I'm sure it's "usable" but that's not really the only metric that counts. Edge is half finished, it lacks major features present in other browsers and, in some ways, is actually a downgrade compared to, say, the Windows 8 version of IE11.
Chrome and Firefox are both full browsers. They'll continue to be the standards until (and unless) Edge actually makes an effort to match them. I find it a little odd that a company the size of Microsoft can't better Chrome - Chrome isn't that great a browser, and it's only beating Firefox because they made better architectural choices than Firefox has.
It's cute watching neo-nazis concern troll, trying to hide the fact they're concern trolls by pretending they don't like nazis but then spouting neo-nazi rhetoric without apparently even realizing it.
In fairness banning racism and punishing it with fines is exactly the same as making it mandatory and murdering millions of Jews because I'm a 15 year old libertarian.
...or, you know, hear me out here, but maybe "Clean Coal" is a scam, and they kept getting permit applications returned because of the very nature of what they were doing, ie it wasn't as green as they claimed, and as a result it wasn't passing any environmental tests that it needed to.
Do you think, at the end of the day, Obama just had some rage hate on for black rocks that burn? Or do you think that maybe his administration was upset about black rocks being burnt to cause pollution including a massive contribution to global warming? Because, believe me, if clean coal was a thing, given the cheapness of coal, everyone from Al Gore onwards would be embracing it.
Yes, but it's natural carbon dioxide, not the artificial stuff they put in coal. That's right there in the name, natural gas. From nature. What could be more green than natural gas?
I'll tell you what could be more green: natural organic gas. And a team at greenNRG Earthsavers Solutions (formerly British Petroleum "We drill it, we leak it!(r)(tm)") are working on this as we speak. We expect to have Natural Organic Gas really in just a year, on sale at Whole Foods, Public Greenwise, and wherever Homeopathic remedies are sold.
Apparently it's a "new form of transportation" where cars will be transported to their destination on automatic self-powered carts.
So, kinda sorta relieves congestion but with parking issues at the destination, and still requiring people who want freedom of movement to buy a f---ing car. I'm hoping someone will look at the UK "tube" tunnels under London and realize that you can actually get a lot of train in a constrained space, and use it for that instead.
They're a taxi company. They can pretend they're not, they can misuse the term "Ride sharing" as much as they want, they can haggle about legal definitions and local regulations, but they're still a service where you hire a car and driver to take you from A to B. In other words, they operate a taxi service.
Every time I read something about something Trump has done, I think "Oh my God, there cannot be a worse, more obnoxious, more "The world revolves around me", person than Trump".
Then I read your comments.
Then I think "No, I still think Trump is the worst, but with sociopaths like roman_mir around, it's not surprising he can get away with it."
I'm always surprised by the number of people who think Twitter users are there because of Donald Trump. He really isn't a draw, and Twitter was actually more successful before he became a well known Twitter user.
What's installed by default generally depends on the vendor and age of the Android distribution. Google's been steering itself away from insisting on the entire app suite being pre-installed and leaving it to just some critical ones like the Google Play Store.
But yes, Allo and Duo are the recommended apps for IM and video chat, despite Hangouts containing perfectly serviceable functionality in both spheres. I don't understand what was so bad about Hangouts they felt the need to implement them.
Google's been treating Hangouts as the red-headed step-child now for a couple of years. They've more or less completely deprecated it on Android, where it's no longer either their SMS system (Messages) or their recommended apps for IM (Allo) or video chat (Duo.)
So... why NOW switch all GMail users to Hangouts? There's literally nothing in Hangouts that isn't being done by Google's own preferred alternatives to Hangouts.
Don't get me wrong, I kinda like Hangouts, and I was annoyed when they removed non-Google Voice SMS from it, but it still doesn't make sense: if you're going to deprecate an app, and Google is deprecating Hangouts, why force people to use it?
Wow, you must live in a bubble. Or work at some hell hole.
This may surprise you but I met my future wife at work. There are many social situations created at work (if only when a bunch of colleagues decide to go to lunch together.) You make friends. You get to know people. After a while, you get to know people well enough that you know how they'd take a more personal proposition, and can act accordingly.
This is not the movies. Women are not agency-free automatons whose actions are dictated by whatever man they're currently associated with. They're human beings. They're neither going to go to HR because you smiled and said "Hello", nor are they going to be happy if you jump on them on day #1, and ask them on a date.
Act like a human being, and respect them as human beings, and you'll avoid meetings with HR. But more importantly, and to a normal person, this would actually be what you're concerned about but it seems most Slashdotters aren't, you won't hurt someone unintentionally. Because if I were hauled in front of HR because someone had made a sexual harassment complaint against me, that'd be my first concern.
How long will it be now until merely saying hello or making any other polite acknowledgement of a lady's existence with anything but a totally emotionless inflection of the voice and totally neutral expression on the face will be considered an unwanted advance?
Already there, and it's happened up here in Canada. I'll have to dig up the article but if I remember right, it boiled down to the guy nodding to the secretary as he entered the building. It later came out he rejected her advances, but he still lost his job
Your article is about someone winning a defamation lawsuit about a false rape accusation. Nothing about an unwanted advance or anyone nodding to a secretary, or being fired.
