everyone's getting excited about outing some LGBTQs, but i'm guessing there are many more couples sharing joint accounts with names like John Jane Doe. and then you have all the completely fake accounts that do nothing but spam. my guess is that if someone wants to use a fake name, the only way facebook is going to know about it and take some action is if some of their friends are jerks and turn them in.
articles that are simplistic reporting of daily news are what has been ruled on. completely original investigative reporting is not affected. there is really very little creativity in slovak journalism. a lot of it is only one-sided rehashing of press releases.
slovakia does not have diversity in the journalism market. that is why piano media was able to get a foothold. hopefully, this will begin to eat away at the paywall and collusion piano media has created.
since there are nearly 40 comments already and no one is talking about the banks, i'll assume no one is reading the article.
the main conclusion is that spam could grind to a halt if credit card companies blocked all transactions to the dozen suspicious banks. it takes the spammers long enough to set up a new bank account that the new accounts could be blocked faster than they could be set up.
there is a subset of vandalism that a bot can be very good at detecting. this bot can never handle every kind of vandalism. for example, adding some subtly false statement to a biographical article, but spelling everything correctly, using correct grammar and adding something that looks like it could be a legitimate source is difficult for even human editors to recognize as vandalism.
adding 1s everywhere or deleting the entire article is very easy to detect.
first step should be cataloging what you have: properly documented license, cracked/definitely illegal and uncertain legality (owner claims it's legal but can't find the license or the purchase receipt). everything without a properly documented license should be elevated along the proper management chain, but you should probably treat the uncertain legality cases different than the definitely illegal. maybe for the uncertain cases, you should give a deadline to produce proper documentation or some signed letter from the appropriate level of management that the software is legal even though they can't document it.
Posts on USENET are rarely regarded as reliable sources, because they are easily forged or misrepresented, and many are anonymous or pseudonymous.
One exception is that some authorities on certain topics have written extensively on USENET, and their writings there are vouched for by them or by other reliable sources. A canonical example is J. Michael Straczynski, the creator of the television series Babylon 5, who discussed the show at length on Usenet. His postings are archived and authenticated on his website, and may be an acceptable source on the topic of Babylon 5 under the self-publication provision of WP:ATT.
it mostly comes from many scholarly interpretations of genealogies and other timelines. the most famous is the ussher chronology, but there are many others.
"Marucs Ranum notes taht 'It's really hard to tell the difference between a program that works and one that just appears to work.'
it's hard to tell the difference between being human, and appearing to be human... oh, wait -- there's a misspelling. i think he's real... or maybe just a robot with bad programming.
it really doesn't take that long to find out the candidate's positions. the league of women voters does a good job of consolidating all the information i needed.
asking "do gamers really need..." is really stupid. gamers don't even really need games! shock! shock! they won't die without them. i imagine though that gamers make up a higher fraction of hd owners than the general population.
this is a solution in search of a problem. wikipedia does not have a problem with ordinary vandalism that could result in a reasonable measure of a user's reliability. wikipedia's biggest problem is with unfounded but believable information. in this case, the measure of reliability of a user would be nearly useless because the reliability of their edits is unknown.
i'm a mechanical engineer. i would not want any job that required me to use autocad as the primary cadd tool. 3d parametric cadd systems are much better. you actually end up designing something instead of just moving lines around.
now if your design is truly 2d, then autocad is a good tool, but most useful things are not 2d.
Slashdot Mirror
everyone's getting excited about outing some LGBTQs, but i'm guessing there are many more couples sharing joint accounts with names like John Jane Doe. and then you have all the completely fake accounts that do nothing but spam. my guess is that if someone wants to use a fake name, the only way facebook is going to know about it and take some action is if some of their friends are jerks and turn them in.
probably mom wouldn't let dad kick him out.
articles that are simplistic reporting of daily news are what has been ruled on. completely original investigative reporting is not affected. there is really very little creativity in slovak journalism. a lot of it is only one-sided rehashing of press releases.
slovakia does not have diversity in the journalism market. that is why piano media was able to get a foothold. hopefully, this will begin to eat away at the paywall and collusion piano media has created.
i am my own grandma?
since there are nearly 40 comments already and no one is talking about the banks, i'll assume no one is reading the article.
the main conclusion is that spam could grind to a halt if credit card companies blocked all transactions to the dozen suspicious banks. it takes the spammers long enough to set up a new bank account that the new accounts could be blocked faster than they could be set up.
except it's not. the correct word is specious.
unless you belong to Planariidae, you don't have much hope of this benefiting you.
there is a subset of vandalism that a bot can be very good at detecting. this bot can never handle every kind of vandalism. for example, adding some subtly false statement to a biographical article, but spelling everything correctly, using correct grammar and adding something that looks like it could be a legitimate source is difficult for even human editors to recognize as vandalism.
adding 1s everywhere or deleting the entire article is very easy to detect.
the bottled water i usually buy already has 0.07mg/L of lithium.
first step should be cataloging what you have: properly documented license, cracked/definitely illegal and uncertain legality (owner claims it's legal but can't find the license or the purchase receipt). everything without a properly documented license should be elevated along the proper management chain, but you should probably treat the uncertain legality cases different than the definitely illegal. maybe for the uncertain cases, you should give a deadline to produce proper documentation or some signed letter from the appropriate level of management that the software is legal even though they can't document it.
it marked me as "user of Firefox on WinXP" even though i'm using iceape on debian.
if nader runs, watch out -- more republican madness.
it mostly comes from many scholarly interpretations of genealogies and other timelines. the most famous is the ussher chronology, but there are many others.
so what does a domain taste like? chocolate or vanilla?
does anyone know how these scientists measured time for this experiment? what sort of equipment do you use to measure picoseconds
so vista is like an expensive whore with STDs?
poorly performing people get stuck in unsatisfying and frustrating jobs, while the strong performers find satisfying and fufilling ones.
it really doesn't take that long to find out the candidate's positions. the league of women voters does a good job of consolidating all the information i needed.
asking "do gamers really need..." is really stupid. gamers don't even really need games! shock! shock! they won't die without them. i imagine though that gamers make up a higher fraction of hd owners than the general population.
this is a solution in search of a problem. wikipedia does not have a problem with ordinary vandalism that could result in a reasonable measure of a user's reliability. wikipedia's biggest problem is with unfounded but believable information. in this case, the measure of reliability of a user would be nearly useless because the reliability of their edits is unknown.
i'm a mechanical engineer. i would not want any job that required me to use autocad as the primary cadd tool. 3d parametric cadd systems are much better. you actually end up designing something instead of just moving lines around.
now if your design is truly 2d, then autocad is a good tool, but most useful things are not 2d.
heroinEEEEEEEE!!!!!! there's an E!!.
else it's under the jurisdiction of the ATF.
on second thought, maybe the editors purposefully insert egregiouss errors to troll readers into commenting, thus increasing ad revenue.