No. At this point, potential has surpassed threshold and achieved REAL problem status.
Anyhoo, Lifelock is a scam. Plain and simple. They'll take your money right enough, but they really can't deliver on their promises to protect you and your information. They're like insurance salesmen. They're simply trying for quantity and trying to live on margins, hoping that they don't get hit big by some massive info theft that they can't cover up or make disappear. Once they get a breach of a truly significant portion of their customer's data, expect to see them fold up shop like all the old fly-by-night insurance salesmen in the Depression.
You can have example after example. Proof after proof. The money grubbing bastards who know how to milk the status quo for every last cent will continue to forge ahead, regardless of who or what gets in their way.
Seriously, he could come up and announce that he was auctioning engagement for him to poop in someones' mouth and the Jobs-fiends would applaud and whoop and holler (and plunk down real money).
Small business can be up and running without customizations and consultants using the base Dynamics CRM sales, marketing and service modules.
Sure, if your business process works like an out-of-the-box install. The problems start piling up when you actually want to customize the package and dial it in to how your business process flows. Or use it in a truly multi-user environment CRM package, rather than just an add-on to the Outlook PIM.
It's been known for a long time that Apple was an insular, unfriendly company to deal with if you didn't happen to drink the Kool-Aid. It's been known for a while now that their iPhone platform is completely closed and totally dependent on authoritarian, arbitrary Apple.
What stuns me is that there are still developers lining up to sink development costs into a platform whose approval process they have ZERO control over and can be completely fucked over on the minute Apple says "NO".
Next time, pick a better, more open platform. Preferably one NOT controlled by a bunch of turtleneck-wearing asshats with a terminal superiority complex.
Saint Peter: Eight Ball in the corner pocket? God: Nah, jumped the bumper. Saint Peter: Ooh. Not good! God: What was that? You wanted a long tour of Hell? Saint Peter: I mean SPECTACULAR SHOT MY LORD!
Our [Crappy Product We're Selling] will lock you up so tight that if you take a crap, we'll be able to tell exactly what you had to eat a month and a half ago from the leavings! You will be secure, SECURE, SEH-CURE BABY!
Just fork over that phat gub-a-mint dole! MONEY MONEY MONEY MO-NEY! MO-NEY!
Truly the finest in buzzword-laden insecure security!
Broken the first time a government worker (or mabye A. Random Janitor) find out that their porn is blocked and get around it all.
1: I never said I wasn't another loudmouth on the internet. 2: By coming up and demanding that I refute him, you completely miss the point of my original contention here.
I am not arguing climate science here. I'm arguing that some of the processes involved in getting published are being gated not by merit, but personal opinion.
What they're questioning is the integrity of the data being put into the process, and thus, the data being extracted by this method.
If you have a computer program that adds 1 + 1 and comes up with 3, repeatedly, regularly, without fail, and is easily duplicated by anyone, does that mean it's correct?
Simply because one disagrees with the outcome of an experiment doesn't mean they question the whole of science. And conflating the two is the worst and sloppiest form of intellectual dishonesty.
What they're talking about isn't simply answering Joe Bob Everyman's questions in a public shouting match. They're talking about getting papers published in peer-reviewed, that actually meet the criteria for publication in journals that are even the least bit contrary to the "party line" that you're spouting. Because of this sleazy, nasty territoriality, the process of putting data out there for peer review (even if the opinions expressed in there aren't popular or even possibly correct) has become something of a sham.
The point of the peer review process is that others can take the data put forth, run their own tests and corroborate or invalidate the results and provide their OWN data on why they did the former or latter.
The only difference between Apple and Microsoft's business methods was that Microsoft happened to piggyback on a much bigger, more rapacious partner until they could put them in their place (IBM).
Both companies and their practices (as well as their founders) are equally rapacious. It's just that it's REALLY hard to be a humongous asshat when you're only holding a fraction of a percent of the market. Now that Apple has near-control over several markets and the money is falling like rain from the sky, Stevie is feeling free to flap his gums and make noise about how you should "kneel before Jobs".
Unfortunately, people who tend to run their mouths aimlessly and aggressively tend to get smacked eventually.
There's 300+ million people HERE IN THE USE living with crappy IP laws! We need to fix our problems at home first! Then some jackass stuffed-shirt can try to tell everyone else how bad they are. Followed shortly by them telling him to eat a dick.
Slashdot Mirror
We hates it...FOREVER!
No. At this point, potential has surpassed threshold and achieved REAL problem status.
Anyhoo, Lifelock is a scam. Plain and simple.
They'll take your money right enough, but they really can't deliver on their promises to protect you and your information.
They're like insurance salesmen. They're simply trying for quantity and trying to live on margins, hoping that they don't get hit big by some massive info theft that they can't cover up or make disappear.
Once they get a breach of a truly significant portion of their customer's data, expect to see them fold up shop like all the old fly-by-night insurance salesmen in the Depression.
Well, at least a trouser-snake.
Well, at least it's better than the whole laser-beam-to-the-crotch method of execution.
What? Of course I'd rather be drowned, crushed, and torn apart by massive hydraulic forces!
Yeah! Yeah! I AM a guy! So what?
You can have example after example. Proof after proof.
The money grubbing bastards who know how to milk the status quo for every last cent will continue to forge ahead, regardless of who or what gets in their way.
Seriously, he could come up and announce that he was auctioning engagement for him to poop in someones' mouth and the Jobs-fiends would applaud and whoop and holler (and plunk down real money).
