"...but for now it seems like Yahoo should step in and do the right thing."
The right thing is to protect people's privacy.
You and I both know the mom doesn't want to access the emails he sent her, she already has them. And we both know the mom doesn't want to access the emails addressed to her he had in his draft folder, he probably doesn't have any.
What the mom really wants is all the emails he made sure to never send her. That's what she truly wants. She wants to see the side of the deceased son which the deceased son had always made sure to keep private from her.
for a video professional, time is money. If he has the time to build a telepromter instead of just buying one that uses a PDA and comes with appropriate PDA software, he can't be that good at producing video.
They are so cheap, his time SHOULD be worth more than the hours to build one.
May be the guy isn't a professional. He certainly doesn't claim to be one.
You will still be able to vote with your wallet. Just like some restaurants already do, some airlines will chose to limit cell phone usage. Airlines will be able to ban them outright, limit their use based on the area you're in, or simply limit their use to a small time window they select.
And comparing the cell phone usage of a passenger on a plane to the use of a cell phone by the driver in a car is like comparing apples to oranges. Contrary to popular belief, using a cell phone in a plane is actually completely safe.
3)How the heck can any judge take these cases seriously, when, like one of my fellow posters made notice of, companies like Sony pratice the business tatics that they do. Their electronics division sells the mp3 players, but the record companies that they own forbid you to transfer the songs to mp3 players.
If anything, it's a damn good diversification strategy. If a new business model threatens you, you might as well both fight back the new business model and create a new division that will embrace the new business model. Corporations are not moral beings. They aim to make money and survive even if they can't predict what's going to happen.
Maybe his Firefox installation or Firefox profile somehow became corrupted. Maybe the sites he visits trigger crashes in Firefox more than the sites we visit. Maybe the extensions he uses are buggy (in which case he should blame the extension).
And may be his power supply is bad, may be he's still running windows 98, may be he doesn't have the suggested memory requirements, may be his system is full of spyware, etc.
The point is, we don't know. He hasn't given us any spec of his sytem. He hasn't even given us any version number of the Firefoxes he is complaining about. His post is so devoid of information, it is surprising to see he was modded up in the first place, and it's doubly surprising he hasn't switched back to IE (with his problems, I would have done that a long time ago).
Unfortunately, firefox is a long way off from approaching IE's stability and speed. There hasn't been a day that has gone by where I haven't experienced a firefox crash or error.
Are you sure it's FireFox? I've been using FireFox 0.9.3 and its previous versions on Win XP. I've never even had one crash and the speed is as fast as IE (as far as I can tell).
And even the guy who posted the story seems to not have had any problem with previous versions of FireFox.
In other words, you know someone who is nothing more than a student on forensic, he gave you a second-hand account of what an expert said, and now you're giving us a third hand account of what the expert said.
I've got news for you. The legal system is not fair. The way it's designed, it's too difficult to get a conviction, and it's very frustrating for the police and the DAs involved.
The police and the DAs have to cheat and lie if they want to make a conviction, not because they want to, but because they have to. That's simply the way the game is played. And that's the way those guys on the prosecution team get to keep their jobs and get promoted.
For instance, you mentioned evidence being thrown out. Well, studies have proven that evidence thrown out do still affect the outcomes of trials. There was one study in particular where the mere mention of a confession would yield a conviction rate of 80% even when that confession was thrown out and even when that piece of evidence was really the only thing that would tell us they had the right suspect. Jurors are not stupid and not that docile, they're not going to release a potential murderer if they believe there is a confession they're not allowed to take into account. Would you?
Often times, those confessions are nothing more than conjectures, responses to leading questions, and responses to "what if you were the killer, where would you hide the body?" scenarios. But usually, the jury doesn't know that. The evidence gets thrown out before the defense gets to challenge it. That's how the game is played. It's really not fair and really inefficient, but it's unfair for both sides of the table.
CSI:Miami is not written well. Its characters are one-dimensional cliches. Its actors suck, especially the old guy with the fake accent. Its story lines are specifically written to shock people. Its unrealistic gadgets are used to dazzle and awe more than anything else. There is really nothing worthwhile I can say about that show.
"It just proves that they pirated some proprietary software to make a sound file..."
It doesn't prove that. For all you know, they could have purchased the sound from a sound gallery, or the guy doing the editing bought a fake copy of Sound Forge.
Lately on Slashdot, we know that's possible, we've seen enough examples of people ripping off software so they could resell it under a different name.
