People will want to take them whether they're sick or not. If you're reasonable, and just tell your employees to stay home when they're sick, they'll mostly do just that.
However, I didn't say they shouldn't show ads, just that I, personally, am not interested in any of them. Some people are more receptive to advertising than others, and I'm pretty far into the low end of that scale.
Slashdot doesn't seem to have a problem with me opting out of their ads...
It wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft had specifically asked for that ad to be shown to Mac users. After all, you're a potential new customer for Windows.
There are more people playing games, and thus more money to be made. There's still about as many good game designers, so there are a lot of really crappy games out there. It's just harder to find the gems.
This is profiling. They're picking on people who, for whatever reason, need or want to carry toner/water/shoes or whatever on a flight. Changing the parameters of the profiling to skin colour or some such so that you, personally, aren't inconvenienced would not make it better.
That's not what happened up here. In fact the copyright cartels are still lobbying hard against the levy. They hate it, because they feel it legitimises piracy. (It does.)
There's also some way around it, because the market price for CD-Rs is lower than the levy is supposed to be.
The anti-abortionists would argue that the foetus is an individual person, and thus should get a vote on any abortion concerning it. Wikipedia can link to a page on the definition of personhood and lay out the various arguments. The real world has to pick one.
There are often multiple possibilities of which no one has been absolutely proven. Wikipedia also has the advantage of not doing original research, but only summarizing that done by others that can be cited.
Where as the world often can't. Abortion is either legal, or it's not. Taxes are either at one rate or another. We either provide universal health care or we do not.
Wikipedia can present all valid views. The world can't implement all possible policies.
Slashdot Mirror
People will want to take them whether they're sick or not. If you're reasonable, and just tell your employees to stay home when they're sick, they'll mostly do just that.
It's Time and Newsweek that are non-profit by accident.
Of course. Why wouldn't I want those things?
However, I didn't say they shouldn't show ads, just that I, personally, am not interested in any of them. Some people are more receptive to advertising than others, and I'm pretty far into the low end of that scale.
Slashdot doesn't seem to have a problem with me opting out of their ads...
I'll just wait for the inevitable update to Adblock.
It wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft had specifically asked for that ad to be shown to Mac users. After all, you're a potential new customer for Windows.
Please don't show them to me, you're just wasting my time and your bandwidth.
You lot haven't given them the vote now, have you?
There are more people playing games, and thus more money to be made. There's still about as many good game designers, so there are a lot of really crappy games out there. It's just harder to find the gems.
Whichever you screen less thoroughly.
Yes, it is, and frankly, young Middle Eastern men have damned good reason to be nervous at a security checkpoint.
This is profiling. They're picking on people who, for whatever reason, need or want to carry toner/water/shoes or whatever on a flight. Changing the parameters of the profiling to skin colour or some such so that you, personally, aren't inconvenienced would not make it better.
The same as it was for mix-tapes.
Piracy is solved forever.
And it goes to 13 in Japan.
This is just a brand name for ad-hoc networking, then?
I think it's fair to assume that the foetus would opt not to be aborted.
We can't implement multiple definitions of personhood in the real world. Wikipedia can.
That's not what happened up here. In fact the copyright cartels are still lobbying hard against the levy. They hate it, because they feel it legitimises piracy. (It does.)
There's also some way around it, because the market price for CD-Rs is lower than the levy is supposed to be.
The anti-abortionists would argue that the foetus is an individual person, and thus should get a vote on any abortion concerning it. Wikipedia can link to a page on the definition of personhood and lay out the various arguments. The real world has to pick one.
They still believe that, somehow, piracy will stop some day.
Any place you wanted to make abortion illegal (or legal) would already have lots of people living there with their own ideas about the issue.
What they don't get is that if they don't compete on features with piracy, then they're really steering people towards it.
It's that simple. Apparently they'd rather people torrent.
That does happen. There are means to deal with it, but it requires there be someone who cares enough about that article to make use of them.
There are often multiple possibilities of which no one has been absolutely proven. Wikipedia also has the advantage of not doing original research, but only summarizing that done by others that can be cited.
Where as the world often can't. Abortion is either legal, or it's not. Taxes are either at one rate or another. We either provide universal health care or we do not.
Wikipedia can present all valid views. The world can't implement all possible policies.