Guess what? They might've fooled you with all the shiny effects, but what we are downloading....*gasp*...IS THE ADVERTISEMENT (albeit an entertaining one).
As for more traditional advertising, as others have pointed out, there isn't any.
God, that is such a piss poor analogy. The blindingly obvious difference here is that a car cannot operate properly without tires, WHEREAS a computer can operate perfectly fine WITHOUT Windows.
Please, take Logic 101 and come back to us.
censor Pronunciation Key (snsr)
n.
1. A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.
Anyone can censor. I think what you mean is that when a business does it, your first ammendment rights are not being impeded.
While I agree that playing EQ for three hours is not much different than watching three hours of sitcoms, I have yet to find a significant number of people who played just three hours per day. Instead, it was something more like 16.
This is not even relevant seeing as I have never been solicited by Google to provide them with even a single bit of personal information. So how exactly are law enforcement officials supposed to "muscle" Google into giving something they never had and never intended to have?
Cookies by themselves are almost worthless to track information as people can deny/clear cookies at any time. Only when coupled with some type of login system whereby they can track each unique session, do cookies become useful for tracking purposes. Right now, my guess is the exist to gather non-personal aggregate information that helps them make the searches more relevant.
I see this as being no different than blacklisting certain mail servers because of open relays. They are not filtering anything, merely denying access to *their* network due to justified concern regarding the well-being of said network.
Oh please. First and foremost, if it helps mankind in any way, then I submit that the testing is necessary.
You would rather have the testing done on humans? This is quite ridiculous, even if said humans are rapists or murderers. It is cruel and unusual for the human because he/she is self-aware and understands what is happening. He/she can appreciate the fact that they are being tortured. Rats cannot. Animal testing is a necessary stage before any science can be applied to humans and as long as humane policies are in place for the testing and disposal of the animals, I have no problems with it.
Whether you like it or not, animal testing has probably extended your life by about fifty or sixty years.
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't a fireproof safe be a little easier?
Yeah, and did you hear this is *already* built into Windows too? Click start, then run, then type "notepad." Rock!
Guess what? They might've fooled you with all the shiny effects, but what we are downloading....*gasp*...IS THE ADVERTISEMENT (albeit an entertaining one).
As for more traditional advertising, as others have pointed out, there isn't any.
I'm guessing that IBM's licensing means far, far more to SCO than it has or ever will mean to IBM.
God, that is such a piss poor analogy. The blindingly obvious difference here is that a car cannot operate properly without tires, WHEREAS a computer can operate perfectly fine WITHOUT Windows. Please, take Logic 101 and come back to us.
It's actually a gif image renamed as jpg.
This is an enormously successful video game that was released exclusively for the PS2. So, how is it that this console has no life left in it?
Wow, this looks Avengers bad.
censor Pronunciation Key (snsr) n. 1. A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.
Anyone can censor. I think what you mean is that when a business does it, your first ammendment rights are not being impeded.
While I agree that playing EQ for three hours is not much different than watching three hours of sitcoms, I have yet to find a significant number of people who played just three hours per day. Instead, it was something more like 16.
Evil will always triumph over Good, because Good is DUMB.
This is not even relevant seeing as I have never been solicited by Google to provide them with even a single bit of personal information. So how exactly are law enforcement officials supposed to "muscle" Google into giving something they never had and never intended to have?
Cookies by themselves are almost worthless to track information as people can deny/clear cookies at any time. Only when coupled with some type of login system whereby they can track each unique session, do cookies become useful for tracking purposes. Right now, my guess is the exist to gather non-personal aggregate information that helps them make the searches more relevant.
I see this as being no different than blacklisting certain mail servers because of open relays. They are not filtering anything, merely denying access to *their* network due to justified concern regarding the well-being of said network.
cortices
Oh please. First and foremost, if it helps mankind in any way, then I submit that the testing is necessary.
You would rather have the testing done on humans? This is quite ridiculous, even if said humans are rapists or murderers. It is cruel and unusual for the human because he/she is self-aware and understands what is happening. He/she can appreciate the fact that they are being tortured. Rats cannot. Animal testing is a necessary stage before any science can be applied to humans and as long as humane policies are in place for the testing and disposal of the animals, I have no problems with it.
Whether you like it or not, animal testing has probably extended your life by about fifty or sixty years.
Calm down my son.