Its sad that you can't have a opinion any more if it hurts someone's feelings. I see nothing wrong with Bleeping computer endorsing one anti virus over another.
I agree that dealing with any event that could hurt other's feeling situation seems to be out of hand. However, I don't see the cause of this situation as feeling hurt by others. I am seeing that the company is abusing the laws, and this kind of law suite is very popular right now.
The reason this type of company suing small companies or individuals is a win-win situation for the company in a sense of short-sight solution. A law suit is not cheap, so small companies or individuals would likely to take the review down, or they would have to spend money on a legal that gives them nothing but pride.
I hope the defendant win this case. Also, I hope that any judge seeing this type of law suite would immediately throw the case away real quick.
What the hell do you think Comrade Bernie Sanders is all about? To listen to him, his platform is freebies for everybody (err.. everybody *he* likes).. If he gets "elected", we are sooooooo screwed,...
I can see that you pick a part of what GP said and spin it out to a different topic. Anyway, I will take on this.
I don't see that Sanders idea is wrong. I'm seeing it as idealistic. The problem with it is that it is impractical in the real world or at least with the current condition. So is it nice to hear about the idea? Yes. Would I want it to be implemented at the current time? No, because I don't see the idea is reasonable.
Here is my simple answer... If you expect things to happen the way you want AFTER a bad consequence occurs, then you will ALWAYS see it over and over again. Besides, not everyone who has authority could always make the right decision at the time given. However, the CURRENT one is usually being blamed on...
Soo.....what's the benefit of having it below water, offshore?
If you think a little bit, you would know the answer right away. If not, read TFA or the quote below from TFA.
The sea provided passive cooling, but further tests this year might place a vessel neare [sic] hydroelectric power sources off the coast of Florida or Europe.
However, my concern is that they are short-sighted in their research (quoted below from TFA).
The group put one server rack inside a cylindrical vessel, named Leona Philpot after a character in the Halo Xbox game. The eight-foot (2.4m) diameter cylinder was filled with unreactive nitrogen gas, and sat on the sea bed 30 ft (9m) down, connected to land by a fiber optic cable.
According to a report in the New York Times, the vessel was loaded with sensors to prove that servers would continue working the vessel wouldn’t leak, and would not affect local marine life.
What they did was deploying only ONE vessel, and then claimed that there is NO EFFECT on marine life. But then they are talking about MASS PRODUCTION. I understand that in a very small scale, there may not be any effect, which is similar to geothermal. However, what would be the effect for having plenty in one area (which seems to be common sense when deploy)? Increasing only a couple degree Celsius of sea temperature in one small area could effect marine lives living in that area, e.g. Shark ( http://shark.ch/Information/Se... ). They have not experimented this but rather claim that it is OK to do so already...
Not really. I should think of using set. Malware is a subset of unwanted software. An unwanted software may or may not have any effect on your computer and/or your info entered or stored via/in the computer but rather occupies spaces in storage. A malware is both unwanted and intend to do something that in turn harm the user and/or computer. However, some malware may have a side effect but its creator doesn't intend to have (e.g. leaves a computer vulnerable and that allows other malwares in).
What you are talking about is not circular logic, but it is a parallel situation/procedure. Your post shows that you are against government and even go further to give a slippery slope fallacy...
And if you really think of what TFA is saying, you would see that TFA is missing the point completely.
The TFA actually explained itself as misinterpreting. The first 2 examples from 2 people (Nash & Tara) in TFA already demonstrate the misunderstanding/mistake. Nash is using "Fitbit", which is NOT an accurate device or software, to determine intake and outtake of calories, and he assumes that the device/software is correct. Tara, has the right idea that intake and outtake could be used to determine the gain or loss, but she over simplifies the situation. The intake should be from eating subtract waste. Outtake could be varied from one to others. She has no way to accurately measure intake/outtake calories. I bet she use intake calories by a standard table or on product labels, and outtake from another standard exercise/activity table. Standard tables are correct in their own way, but not a one-side-fit-all solution. Product labels are questionable accurate. Therefore, both of them are misinterpreting how to control calories.