1. You can't show any evidence actually occurred. Not a news article, court recording, nothing.
2. Nobody else appears to recall anything like it
3. Doesn't match any known laws or even HR sexual harassment procedures known to man
4. Is atypical - we can point at high profile cases where women have been blackballed for making harassment and discrimination claims, even when proven accurate, such as the woman who brought down Uber's CEO
5. Is, well, unbelievable.
You have to admit that we have good reasons for being skeptical. The fact you're hunkering down on the claim but still refusing to give evidence for it (when that's all that's been asked for) doesn't speak well to your character.
This complaint would make sense if it wasn't more or less the end of every moderately successful woman's career to make allegations of sexual discrimination or harassment against their company. Even if they're believed, and successful in promoting change, they endure hell and end up having severe problems getting rehired. Look at the woman who "brought down" Uber's CEO just as a basic example, and we pretty much all know Uber is a shithole and knew it before she said anything.
Your message to women is seriously to tell them to stay out of business?
Here's an idea instead: why don't we shame and fire the assholes, and let the women actually do the jobs they want and are qualified for? Why do the assholes get to win?
tbh there's no reason to publicize anyone in this story, the situation's been handled. Let people move on with their lives.
We routinely have discussions here where a sizable proportion of Slashdot readers insist, absolutely insist, that the tech world doesn't have problems with women, and that women who make complaints are usually making them up in order to pursue a social justice agenda.
So, while it may make the situation of this poor, poor, hard done by, almost totally blameless, sexual assaulting jackass a little less comfortable, I think it's entirely reasonable it gets mentioned here.
Yup. Also Hyperloop advocates get very heated if anyone suggests there's any kind of maglev technology involved (I suspect the submitter is confusing maglev with linear induction motors? That still doesn't explain the Bullet Train comment though...)
Seems mostly devoid of any criticism or useful information. All the article suggests is that the reason it's being covered a lot lately is because it's going public (selling shares.) It doesn't offer an opinion on the service or technology at all.
The glazed over look of someone who has never done any research at all into why the thing they're condemning is being done.
It usually makes sense to actually find out why someone is doing something before criticizing them. Even if you end up disagreeing with their reasons, you'll at least be able to address them.
That doesn't make it wrong, it just means it was misused as an example.
In practice we ban a variety of forms of speech completely legitimately, usually with less lethal consequences than shouting "FIre" in a crowded theater. We ban fraud and defamation, to give but two examples.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure it's "usable" but that's not really the only metric that counts. Edge is half finished, it lacks major features present in other browsers and, in some ways, is actually a downgrade compared to, say, the Windows 8 version of IE11.
Chrome and Firefox are both full browsers. They'll continue to be the standards until (and unless) Edge actually makes an effort to match them. I find it a little odd that a company the size of Microsoft can't better Chrome - Chrome isn't that great a browser, and it's only beating Firefox because they made better architectural choices than Firefox has.
What is Microsoft waiting for?
It's cute watching neo-nazis concern troll, trying to hide the fact they're concern trolls by pretending they don't like nazis but then spouting neo-nazi rhetoric without apparently even realizing it.
In fairness banning racism and punishing it with fines is exactly the same as making it mandatory and murdering millions of Jews because I'm a 15 year old libertarian.
Do you think, at the end of the day, Obama just had some rage hate on for black rocks that burn? Or do you think that maybe his administration was upset about black rocks being burnt to cause pollution including a massive contribution to global warming? Because, believe me, if clean coal was a thing, given the cheapness of coal, everyone from Al Gore onwards would be embracing it.
Yes, but it's natural carbon dioxide, not the artificial stuff they put in coal. That's right there in the name, natural gas. From nature. What could be more green than natural gas?
I'll tell you what could be more green: natural organic gas. And a team at greenNRG Earthsavers Solutions (formerly British Petroleum "We drill it, we leak it!(r)(tm)") are working on this as we speak. We expect to have Natural Organic Gas really in just a year, on sale at Whole Foods, Public Greenwise, and wherever Homeopathic remedies are sold.
Apparently it's a "new form of transportation" where cars will be transported to their destination on automatic self-powered carts.
So, kinda sorta relieves congestion but with parking issues at the destination, and still requiring people who want freedom of movement to buy a f---ing car. I'm hoping someone will look at the UK "tube" tunnels under London and realize that you can actually get a lot of train in a constrained space, and use it for that instead.
It's not an ESTA denial. The summary says he had a valid visa waiver at the time.
They're a taxi company. They can pretend they're not, they can misuse the term "Ride sharing" as much as they want, they can haggle about legal definitions and local regulations, but they're still a service where you hire a car and driver to take you from A to B. In other words, they operate a taxi service.
Every time I read something about something Trump has done, I think "Oh my God, there cannot be a worse, more obnoxious, more "The world revolves around me", person than Trump".
Then I read your comments.
