...but about who you know. Referrals from friends are the best way to get your foot in the door for entry-level positions, then experience will get you in the door for future jobs.
The real problem here is that this judge has set a precedent relating the level of offensiveness of speech to where the school has legal jurisdiction to impose punishment (i.e. if it's lewd enough, it doesn't matter where the student says it). IMO, the judge should clearly have ruled for the student, then the principle can go ahead and file a libel/slander (I forget which is which) suit, which they likely would win. It's not about whether or not the student escapes consequences, it's who gets to impose said consequences.
Maybe they shouldn't advertise speeds they can't deliver (and people pay for). Personally, I consider it false advertising.
And in my area, I have no alternative (too far away to get decent DSL); it's more of an excuse to extort customers and not have to upgrade their lines to handle the advertised bandwidth.
I had to do a double-take at the headline; just glancing out of the corner of my eye, it looked like John Rhys-Davies was going to do Pitfall: The Movie.
I think you've misunderstood. I don't care if neither wins, just that Blu-Ray doesn't lose. Competition is good for the consumer. Additionally, as long as studios put out content in either Blu-Ray or both, I'm happy. There's no question about my future purchase of a PS3, so it's purely a matter of convenience (I may dislike Sony's business practices, but that was a good call on their part).
From a technology standpoint, I stand behind BR. From a consumer rights point of view, HD-DVD gets my support. On the other hand, there will always be more apt people in greater numbers working to unlock content than there will be those locking said content.
It was inevitable that I'd get a PS3, so I'm happy I'll be able to have access to all high-def content from these studios. However, I'll be sad to see the price/promotion war between the two end.
The US government broke the treaty; they've got to pay the price. And, theoretically, the US government represents its citizens. So logically, punishing the US (gov't) involves punishing the citizens.
And besides, when's the last time you really got a real say in where you tax dollars went? I'm paying for Medicare and there's about a 0% chance I'll ever see that put to a use I can reap any benefits from. What about all those programs for underprivileged children? What about foreign aid to countries whose policies I don't agree with?
Seriously though, the US's decisions involving online gambling weren't cool, and even though it'll cost me money in the short-term I can always make it back gambling online:).
Slashdot Mirror
MiFi FTW. Hook your tablet up to it, or any other wifi device you've got. In the long run it's way more useful and cheaper
...but about who you know. Referrals from friends are the best way to get your foot in the door for entry-level positions, then experience will get you in the door for future jobs.
Don't they remember the effect D.A.R.E. had? It actually increased drug use...
Basically, they'll be telling kids how to get all the stuff they want for free.
There is a particularly entertaining game mentioned in the video called "Turbo Hearts", which rules.
I found this good explanation of how to play:
http://ericanderson.us/2009/09/04/how-to-play-turbo-hearts/
Even though the town sucks, spell it right :P
"Oldest Weapons-grade Plutonium Found In Dump"
Man, that's one powerful deuce...
"$10 for a quiz, $20 for a chapter test, and $30 for a semester final"
Sounds like a pretty cheap price to stick a cheat-sheet on your test under the guise of "advertisement".
I notice both of those success rates are less than 100%. Personally, I don't want to be one of those innocent 20+% that gets harassed.
The real problem here is that this judge has set a precedent relating the level of offensiveness of speech to where the school has legal jurisdiction to impose punishment (i.e. if it's lewd enough, it doesn't matter where the student says it). IMO, the judge should clearly have ruled for the student, then the principle can go ahead and file a libel/slander (I forget which is which) suit, which they likely would win. It's not about whether or not the student escapes consequences, it's who gets to impose said consequences.
I'm just going to go ahead and assume it's a Cylon base ship jumping around.
How many of them are just saying that to sound cool?
A little over a third of the way through s02e09 of The Universe here has these guys talking about their simulation.
If you can't provide the speeds you advertise, then don't advertise them.
Maybe they shouldn't advertise speeds they can't deliver (and people pay for). Personally, I consider it false advertising.
And in my area, I have no alternative (too far away to get decent DSL); it's more of an excuse to extort customers and not have to upgrade their lines to handle the advertised bandwidth.
Hah, I read that as "kinder," like for kids.
Something to remember is that RIAA isn't a company, as such, but a collection of companies.
I had to do a double-take at the headline; just glancing out of the corner of my eye, it looked like John Rhys-Davies was going to do Pitfall: The Movie.
I think you've misunderstood. I don't care if neither wins, just that Blu-Ray doesn't lose. Competition is good for the consumer. Additionally, as long as studios put out content in either Blu-Ray or both, I'm happy. There's no question about my future purchase of a PS3, so it's purely a matter of convenience (I may dislike Sony's business practices, but that was a good call on their part).
From a technology standpoint, I stand behind BR. From a consumer rights point of view, HD-DVD gets my support. On the other hand, there will always be more apt people in greater numbers working to unlock content than there will be those locking said content.
It was inevitable that I'd get a PS3, so I'm happy I'll be able to have access to all high-def content from these studios. However, I'll be sad to see the price/promotion war between the two end.
They'll have to pay them in "theoretical" dollars, not real ones.
first one: "improve taskbar for multi-monitor"
Are they just going to buy ultramon (http://www.realtimesoft.com/ultramon/) like I did?
The US government broke the treaty; they've got to pay the price. And, theoretically, the US government represents its citizens. So logically, punishing the US (gov't) involves punishing the citizens.
:).
And besides, when's the last time you really got a real say in where you tax dollars went? I'm paying for Medicare and there's about a 0% chance I'll ever see that put to a use I can reap any benefits from. What about all those programs for underprivileged children? What about foreign aid to countries whose policies I don't agree with?
Seriously though, the US's decisions involving online gambling weren't cool, and even though it'll cost me money in the short-term I can always make it back gambling online
ooooh, why is this on the front page of slashdot? ooooh, we're all nerds and read it anyway! *flails hands wildly in the air*.
maybe it just struck one of the editors as particularly funny and thought those patrons who don't read xkcd all the time might find it funny too.
All this talk about how graphic it is makes me want to play it all the more.