Think of calorie system as a tool. It is for you to apply how you use it. There is no FIXed way of application for everybody. TFA, however, takes unqualified examples (misuse of the tool) and uses them to support its hypothesis that calorie system is broken. Actually, the intention of what TFA said has nothing to do with those unqualified examples. This is misleading and an attempt to make news in public. People should move on...
That should be the citation you want. Cooke said "The current tax code was made for the industrial age, and not the "digital age," Cook said." He also said "Cook said bringing profits back to the United States would cost him 40 percent. "I don't think that's a reasonable thing to do," he said."
What do you think when corporations are forced to pay more in taxes? Do you think they would move their services/manufacturing back to the US or they just increase their product prices? I bet they would just increase the price of products because people who like the brand would still follow regardless. That is the very likely side effect and the Republican party do not want to mention. They knew all along that corporations tend to pass the cost down to consumers instead of do the right thing (move back to the country).
On security grounds, the government can and should refuse to purchase computer equipment from outside the US.
And then you again come out and said "government is too big and has too much authority"??? So what do you really want? Please think before you talk. Step back even further if needed to look at an issue. Do not look at an issue from the inside only.
Maybe. Usually, they just added this in their "side effect" clause in their advertisement. Have you ever listened to any drug advertising on TV in the US? Most of them would try to go through their side effect by talking real quick when the advertising is ending (e.g. the side effect may cause brain dead, suicidal, etc...).
I don't like Trump. I don't like Sanders. I'd take either of them in a heartbeat over "more of the same"! (Cruz looks less crazy than I'd figured - maybe it's just the contrast with Trump but I'm re-considering him).
I would not vote any at all. If I am asked to choose to eat one of different kind of poo, why should I pick one to eat if I am also allowed to pick none of them? It is stupid to "must pick" one if you can simply "not do it" instead.
You don't get it... This is not about whether or not China is going to stop torturing their people, but it is about who assists them to do so. If the person who assists them is not from the US, then the US wouldn't have this legal issue with because it will be up to the person's nation to do so.
Cisco is an American company ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ). Because US laws are against torturing, the citizen of the country should NOT assist others, regardless from where on the earth, to do so. Even worse, in this case, Cisco have the knowledge of what the system is going to be used for...
Unrestricted freedom of the press would include the freedom to print what someone else wrote. So yes, copyright is a restriction of that freedom.
You could say that, but it is not totally true. Fair use can be applied if the conditions are right. It is depended on your intent of what you called freedom.
Yes, but that does not mean the GP can blame the other, who took over the war, on spending regardless whatever reason of initiating the war. Also, Hillary at least admitted the wrong choice; however, the GP mind is blocked by his/her own selected memory as you could see from his reply...
Only Trump? If Trump is 100% crazy then mainstream politicians like Hillary and Obama are 99.9% crazy. And Trump doesn't seem to take himself too seriously.
If he doesn't take himself too seriously, how could anyone trust him to take a job as President seriously? Keep the joke going?
What's scary about Hillary is that a lot of the policies she advocates are just as nonsensical as Trump's. But the possibility that she might be wrong doesn't even seem to occur to her. Sure, building a wall along the parts of the border with Mexico that are way out in remote parts of the desert would be a waste of taxpayer money. But it would be many orders of magnitude smaller than the amount of money wasted on the Iraq war - that Hillary in all judgement and experience and wisdom thought was such a thoroughly wonderful idea.
Excuse me, do you have short memory or what? Who ordered to invade Iraq in the first place and left with a big mess to be cleaned up as a consequence? Really short memory or rather pick and choose to remember...
If you at least think a bit, you would understand that reporting the kind of news is 2-edged sword. One side think all of the news should be published and the other think opposite because it could result in worse consequence. It seems that you are in the former group. To me, I am unsure that it is good to do so especially with the current situation with religious now... I may be in the latter group...
Even though Apple never (or so far) force me to upgrade/update my device, sadly the iOS 9.2 seems to be a new annoyance to me. In the past, a pop up asking me to update/upgrade iOS version would go away if I denied it. Now, it will pop up EVERYDAY. First a pop up asks me to 1) 'Install Now' or 'Install Later'. If I select 'Install Later', it will have 3 more options asking me when I should be reminded. The longest time I can select is 'Tonight'. Everyday, the pop up will come back again, and this never happened before in previous versions!
