea if they have viruses or not, but I do know that it's in the anti-virus company's own self interest to make you think that there are.
Eh, not really. They were sued for copyright infringement for making thumbnail copies of images in google search and they were cleared because they only made thumbnails and were providing a new and useful service. I'm sure they'll make the same argument for books. We're only providing a portion of the book and then telling you how to get the full thing.
What, is he going to start charging for showing up at office hours too? He's a jackass. You shouldn't be charging for class materials when that money's just going into his own pocket. If the school were charging it would still be annoying, but not awful. THIS, however, is awful.
The second part of that statement was not describing Netflix, but a fictional Netflix that delivered movies via the internet. You can see at the beginning he says that Netflix charges you for delivery (not strictly true, but we'll leave that point untouched). Then he inserts that 'But' to start his next sentence, describing a service that depends not upon the postal system (with its series of fees for delivery) but upon the Internet (which I guess he sees as being free from bandwidth charges).
Netflix, as he understands it, doesn't deliver ten movies to you because it would be too costly to pay for all the shipping. Over the Internet, however, he sees no cost and hence no reason NOT to ship ten movies at a time. He woefully misunderstands how the internet works, but he's at least partially right about Netflix.
I just assumed it was from resting my hands in the same place over and over and over again. Some dirt is bound to rub off on the light grey plastic. Is it not normal?
I've been waiting to buy one for the size to hit around 15 gigs so they can hold all the music on my computer at once. That seems useful to me. I don't really want to hassle with changing what's on there when I get bored of the selection.
Slashdot Mirror
It's faster. My computer takes a long time to load up, I'd rather just put it on hibernate and bring it back to life when I need it. The bootup process is frustrating.
It's different because you're given permission when you purchase a piece of software to make a copy when you install. The MPAA is arguing that you are not given permission to make a copy of a DVD when you buy it.
I wouldn't agree with them, but there you go.
Scott Adams was able to outdiagnose his doctors using Google.
Congress decided the market wasn't working with respect to the handicapped. The costs were too high and the benefits accrued to too few individuals to make it worthwhile for most organizations to retrofit for handicapped accessibility. So, of course, nobody did.
If you don't care that people with wheelchairs can't get to the second floor of the Gap sometimes, then this is fine. If you do care, then it's not. Sort of a personal judgment call on how you feel about government intervention to protect the less fortunate.
Regardless of how I might feel about forcing retrofits (not a big fan), setting standards before establishments are built seems somewhat reasonable (and it's usually not all that expensive if you plan on doing it from the beginning). Having rules established ahead of time is basically the same as having building codes, and just as onerous.
With regard to the ADA and websites, it seems that the internet is not at all what was envisioned when the ADA was drafted and it should be looked at anew. If you want to set rules for website design, it has to be clear what those rules are going to be before design begins. Forcing major sites to redesign after they're established seems mean spirited and expensive. If this is something that people feel strongly about, they can go back to Congress and draft an amendment. Courts are probably wise to stay out of the way until then.
There are THOUSANDS of shirts on CafePress for Snakes on a Plane. How many of those shirts infringe on New Line's copyrighted material? And yet, does anybody doubt that New Line would have been better off not having that fan-based for-profit marketing? New Line was even smart enough to partner with CafePress so everything became more or less legally legit.
And here's the real issue. If Universal REALLY didn't want this person selling those t-shirts... just ASK them to stop. A nice letter with an explanation of why you'd like them to stop with a few official promo goodies would probably be more than enough to get someone to modify what they've been doing. Why do these companies think it's wise to open with threats as opposed to genuine dialogue?
Ugh, I hate people sometimes.
Ha, ha! Fixed it myself.
k y&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=
For anyone curious:
Go to about:config (type it into the location bar)
Select: Keyword.URL
Change the value to this: http://www.google.com/search?btnI=I'm+Feeling+Luc
All is well.
Ok, a favorite feature of mine has changed, someone help me figure out how to change it back. Traditionally in Firefox I could type a search phrase into the location bar and firefox would take me to the top google result (the I'm Feeling Lucky result). This was great for a lot of things. Now, sadly, when I type a search phrase into the 2.0 location bar, I get the google search page. No no no. That's no good. I've already got the google search bar for that, I want the I'm feeling Lucky result.
How can I get it back?
Please, help me.
I'm pretty sure the fact that someone is trying to sell anti-virus software to gullible people does not count as proof of viruses for Macs. I don't use a Mac and I have no idea if they have viruses or not, but I do know that it's in the anti-virus company's own self interest to make you think that there are.
Yawn 2.0
Does google still have "IPO money" any more? At this point, I think they're just in to plain old regular money.
I switched to Firefox for adblock, which has made web surfing a considerably better experience for me.
Wonderfalls was great.
Also, Skin? "His father is the District Attorney!"
Eh, not really. They were sued for copyright infringement for making thumbnail copies of images in google search and they were cleared because they only made thumbnails and were providing a new and useful service. I'm sure they'll make the same argument for books. We're only providing a portion of the book and then telling you how to get the full thing.
And the "projections" of these "hyperdimensional" beings into our universe... they don't look like mice, by any chance, do they?
Jeez, why aren't Swedish videos like this one more popular worldwide? I don't know, I just can't figure it out.
What, is he going to start charging for showing up at office hours too? He's a jackass. You shouldn't be charging for class materials when that money's just going into his own pocket. If the school were charging it would still be annoying, but not awful. THIS, however, is awful.
You listen to one song per album per week?!? How many albums do you have? That's amazing.
The fishing expedition thing was referring to the older incident with Google in the US, not the current child porn thing.
You are contending that there are twice as many sellers but the same number of buyers? That doesn't seem likely.
The second part of that statement was not describing Netflix, but a fictional Netflix that delivered movies via the internet. You can see at the beginning he says that Netflix charges you for delivery (not strictly true, but we'll leave that point untouched). Then he inserts that 'But' to start his next sentence, describing a service that depends not upon the postal system (with its series of fees for delivery) but upon the Internet (which I guess he sees as being free from bandwidth charges).
Netflix, as he understands it, doesn't deliver ten movies to you because it would be too costly to pay for all the shipping. Over the Internet, however, he sees no cost and hence no reason NOT to ship ten movies at a time. He woefully misunderstands how the internet works, but he's at least partially right about Netflix.
Writing your own scripts is not terribly convenient for most people.
I just assumed it was from resting my hands in the same place over and over and over again. Some dirt is bound to rub off on the light grey plastic. Is it not normal?
What you say? Someone set us up the bomb!
You have nothing to lose but your IPchains?
I've been waiting to buy one for the size to hit around 15 gigs so they can hold all the music on my computer at once. That seems useful to me. I don't really want to hassle with changing what's on there when I get bored of the selection.