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Damn! That's some GOOD Joker Venom you have there Gabe!
Small business can be up and running without customizations and consultants using the base Dynamics CRM sales, marketing and service modules.
Sure, if your business process works like an out-of-the-box install. The problems start piling up when you actually want to customize the package and dial it in to how your business process flows. Or use it in a truly multi-user environment CRM package, rather than just an add-on to the Outlook PIM.
THEN it's not so "free" anymore.
Cougar Life has run adverts on the radio here in Chicago.
Their tag line is "Wouldn't you like to **** a cougar too?"
As such, it's pretty obvious that they're not going to pass the "No Adult Content" caveat in place with Google.
It's been known for a long time that Apple was an insular, unfriendly company to deal with if you didn't happen to drink the Kool-Aid.
It's been known for a while now that their iPhone platform is completely closed and totally dependent on authoritarian, arbitrary Apple.
What stuns me is that there are still developers lining up to sink development costs into a platform whose approval process they have ZERO control over and can be completely fucked over on the minute Apple says "NO".
Next time, pick a better, more open platform. Preferably one NOT controlled by a bunch of turtleneck-wearing asshats with a terminal superiority complex.
Saint Peter: Eight Ball in the corner pocket?
God: Nah, jumped the bumper.
Saint Peter: Ooh. Not good!
God: What was that? You wanted a long tour of Hell?
Saint Peter: I mean SPECTACULAR SHOT MY LORD!
blahblahblahblahblahJUSTIFYEXISTENCEblah.
blahblahblahblahblahGIVEUSMONEYblah.
blahblahblahblahblahSUEYOURASSOFFblah.
blahblahblahblahblahITISALLEVILPIRATESFAULTblah!
blahblahblahblahblahWHATDOYOUMEANMAKEADECENTPRODUCTYOUARECRAZYblah!
Shoot 'em down, Shoot 'em down
Shoot 'em down, Shoot 'em down
Shoot 'em down, Shoot 'em down
Shoot 'em down to the ground!
I can see it now.
Our [Crappy Product We're Selling] will lock you up so tight that if you take a crap, we'll be able to tell exactly what you had to eat a month and a half ago from the leavings! You will be secure, SECURE, SEH-CURE BABY!
Just fork over that phat gub-a-mint dole! MONEY MONEY MONEY MO-NEY! MO-NEY!
Truly the finest in buzzword-laden insecure security!
Broken the first time a government worker (or mabye A. Random Janitor) find out that their porn is blocked and get around it all.
Security through bullshittery.
That worked out GREAT for TSR too. Didn't it?
Oh wait...
Never mind that fansites like this help build community that otherwise would go unserved or underserved and helps...oh...RETAIN CUSTOMERS?
Until Voldy pulls that whole Avada Kedavra thing...
I'm not questioning the instruments or anyone's integrity.
I'm merely telling you that what some of these people are questioning is NOT the scientific method.
Again, conflating one argument with another isn't productive and generates no useful dialog.
If you want to go rabid-attack-dog on someone, why not just join Scientology?
1: I never said I wasn't another loudmouth on the internet.
2: By coming up and demanding that I refute him, you completely miss the point of my original contention here.
I am not arguing climate science here. I'm arguing that some of the processes involved in getting published are being gated not by merit, but personal opinion.
Nobody is questioning the scientific method.
What they're questioning is the integrity of the data being put into the process, and thus, the data being extracted by this method.
If you have a computer program that adds 1 + 1 and comes up with 3, repeatedly, regularly, without fail, and is easily duplicated by anyone, does that mean it's correct?
Simply because one disagrees with the outcome of an experiment doesn't mean they question the whole of science. And conflating the two is the worst and sloppiest form of intellectual dishonesty.
You're just some "loudmouth" on the internet.
What they're talking about isn't simply answering Joe Bob Everyman's questions in a public shouting match.
They're talking about getting papers published in peer-reviewed, that actually meet the criteria for publication in journals that are even the least bit contrary to the "party line" that you're spouting.
Because of this sleazy, nasty territoriality, the process of putting data out there for peer review (even if the opinions expressed in there aren't popular or even possibly correct) has become something of a sham.
The point of the peer review process is that others can take the data put forth, run their own tests and corroborate or invalidate the results and provide their OWN data on why they did the former or latter.
Welcome our new super-industrious, megalith-building beaver overlords.
I greet them with the following phrase.
NICE BEAVER!
No, I think that's PEDObyte.
Just keep them away from children (with guns and horrendous megaviolence preferably) and you're golden.
We never expect this many people
SURPRISE!
At least you didn't pull your host down with you.
I was one of the offical mirrors for the MechCommander game way back when.
What's more, I was the first one on the list.
My host had a severe case of NOT pleased when we ate their entire pipe.
The only difference between Apple and Microsoft's business methods was that Microsoft happened to piggyback on a much bigger, more rapacious partner until they could put them in their place (IBM).
Both companies and their practices (as well as their founders) are equally rapacious. It's just that it's REALLY hard to be a humongous asshat when you're only holding a fraction of a percent of the market. Now that Apple has near-control over several markets and the money is falling like rain from the sky, Stevie is feeling free to flap his gums and make noise about how you should "kneel before Jobs".
Unfortunately, people who tend to run their mouths aimlessly and aggressively tend to get smacked eventually.
There's 300+ million people HERE IN THE USE living with crappy IP laws!
We need to fix our problems at home first!
Then some jackass stuffed-shirt can try to tell everyone else how bad they are.
Followed shortly by them telling him to eat a dick.