Speaking of changing user configuration, only certain configurations will be reset to their default set up when a device is upgraded/updated iOS. One configuration is Bluetooth. The setting will ALWAYS be turned back on after an update/upgrade. I always keep my bluetooth turned off and I have to do that every time I update/upgrade iOS...
Regardless Republicant or Democrate, which politician you can really call "trustworthy" for decades (or if ever)? Seriously, it is just an oxymoron for the words "trustworthy politician"...
I'm annoyed by people like you who do not (carefully) read TFA but rather make a comment from summary. Even worse, these people pick and choose only a section of the whole to make a dubious comment on.
Whalen essentially alleges five different types of injuries:
(1) actual damages including monetary losses arising from unauthorized bank account withdrawals,
fraudulent card payments, and/or related bank fees charged to their accounts, (Compl. 49);
(2) the loss of time and money associated with credit monitoring and obtaining replacement cards, (Compl. 54);
(3) overpayment of Michaels' services because Whalen would not have shopped at Michaels had she known that Michaels did not properly safeguard her personal identified information (PII),
(Compl. 24, 70-71);
(4) the lost value of Whalen's credit card information, (Compl. 35-37) and
(5) a statutory violation of GBL 349, (Compl. 74-98)
By laws, you cannot assume damage before there are real damages. If laws permit to do so, there will be tons of law suits attempting to get money before a real issue happens! Also if you actually READ the PDF file from Bloomsburg Law site, you will see how the judge counters her claims and should be able to understand exactly why.
Anyway, this does not mean she cannot sue Michael again. The case is dismissed without prejudice which means she can take Michael to court again IF there is real damage later on.
PS: Where is in the court ruling said that she "paid" for credit monitoring? On the other hand "Michaels offered free credit monitoring for
twelve months." You need to look at #2 above and read on what the judge commented on the item...
Slashdot Mirror
Go to http://www.apple.com/iphone/co... and search for "Power and Battery" section...
Show me a place where you can buy the 240gb version for $70.
Didn't say anything about shipping. sims2 has answered the question.
Its sad that you can't have a opinion any more if it hurts someone's feelings. I see nothing wrong with Bleeping computer endorsing one anti virus over another.
I agree that dealing with any event that could hurt other's feeling situation seems to be out of hand. However, I don't see the cause of this situation as feeling hurt by others. I am seeing that the company is abusing the laws, and this kind of law suite is very popular right now.
The reason this type of company suing small companies or individuals is a win-win situation for the company in a sense of short-sight solution. A law suit is not cheap, so small companies or individuals would likely to take the review down, or they would have to spend money on a legal that gives them nothing but pride.
I hope the defendant win this case. Also, I hope that any judge seeing this type of law suite would immediately throw the case away real quick.
What the hell do you think Comrade Bernie Sanders is all about? To listen to him, his platform is freebies for everybody (err.. everybody *he* likes).. If he gets "elected", we are sooooooo screwed, ...
I can see that you pick a part of what GP said and spin it out to a different topic. Anyway, I will take on this.
I don't see that Sanders idea is wrong. I'm seeing it as idealistic. The problem with it is that it is impractical in the real world or at least with the current condition. So is it nice to hear about the idea? Yes. Would I want it to be implemented at the current time? No, because I don't see the idea is reasonable.
Here is my simple answer... If you expect things to happen the way you want AFTER a bad consequence occurs, then you will ALWAYS see it over and over again. Besides, not everyone who has authority could always make the right decision at the time given. However, the CURRENT one is usually being blamed on...
Not only terrible editing, the link itself in TFA is about something else (something about television recoding technology)...
Soo.....what's the benefit of having it below water, offshore?
If you think a little bit, you would know the answer right away. If not, read TFA or the quote below from TFA.
The sea provided passive cooling, but further tests this year might place a vessel neare [sic] hydroelectric power sources off the coast of Florida or Europe.
However, my concern is that they are short-sighted in their research (quoted below from TFA).
The group put one server rack inside a cylindrical vessel, named Leona Philpot after a character in the Halo Xbox game. The eight-foot (2.4m) diameter cylinder was filled with unreactive nitrogen gas, and sat on the sea bed 30 ft (9m) down, connected to land by a fiber optic cable.
According to a report in the New York Times, the vessel was loaded with sensors to prove that servers would continue working the vessel wouldn’t leak, and would not affect local marine life.