For now, I'll give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt.
I completely agree. TIs are shoddy pieces of crap. I've seen so many of those calculators fail, it's unbelievable. HP makes and has always made great top of the line calculators, it's too bad they're also associated with louzy printers.
The Fairness doctrine was a Croc. You can't legislate fairness. Picking extremists of both sides of an issue does not make the discussion fair, it makes it retarded.
This still brings up the issue of coercion to "vote the right way". If someone else can confirm how you voted, they can punish/reward you.
I don't know if it's the case in your State, but in my County in California anyone can vote absentee. What prevents someone from photocopying or showing their completed ballot to someone else before mailing it? Nursing homes are vulnerable to this kind of intimidation.
Each absentee ballot even has a unique number on it, so you can call an 800 number 28 days later, to make sure your ballot was well-received and valid. Doesn't every state have something like this?
Blame your neighbors, who are probably lobbying in NIMBY campaigns to prevent more cell towers from being put up.
I agree with this. Berkeley is one cities that has been fighting cell antennas tooth and nail. I don't suppose the original poster lives in that East Bay city. Does he?
You could have made your point a little more eloquently, but in any case, you're right, noone is disagreeing with you there. And again, the original poster didn't even mention Europe.
"Have you asked the French what they're up to in the Ivory coast?"
Exactely, this conflict is one where the French and the Americans are allies.
"So? Am I not allowed to mention any nouns unless he does? "
Why so defensive? Who said you were not allowed to mention something? You can continue arguing against yourself for all I care.
"He obviously agrees with the European (except for Poland, Italy and now the Netherlands) position."
The European governments have their own reasons for doing things. And again, the original poster didn't even mention Europe. Your stance for the war in Iraq might be the same as the one held by a white supremacist, but that doesn't necessarily make you a white supremacist. Does it?
"Does anyone in Europe worry about the suffering *without* formal declaration of war in Sudan, NK, much of Africa etc etc? Most of Afghnistan isn't worrying about the US anymore and that must chap your ass. "
Actually, a much larger proportion of Europeans are aware of those "conflicts" as opposed to the numbers of Americans that are aware of its own government's involvement abroad. If you were to ask most Americans what the Bush administration has recently done in Venezuela, Haiti, and the Ivory Coast, the overwhelming majority of Americans simply wouldn't be able to tell you.
In any case, what you're setting up here is a straw man's argument. The original poster didn't even mention Europe. You're putting arguments in his mouth he hasn't even made. I guess you must be proud of yourself, it must be soooo challenging to win arguments against yourself.
If you consider the growth of infrastructure in China to the rate of upgrading in the west is it any wonder they are ahead?
They're not ahead. If you ever decide to go outside your own county, you will see that each country can do some things better than everyone else. It's all a matter of having different constraints.
Slashdot Mirror
The right thing is to protect people's privacy.
You and I both know the mom doesn't want to access the emails he sent her, she already has them. And we both know the mom doesn't want to access the emails addressed to her he had in his draft folder, he probably doesn't have any.
What the mom really wants is all the emails he made sure to never send her. That's what she truly wants. She wants to see the side of the deceased son which the deceased son had always made sure to keep private from her.
It could be the placebo effect of being charged $5 a minute, that and the effect of tensing the muscle of the eardrum to listen more streanuously.
May be the guy isn't a professional. He certainly doesn't claim to be one.
And comparing the cell phone usage of a passenger on a plane to the use of a cell phone by the driver in a car is like comparing apples to oranges. Contrary to popular belief, using a cell phone in a plane is actually completely safe.
If anything, it's a damn good diversification strategy. If a new business model threatens you, you might as well both fight back the new business model and create a new division that will embrace the new business model. Corporations are not moral beings. They aim to make money and survive even if they can't predict what's going to happen.
And may be his power supply is bad, may be he's still running windows 98, may be he doesn't have the suggested memory requirements, may be his system is full of spyware, etc.
The point is, we don't know. He hasn't given us any spec of his sytem. He hasn't even given us any version number of the Firefoxes he is complaining about. His post is so devoid of information, it is surprising to see he was modded up in the first place, and it's doubly surprising he hasn't switched back to IE (with his problems, I would have done that a long time ago).
Are you sure it's FireFox? I've been using FireFox 0.9.3 and its previous versions on Win XP. I've never even had one crash and the speed is as fast as IE (as far as I can tell).
