Case in point, "provide printing options." Any webhead worth her salt knows that providing a duplicate page just for printing is a waste of time and effort, when CSS can do it for you.
Why would you bother keeping a credit card with a zero balance on it?
Any number of reasons:
You don't want to pay rent (interest) on the card, but you still want the convenience.
You want to use a card for the protections it offers (getting your money back in the event the product is defective or in the event that a mail-order product doesn't even exist).
You wish to make a large purchase and you don't wish to carry that much cash on your person
You want to avoid writing a check that can be later used to drain your bank account.
Note that a debit card offers some of these protections, but the fact that your money can be tied up during an investigation makes the debit card a dangerous and unsuitable substitute for a credit card.
It's been my experience that people who are natural socializers don't need any help from technology in order to get together, and the socially inept couldn't peel themselves from the wall with all the power of a beowolf cluster.
Exactly. I attend networking meetings regularly and the old saw about getting out what you put in fits this to a "t."
My own personal goal is, every time I attend, to get at least three business cards from people who I don't know, and to sit next at least one person I've never met at the dinner. Thanks to this, I've met people from many different companies, interests, and with varying level of industry skill.
Guess how hard it is going to be to find a job when I next enter the "looking for something new" category?;)
They're not. Go get yourself a card reader and swipe your own ATM card through it. You'll find (as I did) that the information contained therein is shockingly unencrypted. The other end has a standard modem; how do you think the data is transmitted, encrypted or... unencrypted?
You're not prohibited from performing it, just from selling it. If you charge someone to come into your place of business (think of an amusement park/sports arena/theater), then you have to have a license and possibly pay royalties. If access is free to the public, you do not.
When I worked for a movie theater (back in the dark ages), we were allowed to only play music that was licensed by ASCAP as the company had a license with them but no one else.
You can go on a local street and sing "Happy Birthday" to your heart's content, but as a bartender at a club that charges a cover, you cannot sing it to a customer without paying.
Google is punking out. The reason they are doing this is to sidestep underwriters and their fees.
If they go public, there will be greater pressure to avoid "controversial" stories about them that will affect their stock price. If Google had been a publicly traded company back in the day, then the scientology/operation clambake thing might have gone down much differently (and worse for the public).
Possibilites will range from no screenshot at all to blanking out just the secure apps.
(Un)Fortunately, the way Windoze works is that any given app cannot verify if a message comes from the system or another app. All you do is write your little application to subclass the "Mark" (in this case, Outlook), then send it a WM_PAINT and sit back while that bugger sends you its "screen."
Or, if you want to get super-jakey, write your own screen driver (like terminal services does) and steal the content that way.
The one nice thing I can think of that this foolish DRM does is make it harder to spoof email. Ask your average lUser if they know that emails can be faked, and you'll get back the blank stare. If, on the other hand, the message has some kind of signature key, it could be harder to spoof.
I'd be interested to see how well this works when transmitted over the internet. Ever try sending your home PC meeting notices from work? Doesn't work, 'cause you need Exchange server point-to-point (I believe you need port 135 across the board to get this "feature") to make it happen.
I can
tell you unequivocally that 7.0 IS my last
upgrade. As far as I'm concerned, I will never purchase
another product from Adobe. Yes, this is a hysterical rant and I
can be a vindictive SOB, but that's how I get when someone punches
me in the face.
Adobe has, in effect, said that they don't want
me to use a program that I purchased to fit the way I work.
They're greedy bastards. They haven't learned from history
about what
happens when companies get greedy. They've lost at
least one customer forever.
Let me explain.
Over the years, I
purchased Adobe Photoshop 4.x, 7.0, and Adobe Elements 1.0. I use
them both at work and at home, as I refuse to buy into the BS that
I must fork out hundreds of dollars for the convenience of not
doing the uninstall-on-one-install-on-the-other dance twice a day
(most EULAs are really 'end
machine license agreements').
Last week Adobe did an
"audit" at work. Prior to that we had an email that said, in
effect, make sure we have no unlicensed Adobe software. When I
checked with my boss about my situation, he said as long as it was
a licensed copy, I was okay. Well, Adobe had a problem with that.