Then I think "No, I still think Trump is the worst, but with sociopaths like roman_mir around, it's not surprising he can get away with it."
No, LG released something more or less identical to the first iPhone a few months before the latter was announced. The market was definitely going in that direction.
Funny you should say that, there's a video on exactly how they'd do that - it's the expression of determination that always gets me when I see this.
I see configuration files with [section] breaks all the time under GNU/Linux. What are you looking at that doesn't? gconf XML files? ;-)
I rather like .ini files, they work, they're easy to navigate, and they're human readable, unlike XML.
I'm always surprised by the number of people who think Twitter users are there because of Donald Trump. He really isn't a draw, and Twitter was actually more successful before he became a well known Twitter user.
What's installed by default generally depends on the vendor and age of the Android distribution. Google's been steering itself away from insisting on the entire app suite being pre-installed and leaving it to just some critical ones like the Google Play Store.
But yes, Allo and Duo are the recommended apps for IM and video chat, despite Hangouts containing perfectly serviceable functionality in both spheres. I don't understand what was so bad about Hangouts they felt the need to implement them.
Google's been treating Hangouts as the red-headed step-child now for a couple of years. They've more or less completely deprecated it on Android, where it's no longer either their SMS system (Messages) or their recommended apps for IM (Allo) or video chat (Duo.)
So... why NOW switch all GMail users to Hangouts? There's literally nothing in Hangouts that isn't being done by Google's own preferred alternatives to Hangouts.
Don't get me wrong, I kinda like Hangouts, and I was annoyed when they removed non-Google Voice SMS from it, but it still doesn't make sense: if you're going to deprecate an app, and Google is deprecating Hangouts, why force people to use it?
Wow, you must live in a bubble. Or work at some hell hole.
This may surprise you but I met my future wife at work. There are many social situations created at work (if only when a bunch of colleagues decide to go to lunch together.) You make friends. You get to know people. After a while, you get to know people well enough that you know how they'd take a more personal proposition, and can act accordingly.
This is not the movies. Women are not agency-free automatons whose actions are dictated by whatever man they're currently associated with. They're human beings. They're neither going to go to HR because you smiled and said "Hello", nor are they going to be happy if you jump on them on day #1, and ask them on a date.
Act like a human being, and respect them as human beings, and you'll avoid meetings with HR. But more importantly, and to a normal person, this would actually be what you're concerned about but it seems most Slashdotters aren't, you won't hurt someone unintentionally. Because if I were hauled in front of HR because someone had made a sexual harassment complaint against me, that'd be my first concern.
Your claim was:
Your article is about someone winning a defamation lawsuit about a false rape accusation. Nothing about an unwanted advance or anyone nodding to a secretary, or being fired.
Again, more evidence of your character here.
Your "evidence" is a case that:
1. You can't show any evidence actually occurred. Not a news article, court recording, nothing.
2. Nobody else appears to recall anything like it
3. Doesn't match any known laws or even HR sexual harassment procedures known to man
4. Is atypical - we can point at high profile cases where women have been blackballed for making harassment and discrimination claims, even when proven accurate, such as the woman who brought down Uber's CEO
5. Is, well, unbelievable.
You have to admit that we have good reasons for being skeptical. The fact you're hunkering down on the claim but still refusing to give evidence for it (when that's all that's been asked for) doesn't speak well to your character.
This complaint would make sense if it wasn't more or less the end of every moderately successful woman's career to make allegations of sexual discrimination or harassment against their company. Even if they're believed, and successful in promoting change, they endure hell and end up having severe problems getting rehired. Look at the woman who "brought down" Uber's CEO just as a basic example, and we pretty much all know Uber is a shithole and knew it before she said anything.
Your message to women is seriously to tell them to stay out of business?
Here's an idea instead: why don't we shame and fire the assholes, and let the women actually do the jobs they want and are qualified for? Why do the assholes get to win?
We routinely have discussions here where a sizable proportion of Slashdot readers insist, absolutely insist, that the tech world doesn't have problems with women, and that women who make complaints are usually making them up in order to pursue a social justice agenda.
So, while it may make the situation of this poor, poor, hard done by, almost totally blameless, sexual assaulting jackass a little less comfortable, I think it's entirely reasonable it gets mentioned here.
Yup. Also Hyperloop advocates get very heated if anyone suggests there's any kind of maglev technology involved (I suspect the submitter is confusing maglev with linear induction motors? That still doesn't explain the Bullet Train comment though...)
Seems mostly devoid of any criticism or useful information. All the article suggests is that the reason it's being covered a lot lately is because it's going public (selling shares.) It doesn't offer an opinion on the service or technology at all.
The glazed over look of someone who has never done any research at all into why the thing they're condemning is being done.
It usually makes sense to actually find out why someone is doing something before criticizing them. Even if you end up disagreeing with their reasons, you'll at least be able to address them.
That doesn't make it wrong, it just means it was misused as an example.
In practice we ban a variety of forms of speech completely legitimately, usually with less lethal consequences than shouting "FIre" in a crowded theater. We ban fraud and defamation, to give but two examples.