What they did was deploying only ONE vessel, and then claimed that there is NO EFFECT on marine life. But then they are talking about MASS PRODUCTION. I understand that in a very small scale, there may not be any effect, which is similar to geothermal. However, what would be the effect for having plenty in one area (which seems to be common sense when deploy)? Increasing only a couple degree Celsius of sea temperature in one small area could effect marine lives living in that area, e.g. Shark ( http://shark.ch/Information/Se... ). They have not experimented this but rather claim that it is OK to do so already...
someone somewhere might be getting a deal you are not getting.
That's exactly why there is net neutrality.
Everyone else must suffer because you cannot be on top
Hmm... I don't get this... If you can be on top, why would everyone be happy when everyone can't be on top like you are???
Not really. I should think of using set. Malware is a subset of unwanted software. An unwanted software may or may not have any effect on your computer and/or your info entered or stored via/in the computer but rather occupies spaces in storage. A malware is both unwanted and intend to do something that in turn harm the user and/or computer. However, some malware may have a side effect but its creator doesn't intend to have (e.g. leaves a computer vulnerable and that allows other malwares in).
What you are talking about is not circular logic, but it is a parallel situation/procedure. Your post shows that you are against government and even go further to give a slippery slope fallacy...
And if you really think of what TFA is saying, you would see that TFA is missing the point completely.
The TFA actually explained itself as misinterpreting. The first 2 examples from 2 people (Nash & Tara) in TFA already demonstrate the misunderstanding/mistake. Nash is using "Fitbit", which is NOT an accurate device or software, to determine intake and outtake of calories, and he assumes that the device/software is correct. Tara, has the right idea that intake and outtake could be used to determine the gain or loss, but she over simplifies the situation. The intake should be from eating subtract waste. Outtake could be varied from one to others. She has no way to accurately measure intake/outtake calories. I bet she use intake calories by a standard table or on product labels, and outtake from another standard exercise/activity table. Standard tables are correct in their own way, but not a one-side-fit-all solution. Product labels are questionable accurate. Therefore, both of them are misinterpreting how to control calories.
Think of calorie system as a tool. It is for you to apply how you use it. There is no FIXed way of application for everybody. TFA, however, takes unqualified examples (misuse of the tool) and uses them to support its hypothesis that calorie system is broken. Actually, the intention of what TFA said has nothing to do with those unqualified examples. This is misleading and an attempt to make news in public. People should move on...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tim-cook-says-notion-that-apple-avoids-taxes-is-political-crap_us_5677639ae4b0b958f6571279
That should be the citation you want. Cooke said "The current tax code was made for the industrial age, and not the "digital age," Cook said." He also said "Cook said bringing profits back to the United States would cost him 40 percent. "I don't think that's a reasonable thing to do," he said."
What do you think when corporations are forced to pay more in taxes? Do you think they would move their services/manufacturing back to the US or they just increase their product prices? I bet they would just increase the price of products because people who like the brand would still follow regardless. That is the very likely side effect and the Republican party do not want to mention. They knew all along that corporations tend to pass the cost down to consumers instead of do the right thing (move back to the country).
On security grounds, the government can and should refuse to purchase computer equipment from outside the US.
And then you again come out and said "government is too big and has too much authority"??? So what do you really want? Please think before you talk. Step back even further if needed to look at an issue. Do not look at an issue from the inside only.
Maybe. Usually, they just added this in their "side effect" clause in their advertisement. Have you ever listened to any drug advertising on TV in the US? Most of them would try to go through their side effect by talking real quick when the advertising is ending (e.g. the side effect may cause brain dead, suicidal, etc...).
I don't like Trump. I don't like Sanders. I'd take either of them in a heartbeat over "more of the same"! (Cruz looks less crazy than I'd figured - maybe it's just the contrast with Trump but I'm re-considering him).
I would not vote any at all. If I am asked to choose to eat one of different kind of poo, why should I pick one to eat if I am also allowed to pick none of them? It is stupid to "must pick" one if you can simply "not do it" instead.
You don't get it... This is not about whether or not China is going to stop torturing their people, but it is about who assists them to do so. If the person who assists them is not from the US, then the US wouldn't have this legal issue with because it will be up to the person's nation to do so.
