Yeah, my first thought was "wait, the iPad already has a 'magazine' app" - Flipboard. That app puts web content in a magazine format and looks very easy to use. (My wife has the iPad, not me.)
As far as the content - why would people around the country want to be locked into The Daily's content when they could aggregate content from multiple sources - including Fox or other Murdoch publications if they wish to.
They really do have the best interest of their state in mind (at least what they sincerely believe the best interests ought to be) and very few of them have higher ambitions other than to serve a couple of terms in their current office and then getting back to their small business/[lawyer or lobbyist/PR] job/retirement.
With no salary, NH has decided that only the rich, self or semi-self employed, or retired can hold office.
I really don't see anything to look up to in a system like that. The state ought to pay their representatives the state's median-salary wage for the months they meet, and require that there be a job available at the end of that time for anyone who has to take a leave of absence to serve.
I wasn't born when JFK died or when we landed on the moon, but I know where I was when the Challenger blew up. I was in third grade math class. The fifth grade science class at the end of the hall was watching the launch, and their teacher came into our class room, spoke briefly with our teacher, then said "The Challenger exploded. It just - blew up." I think after that he moved on to the next room, but I don't recall what else much, if anything, happened for the rest of the class.
It's pretty stupid that, on the main page, a full third of the page is wasted with an empty white bar down the right side of the screen, with the "ads disabled, thanks for your excellence" at the top --- AND there's a horizontal scroll bar so I can see more of it.
Let me maximize the main page for content like I could before.
Otherwise I don't see anything that bad yet. The text is way too small - but I had to blow it up before anyway.
The first time you try to post after visiting, it still takes waaaaay too long with the little AJAX "Loading" dialog before you get your post preview. Still need to fix that.
What you say isn't allowed in the U.S. right now. Use of infrared cameras without a warrant was tossed out already, using a case involving a cop on the street. Putting the camera on a plane isn't any different.
From brief reading, it doesn't look like there's a set minimum height. Rather, you have to prove that the actions of the plane infringe upon your rights to use and possess your property. (The burden is on you because, while your property rights extend to the edge of the atmosphere, those rights do not apply to air vehicles.) If you can prove infringement, you can get an injunction. Good luck with that.
Best bet: if you are a model airplane enthusiast, and are flying a plane over your property, you could likely crash it into the drone and then sue the police for infringing on your rights to use your property.
If you park on a public street, or in an open-to-the-public general parking lot or garage, I'd support those with guns storing them in their cars.
But if you park on private property, at a job site not open to the public, why would you expect the right to bring a gun onto that property? Many of your rights end at my property line, and that's mostly true even if I've hired you to perform work on my property.
But due to people acting in their own self-interest, we've developed modern techniques of agriculture to the point where everyone can be fully fed unless they are under an oppressive government (such as most of Africa).
Or the nearly 10 million Americans that are forced to skip meals or eat too little each year.
To nearly all the rest of your comments, I thank unions more than corporations for all of that. Corporations that sell to the middle class only exist because there is a middle class.
Re:Very similar to smoking bans
on
Comics Code Dead
·
· Score: 1
It has a lot more to do with your employees than your customers. The argument is that your employees have a right to work in a safe environment - the same way that employees in a machine shop or garage or manufacturing facility have the right to be safe at their jobs, too.
It doesn't matter if every employee you have smokes and doesn't mind. What if one of them wanted to quit smoking? Should a company be able to fire an employee who asked for goggles because he kept getting metal dust in his eyes from a machine lacking safety mechanisms?
At one point such an employee would get fired. Then there were some sit-ins and a few factories burnt to the ground, and now there are workplace protections in place. Extending them to smoking is a smaller leap than making smoking an exception.
Well, Firefox could ignore that "special registry entry" and instead require special add-ons to install a small "hook" in each user's profile. That way each user could still remove the addon from their Firefox instance, yet only one version of the addon is still required on the system.
The next time the user enters the browser, how is the browser supposed to know if an addon is new?
Should Firefox maintain a list of installed addons? What stops a shady addon from manually modifying this list? Should Firefox sign a list of installed addons? Firefox is open source; what stops a shady addon from just reading the key from the code and signing the updated list? Would you want your list of installed addons to automatically transmit to a mozilla website so that they can sign using a private key? That causes all sorts of privacy concerns on its own.
I, too, would like and have asked for something like this. But I'm pretty certain that they can't do it without a server call or closing a piece of their code.
And your apps would get rejected because Apple does not allow applications that weren't developed in the native languages. Cross compilers are against the developer program license agreement.
I'm not sure what the GP said (apart from the bit you quoted), nor do I know if anyone else said something more insightful than you did. But your post is +4, and I almost moderated it up to +5.