And even the guy who posted the story seems to not have had any problem with previous versions of FireFox.
Actually, I think I just made a mistake, I was thinking about the CSI with the military intelligence. I'm not sure what that's called.
Do I have this right?
The police and the DAs have to cheat and lie if they want to make a conviction, not because they want to, but because they have to. That's simply the way the game is played. And that's the way those guys on the prosecution team get to keep their jobs and get promoted.
For instance, you mentioned evidence being thrown out. Well, studies have proven that evidence thrown out do still affect the outcomes of trials. There was one study in particular where the mere mention of a confession would yield a conviction rate of 80% even when that confession was thrown out and even when that piece of evidence was really the only thing that would tell us they had the right suspect. Jurors are not stupid and not that docile, they're not going to release a potential murderer if they believe there is a confession they're not allowed to take into account. Would you?
Often times, those confessions are nothing more than conjectures, responses to leading questions, and responses to "what if you were the killer, where would you hide the body?" scenarios. But usually, the jury doesn't know that. The evidence gets thrown out before the defense gets to challenge it. That's how the game is played. It's really not fair and really inefficient, but it's unfair for both sides of the table.
CSI:Miami is not written well. Its characters are one-dimensional cliches. Its actors suck, especially the old guy with the fake accent. Its story lines are specifically written to shock people. Its unrealistic gadgets are used to dazzle and awe more than anything else. There is really nothing worthwhile I can say about that show.
It doesn't prove that. For all you know, they could have purchased the sound from a sound gallery, or the guy doing the editing bought a fake copy of Sound Forge.
Lately on Slashdot, we know that's possible, we've seen enough examples of people ripping off software so they could resell it under a different name.
For now, I'll give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt.
I completely agree. TIs are shoddy pieces of crap. I've seen so many of those calculators fail, it's unbelievable. HP makes and has always made great top of the line calculators, it's too bad they're also associated with louzy printers.
Actually, first he purchased the original os for a lump sum, then he hired coders to work on it.
And Desktop Search is a server. What's your point?
I felt the same way as you did before I tried it. You've got to try it.
What's next? Free web access if you pay for broadband. Free email if you pay for broadband. Free virus protection if you pay for broadband.
Might as well go wild and give free access to Slashdot.
The Fairness doctrine was a Croc. You can't legislate fairness. Picking extremists of both sides of an issue does not make the discussion fair, it makes it retarded.
I don't know if it's the case in your State, but in my County in California anyone can vote absentee. What prevents someone from photocopying or showing their completed ballot to someone else before mailing it? Nursing homes are vulnerable to this kind of intimidation.
Each absentee ballot even has a unique number on it, so you can call an 800 number 28 days later, to make sure your ballot was well-received and valid. Doesn't every state have something like this?
I agree with this. Berkeley is one cities that has been fighting cell antennas tooth and nail. I don't suppose the original poster lives in that East Bay city. Does he?
You could have made your point a little more eloquently, but in any case, you're right, noone is disagreeing with you there. And again, the original poster didn't even mention Europe.
"Have you asked the French what they're up to in the Ivory coast?"
Exactely, this conflict is one where the French and the Americans are allies.
"So? Am I not allowed to mention any nouns unless he does? "
Why so defensive? Who said you were not allowed to mention something? You can continue arguing against yourself for all I care.
"He obviously agrees with the European (except for Poland, Italy and now the Netherlands) position."
The European governments have their own reasons for doing things. And again, the original poster didn't even mention Europe. Your stance for the war in Iraq might be the same as the one held by a white supremacist, but that doesn't necessarily make you a white supremacist. Does it?
Actually, a much larger proportion of Europeans are aware of those "conflicts" as opposed to the numbers of Americans that are aware of its own government's involvement abroad. If you were to ask most Americans what the Bush administration has recently done in Venezuela, Haiti, and the Ivory Coast, the overwhelming majority of Americans simply wouldn't be able to tell you.
In any case, what you're setting up here is a straw man's argument. The original poster didn't even mention Europe. You're putting arguments in his mouth he hasn't even made. I guess you must be proud of yourself, it must be soooo challenging to win arguments against yourself.
As soon as you legalize the use of drugs, then the war over there will be won. It's the same way we won the war on "alcohol".
Yeah, if you do know them and if your skin is brown, there a couple of government officials would love to talk to you.
They're not ahead. If you ever decide to go outside your own county, you will see that each country can do some things better than everyone else. It's all a matter of having different constraints.