Cisco is an American company ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ). Because US laws are against torturing, the citizen of the country should NOT assist others, regardless from where on the earth, to do so. Even worse, in this case, Cisco have the knowledge of what the system is going to be used for...
Unrestricted freedom of the press would include the freedom to print what someone else wrote. So yes, copyright is a restriction of that freedom.
You could say that, but it is not totally true. Fair use can be applied if the conditions are right. It is depended on your intent of what you called freedom.
Yes, but that does not mean the GP can blame the other, who took over the war, on spending regardless whatever reason of initiating the war. Also, Hillary at least admitted the wrong choice; however, the GP mind is blocked by his/her own selected memory as you could see from his reply...
For now... You don't know when they are going to redefine the definition as they did before on other types of genes...
Only Trump? If Trump is 100% crazy then mainstream politicians like Hillary and Obama are 99.9% crazy. And Trump doesn't seem to take himself too seriously.
If he doesn't take himself too seriously, how could anyone trust him to take a job as President seriously? Keep the joke going?
What's scary about Hillary is that a lot of the policies she advocates are just as nonsensical as Trump's. But the possibility that she might be wrong doesn't even seem to occur to her. Sure, building a wall along the parts of the border with Mexico that are way out in remote parts of the desert would be a waste of taxpayer money. But it would be many orders of magnitude smaller than the amount of money wasted on the Iraq war - that Hillary in all judgement and experience and wisdom thought was such a thoroughly wonderful idea.
Excuse me, do you have short memory or what? Who ordered to invade Iraq in the first place and left with a big mess to be cleaned up as a consequence? Really short memory or rather pick and choose to remember...
If you at least think a bit, you would understand that reporting the kind of news is 2-edged sword. One side think all of the news should be published and the other think opposite because it could result in worse consequence. It seems that you are in the former group. To me, I am unsure that it is good to do so especially with the current situation with religious now... I may be in the latter group...
Even though Apple never (or so far) force me to upgrade/update my device, sadly the iOS 9.2 seems to be a new annoyance to me. In the past, a pop up asking me to update/upgrade iOS version would go away if I denied it. Now, it will pop up EVERYDAY. First a pop up asks me to 1) 'Install Now' or 'Install Later'. If I select 'Install Later', it will have 3 more options asking me when I should be reminded. The longest time I can select is 'Tonight'. Everyday, the pop up will come back again, and this never happened before in previous versions!
Speaking of changing user configuration, only certain configurations will be reset to their default set up when a device is upgraded/updated iOS. One configuration is Bluetooth. The setting will ALWAYS be turned back on after an update/upgrade. I always keep my bluetooth turned off and I have to do that every time I update/upgrade iOS...
Regardless Republicant or Democrate, which politician you can really call "trustworthy" for decades (or if ever)? Seriously, it is just an oxymoron for the words "trustworthy politician"...
I'm annoyed by people like you who do not (carefully) read TFA but rather make a comment from summary. Even worse, these people pick and choose only a section of the whole to make a dubious comment on.
Whalen essentially alleges five different types of injuries:
(1) actual damages including monetary losses arising from unauthorized bank account withdrawals, fraudulent card payments, and/or related bank fees charged to their accounts, (Compl. 49);
(2) the loss of time and money associated with credit monitoring and obtaining replacement cards, (Compl. 54);
(3) overpayment of Michaels' services because Whalen would not have shopped at Michaels had she known that Michaels did not properly safeguard her personal identified information (PII), (Compl. 24, 70-71);
(4) the lost value of Whalen's credit card information, (Compl. 35-37) and
(5) a statutory violation of GBL 349, (Compl. 74-98)
By laws, you cannot assume damage before there are real damages. If laws permit to do so, there will be tons of law suits attempting to get money before a real issue happens! Also if you actually READ the PDF file from Bloomsburg Law site, you will see how the judge counters her claims and should be able to understand exactly why.
Anyway, this does not mean she cannot sue Michael again. The case is dismissed without prejudice which means she can take Michael to court again IF there is real damage later on.
PS: Where is in the court ruling said that she "paid" for credit monitoring? On the other hand "Michaels offered free credit monitoring for twelve months." You need to look at #2 above and read on what the judge commented on the item...