Yes. And back in the day they had a free ad-supported tier. But they pulled that away, made it a pay service, but still showed ads. That soured me on them. I could pay for ad-free, but just don't trust that they won't pull a bait and switch.
I have had the same experience. I finally just stopped taking that deal. I told salesperson, if this were not a deal, but were simply the normal price, I would still be on the fence about taking it. I simply don't like the service enough to value it at more than a few bucks a month. And even then, I'm weary of them billing me on a monthly basis.
"The CIA has employed Python for hacking, Pixar for producing films, Google for crawling web pages and Spotify for recommending songs," notes the Economist.
I didn't know the CIA uses Pixar to produce their films. And, I'm glad that they're in the business of recommending songs!
I sort of thought his comments were exactly that; laying the PR seeds early in the production of his long-term films. "I predict that sometime in the next five to 10 years you will have a science-fiction film win Best Picture". So, basically he's trying to sway the opinions of the Academy, using a time frame that happens to coincide with the next few Avatar film releases. He goes as far as saying, "I would argue that there's nothing more quintessentially human than dealing with these themes. But Hollywood tends to pull short from that.", practically daring Hollywood to applaud his efforts.
Agreed. I may be accepting of there being a "copy raw url" from the context menu, but would prefer a copy to behave as always with a "copy simplified url" from the context menu.
With respect to safely trimming, google has a done a lot of work on determining the canonical form of a URL to limit redundant search results. I'll bet that it uses patterns in the URL only partially, while it uses the results rendered for their crawlers for various forms of the URL to determine the insignificant parameters.
I tried this out on CNN. It works, but if I want to hear a video, I have to choose "always allow this site to play audio". It's a bit too fidgety for my liking, but better than nothing.
As with any computer type of computer operation you should be able to reverse the algorithm to obtain the original footage.
You must be that dude who writes all the "nerd guy" dialog for TV crime shows. I'm sorry to say, but that's not quite how computer types of computer operations work.
Right. I have zero doubt or cynicism as to the sincerity of this post. But all of the complaints are merely bug reports, more or less. That is to say, the goals and approach of the technology is sound, and once the rough edges are worked out, it will be a game changer. The current state of the audio filtering technology is not up snuff. So be it. These real-world tests will only make it stronger. The poster uses strong language (sucks), but the frustrations are helpful and will only improve the tech.
She, herself may not have searched for you or anyone in your network, but people in her network may have done so. The shape and number of those connections may have revealed that bond. That's one way Facebook could divine these connections. Graph theory is neat and eerie.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure he said anything was OK.
Yes. And back in the day they had a free ad-supported tier. But they pulled that away, made it a pay service, but still showed ads. That soured me on them. I could pay for ad-free, but just don't trust that they won't pull a bait and switch.
I refuse to pay twice. That's why I have never given Hulu a cent. I don't care how great the shows are, or how much my kids will kick and scream.
Would someone please explain why it wouldn't just be 14! for all permutations?
I believe the puzzle requires not calculating all permutations, but figuring out the shortest common supersequence.
I have had the same experience. I finally just stopped taking that deal. I told salesperson, if this were not a deal, but were simply the normal price, I would still be on the fence about taking it. I simply don't like the service enough to value it at more than a few bucks a month. And even then, I'm weary of them billing me on a monthly basis.
"It seems we will never get tired of "language X is the future of all computer science because Y it" tropes."
"Language Klingon is the future of all computer science because fuck it"
"The CIA has employed Python for hacking, Pixar for producing films, Google for crawling web pages and Spotify for recommending songs," notes the Economist.
I didn't know the CIA uses Pixar to produce their films. And, I'm glad that they're in the business of recommending songs!
I sort of thought his comments were exactly that; laying the PR seeds early in the production of his long-term films. "I predict that sometime in the next five to 10 years you will have a science-fiction film win Best Picture". So, basically he's trying to sway the opinions of the Academy, using a time frame that happens to coincide with the next few Avatar film releases. He goes as far as saying, "I would argue that there's nothing more quintessentially human than dealing with these themes. But Hollywood tends to pull short from that.", practically daring Hollywood to applaud his efforts.
"let's be clear: Congress just made trafficking victims less safe, not more"
This makes it look like congress made things less safe for those who traffic victims.
"victims of trafficking".. fixed that for you, EFF!
Agreed. I may be accepting of there being a "copy raw url" from the context menu, but would prefer a copy to behave as always with a "copy simplified url" from the context menu.
With respect to safely trimming, google has a done a lot of work on determining the canonical form of a URL to limit redundant search results. I'll bet that it uses patterns in the URL only partially, while it uses the results rendered for their crawlers for various forms of the URL to determine the insignificant parameters.
I tried this out on CNN. It works, but if I want to hear a video, I have to choose "always allow this site to play audio". It's a bit too fidgety for my liking, but better than nothing.
As with any computer type of computer operation you should be able to reverse the algorithm to obtain the original footage.
You must be that dude who writes all the "nerd guy" dialog for TV crime shows. I'm sorry to say, but that's not quite how computer types of computer operations work.
3 and 4 are a great way to ensure that only wealthy copyright holders would be able to retain a copyright.
How about these: "Copy and paste this. DO NOT SHARE"
Contact Lenses are a gateway to things like larger screens and telescopes. Think of the children.
Right. I have zero doubt or cynicism as to the sincerity of this post. But all of the complaints are merely bug reports, more or less. That is to say, the goals and approach of the technology is sound, and once the rough edges are worked out, it will be a game changer. The current state of the audio filtering technology is not up snuff. So be it. These real-world tests will only make it stronger. The poster uses strong language (sucks), but the frustrations are helpful and will only improve the tech.
This is apparently untrue, because to "not play" requires the ability to choose not to play. There is no opt-out on shadow profiling.
Trust. No way would I let this walking root kit into my home.
I'm not worried. I've already set up a honey pot to trap them.
ZigBees?
It looks like having had contact with PHP comes at more of a cost than I thought.
Seriously, i came here to say just this. Is the eating analogy devouring slashdot?
She, herself may not have searched for you or anyone in your network, but people in her network may have done so. The shape and number of those connections may have revealed that bond. That's one way Facebook could divine these connections. Graph theory is neat and eerie.
Sure, but that doesn't mean you need to be complacent when you see it happening.
Once I can find a suitable website that has a free flash-based countdown tool.