Then I decided to break the feedback loop and not mod you up. Viva variety! You're welcome.
I was a Commodore user in the 1980s, which made me anti-PC but no Mac lover. It did make it easier to switch from PC to Mac a few years ago, though, when it made economic sense to do so. My wife and I have no intention of being Apple fans; we have three iPods, an iPhone, an iPad, and two MacBook Pros based on the quality of the products and their ease of use. I bought the stock because I thought it would go up instead of stagnate or go down. If my opinion of their product line changes so will my purchasing and investment, but I have no personal dislike of any company or individuals who haven't attempted to subvert the laws of the country.
Markets are closed today. Tomorrow morning, though, if I can buy before the earnings report, I will. (I'm not sure when the earning report comes out, but it should be obvious from the stock price.)
Indeed. Moreover, most companies that do pay dividends do so electronically. The value is based solely on the belief that there will always be another sucker willing to accept your non-existent electronic funds.
The only real stock is that which pays dividends in gold doubloons. Am I right?
Indeed. I'm in at $125, but I've been looking for an opportunity to buy more shares. Tuesday morning may be the best chance I get this year. While everyone panics due to Jobs' health, I can pick up some shares on discount that will grow by end of year.
That said, I'm ready to dump them as soon as I don't feel they can sustain their new product development. For now though they clearly can.
I'd rather have all discounts based off of MSRP than based off of some other nebulous vendor-specific metric. "50% off (the price we charged for one day last September)" is meaningless when trying to compare with other vendors, but "50% off MSRP" can be compared everywhere because that product only has one MSRP.
The only three parties involved that could set a fixed price to generate "% off" comparisons are the retailer (not good as explained above), the manufacturer, and the government (via some sort of truth in advertising law). And while the government can do some things well, I don't see any reason why it would do this well, nor do I see any value in having it try.
However, I've previously read that cows infected with Mad Cow Disease are disposed of by dissolving them in lye, not burning, precisely due to the risk that prions could survive the fire and become airborne.
Slashdot Mirror
Some people won't pay anything, ever, for content. But I think that's shortsighted. SOMEONE has to be paid to produce content.
Indeed. But, at least from me, that someone won't be Rupert Murdoch.
Yeah, my first thought was "wait, the iPad already has a 'magazine' app" - Flipboard. That app puts web content in a magazine format and looks very easy to use. (My wife has the iPad, not me.)
As far as the content - why would people around the country want to be locked into The Daily's content when they could aggregate content from multiple sources - including Fox or other Murdoch publications if they wish to.
Chance of funding, in descending order of application:
Military
Sex
.
Business
.
.
.
.
.
Health/Education
They really do have the best interest of their state in mind (at least what they sincerely believe the best interests ought to be) and very few of them have higher ambitions other than to serve a couple of terms in their current office and then getting back to their small business/[lawyer or lobbyist/PR] job/retirement.
With no salary, NH has decided that only the rich, self or semi-self employed, or retired can hold office.
I really don't see anything to look up to in a system like that. The state ought to pay their representatives the state's median-salary wage for the months they meet, and require that there be a job available at the end of that time for anyone who has to take a leave of absence to serve.
I wasn't born when JFK died or when we landed on the moon, but I know where I was when the Challenger blew up. I was in third grade math class. The fifth grade science class at the end of the hall was watching the launch, and their teacher came into our class room, spoke briefly with our teacher, then said "The Challenger exploded. It just - blew up." I think after that he moved on to the next room, but I don't recall what else much, if anything, happened for the rest of the class.
It's pretty stupid that, on the main page, a full third of the page is wasted with an empty white bar down the right side of the screen, with the "ads disabled, thanks for your excellence" at the top --- AND there's a horizontal scroll bar so I can see more of it.
Let me maximize the main page for content like I could before.
Otherwise I don't see anything that bad yet. The text is way too small - but I had to blow it up before anyway.
The first time you try to post after visiting, it still takes waaaaay too long with the little AJAX "Loading" dialog before you get your post preview. Still need to fix that.
What you say isn't allowed in the U.S. right now. Use of infrared cameras without a warrant was tossed out already, using a case involving a cop on the street. Putting the camera on a plane isn't any different.
From brief reading, it doesn't look like there's a set minimum height. Rather, you have to prove that the actions of the plane infringe upon your rights to use and possess your property. (The burden is on you because, while your property rights extend to the edge of the atmosphere, those rights do not apply to air vehicles.) If you can prove infringement, you can get an injunction. Good luck with that.
Best bet: if you are a model airplane enthusiast, and are flying a plane over your property, you could likely crash it into the drone and then sue the police for infringing on your rights to use your property.
If you park on a public street, or in an open-to-the-public general parking lot or garage, I'd support those with guns storing them in their cars.