They insisted that since I was using my legally-licensed copy at a
place of business, that the business would have to own the license
in its name. If you knew where I worked (when referring to
the company off-premises, one typically substitutes the word
"cheap" for part of the name), you'd understand that getting them
to crack open their wallet for a copy of Photoshop has between
zero and no chance. For about 10 seconds, I toyed with the thought
of selling my license to the company in exchange for some office
supplies (trade in kind for a staple or a paperclip or something),
but then I thought, "screw 'em -- I'm not giving up my license at
home."
So, here's my present course of action: I already
uninstalled Photoshop on the work box and installed GIMP. I will
use GIMP for the stuff that I need at work and Photoshop for the
stuff at home, but I'm done with any new
versions of Photoshop.
If anything, the media should be embedding
advertising and so on so they can sell commercial time on the
traded files.
That is a possibility, but the sad
fact of the matter is that advertising doesn't work...at least not
to the effect that advertising companies (adcos) think it does.
The failure of banner ads elucidates this: for the first time,
ever, adcos were able to analyse the actual impact of ads. Where
people paying enough attention to the ads to click through? What
they found was that the click through rate is/was abysmally low.
So instead of figuring out how to make the ads more appealing
(IMHO the BMW "tiny films" was a fluke), they tried stupider
things (pop-under, flash obtrusive, more
flashing/blinking/beeping), and generally gave up. It is much
easier to rent space on the billboard or TV sop and lie about how
much impact that advert has than actually admit that you are
gouging your customers and they are getting almost nothing in
return.
Embedding advertising *may* raise brand awareness, but
if you're Coka-Cola or Pepsi then you don't really need brand
awareness, do you? Embedded adverts will not generate sales.
This surely isn't breaking news. Multi-monitor displays have been
in vogue on trading desks for nearly ten years.
We used STB
multi-monitor cards back in the mid 90s, but by the time they
inexplicably dropped the line (and subsequently imploded), a few
flat-panel vendors had started supporting multi-monitor displays
from a single video card.
Seeing as how the Music Companies own the music, not the artists (songs created under contract are s unfortunately considered "works for hire") and the RIAA is a construct of the Music Companies, compensating the artists does nothing to absolve you from proscecution; you're still violating copyright.
You'd be better off taking that money and purchasing your own congresscritters to change the copyright law.
If you don't want to support the RIAA, then don't buy anything from their member companies. Get all your CDs second-hand if they're from one of them.
I notice that the workers in the pictures aren't wearing goggles, ear-protection or respirators, like when they blow the dust off the cases prior to painting. Nothin' like breathing in fine metal dust over 20 years to give you that (wo)manly cough...
It is possible for someone to get a limb in the press, and get it folded or stamped ~.
Hey, if getting one's hand stamped is good enough for Darth (er, Anikin), then it should be good enough for them!
Slashdot Mirror
Scroll down; it's the 11th line in the script...
One you take the Home Front Pledge, then we can answer your question.
Case in point, "provide printing options." Any webhead worth her salt knows that providing a duplicate page just for printing is a waste of time and effort, when CSS can do it for you.
Let me guess, you went to the US Army School of Tactics. First assignment: Operations in Mogadishu.
That's a good one. Also, you sometimes get better warrantee protection with some cards.
Note that a debit card offers some of these protections, but the fact that your money can be tied up during an investigation makes the debit card a dangerous and unsuitable substitute for a credit card.
My own personal goal is, every time I attend, to get at least three business cards from people who I don't know, and to sit next at least one person I've never met at the dinner. Thanks to this, I've met people from many different companies, interests, and with varying level of industry skill.
Guess how hard it is going to be to find a job when I next enter the "looking for something new" category? ;)
Doctor Faustus, please report to the black courtesy phone.
They're not. Go get yourself a card reader and swipe your own ATM card through it. You'll find (as I did) that the information contained therein is shockingly unencrypted. The other end has a standard modem; how do you think the data is transmitted, encrypted or... unencrypted?