But if you park on private property, at a job site not open to the public, why would you expect the right to bring a gun onto that property? Many of your rights end at my property line, and that's mostly true even if I've hired you to perform work on my property.
But due to people acting in their own self-interest, we've developed modern techniques of agriculture to the point where everyone can be fully fed unless they are under an oppressive government (such as most of Africa).
Or the nearly 10 million Americans that are forced to skip meals or eat too little each year.
To nearly all the rest of your comments, I thank unions more than corporations for all of that. Corporations that sell to the middle class only exist because there is a middle class.
It has a lot more to do with your employees than your customers. The argument is that your employees have a right to work in a safe environment - the same way that employees in a machine shop or garage or manufacturing facility have the right to be safe at their jobs, too.
It doesn't matter if every employee you have smokes and doesn't mind. What if one of them wanted to quit smoking? Should a company be able to fire an employee who asked for goggles because he kept getting metal dust in his eyes from a machine lacking safety mechanisms?
At one point such an employee would get fired. Then there were some sit-ins and a few factories burnt to the ground, and now there are workplace protections in place. Extending them to smoking is a smaller leap than making smoking an exception.
Well, Firefox could ignore that "special registry entry" and instead require special add-ons to install a small "hook" in each user's profile. That way each user could still remove the addon from their Firefox instance, yet only one version of the addon is still required on the system.
New users wouldn't get the existing addon. Tough.
The next time the user enters the browser, how is the browser supposed to know if an addon is new?
Should Firefox maintain a list of installed addons? What stops a shady addon from manually modifying this list?
Should Firefox sign a list of installed addons? Firefox is open source; what stops a shady addon from just reading the key from the code and signing the updated list? Would you want your list of installed addons to automatically transmit to a mozilla website so that they can sign using a private key? That causes all sorts of privacy concerns on its own.
I, too, would like and have asked for something like this. But I'm pretty certain that they can't do it without a server call or closing a piece of their code.
Yeah, but note that it's still collusion between the two biggest players in the market. What else have they secretly planning?
If the top players in the airline industry did a joint announcement of a new business model, the DoJ would be all over them.
And your apps would get rejected because Apple does not allow applications that weren't developed in the native languages. Cross compilers are against the developer program license agreement.
http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler
I'm not sure what the GP said (apart from the bit you quoted), nor do I know if anyone else said something more insightful than you did. But your post is +4, and I almost moderated it up to +5.
Then I decided to break the feedback loop and not mod you up. Viva variety! You're welcome.
I was a Commodore user in the 1980s, which made me anti-PC but no Mac lover. It did make it easier to switch from PC to Mac a few years ago, though, when it made economic sense to do so. My wife and I have no intention of being Apple fans; we have three iPods, an iPhone, an iPad, and two MacBook Pros based on the quality of the products and their ease of use. I bought the stock because I thought it would go up instead of stagnate or go down. If my opinion of their product line changes so will my purchasing and investment, but I have no personal dislike of any company or individuals who haven't attempted to subvert the laws of the country.
Markets are closed today. Tomorrow morning, though, if I can buy before the earnings report, I will. (I'm not sure when the earning report comes out, but it should be obvious from the stock price.)
You mean two years ago? When Apple stock went on sale and then nothing at all wrong happened to the company's growth or new product development?
Indeed. Moreover, most companies that do pay dividends do so electronically. The value is based solely on the belief that there will always be another sucker willing to accept your non-existent electronic funds.
The only real stock is that which pays dividends in gold doubloons. Am I right?
Indeed. I'm in at $125, but I've been looking for an opportunity to buy more shares. Tuesday morning may be the best chance I get this year. While everyone panics due to Jobs' health, I can pick up some shares on discount that will grow by end of year.
That said, I'm ready to dump them as soon as I don't feel they can sustain their new product development. For now though they clearly can.
And I doubt that they would adapt to California politics and life style. Everyone know elephants are Republicans.
Well, that 's the clean-cut kind of elephant. I'm not sure I've ever described a Republican as "wooly".
I'd rather have all discounts based off of MSRP than based off of some other nebulous vendor-specific metric. "50% off (the price we charged for one day last September)" is meaningless when trying to compare with other vendors, but "50% off MSRP" can be compared everywhere because that product only has one MSRP.
The only three parties involved that could set a fixed price to generate "% off" comparisons are the retailer (not good as explained above), the manufacturer, and the government (via some sort of truth in advertising law). And while the government can do some things well, I don't see any reason why it would do this well, nor do I see any value in having it try.
As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly!
However, I've previously read that cows infected with Mad Cow Disease are disposed of by dissolving them in lye, not burning, precisely due to the risk that prions could survive the fire and become airborne.