Did you know, for example, that th--
#^$~(NO CARRIER
Thanks to the magic of technology, you can avoid the RIAA easily.
Every time you rip a DVD or skip commercials, God Kills a Kitten!
Heck, if it is good enough for CAN, then it is good enough for this place...
When I worked for a movie theater (back in the dark ages), we were allowed to only play music that was licensed by ASCAP as the company had a license with them but no one else.
You can go on a local street and sing "Happy Birthday" to your heart's content, but as a bartender at a club that charges a cover, you cannot sing it to a customer without paying.
If they go public, there will be greater pressure to avoid "controversial" stories about them that will affect their stock price. If Google had been a publicly traded company back in the day, then the scientology/operation clambake thing might have gone down much differently (and worse for the public).
Too late, citizen! Papers, please.
Or, if you want to get super-jakey, write your own screen driver (like terminal services does) and steal the content that way.
The one nice thing I can think of that this foolish DRM does is make it harder to spoof email. Ask your average lUser if they know that emails can be faked, and you'll get back the blank stare. If, on the other hand, the message has some kind of signature key, it could be harder to spoof.
I'd be interested to see how well this works when transmitted over the internet. Ever try sending your home PC meeting notices from work? Doesn't work, 'cause you need Exchange server point-to-point (I believe you need port 135 across the board to get this "feature") to make it happen.
Then someone messed up and made him President...
Adobe has, in effect, said that they don't want me to use a program that I purchased to fit the way I work. They're greedy bastards. They haven't learned from history about what happens when companies get greedy . They've lost at least one customer forever.
Let me explain.
Over the years, I purchased Adobe Photoshop 4.x, 7.0, and Adobe Elements 1.0. I use them both at work and at home, as I refuse to buy into the BS that I must fork out hundreds of dollars for the convenience of not doing the uninstall-on-one-install-on-the-other dance twice a day (most EULAs are really 'end machine license agreements').
Last week Adobe did an "audit" at work. Prior to that we had an email that said, in effect, make sure we have no unlicensed Adobe software. When I checked with my boss about my situation, he said as long as it was a licensed copy, I was okay. Well, Adobe had a problem with that. They insisted that since I was using my legally-licensed copy at a place of business, that the business would have to own the license in its name. If you knew where I worked (when referring to the company off-premises, one typically substitutes the word "cheap" for part of the name), you'd understand that getting them to crack open their wallet for a copy of Photoshop has between zero and no chance. For about 10 seconds, I toyed with the thought of selling my license to the company in exchange for some office supplies (trade in kind for a staple or a paperclip or something), but then I thought, "screw 'em -- I'm not giving up my license at home."
So, here's my present course of action: I already uninstalled Photoshop on the work box and installed GIMP. I will use GIMP for the stuff that I need at work and Photoshop for the stuff at home, but I'm done with any new versions of Photoshop.
The failure of banner ads elucidates this: for the first time, ever, adcos were able to analyse the actual impact of ads. Where people paying enough attention to the ads to click through? What they found was that the click through rate is/was abysmally low. So instead of figuring out how to make the ads more appealing (IMHO the BMW "tiny films" was a fluke), they tried stupider things (pop-under, flash obtrusive, more flashing/blinking/beeping), and generally gave up. It is much easier to rent space on the billboard or TV sop and lie about how much impact that advert has than actually admit that you are gouging your customers and they are getting almost nothing in return.
Embedding advertising *may* raise brand awareness, but if you're Coka-Cola or Pepsi then you don't really need brand awareness, do you? Embedded adverts will not generate sales.
We used STB multi-monitor cards back in the mid 90s, but by the time they inexplicably dropped the line (and subsequently imploded), a few flat-panel vendors had started supporting multi-monitor displays from a single video card.
You'd be better off taking that money and purchasing your own congresscritters to change the copyright law.
If you don't want to support the RIAA, then don't buy anything from their member companies. Get all your CDs second-hand if they're from one of them.
Umm... make up your mind.
(Troll feeding time!)