I'm assuming that in such a case the cards would be either tagged or disabled? I know when my girlfriend's card went through a retailer that was found to have been hacked at the time (or had an employee stealing CC #'s) it was cancelled by the CC company and she had to wait on a new one.
He said the doctors told him that finger tips generally grow back just fine unless they are cut so far back that none of the nail bed is left.
Makes sense. If you pull out a hair, but the root remains, the hair grows back. If you use the electroshock hair removal or other such things (which fries the hair hair down to the root) it doesn't come back.
Same with fingernails/toenails (and this one I have personal experience with). If you crush your toenail and there's some root left, it comes back. If - as I've experienced - you have a problem with ingrown nails (nail grows into the side of the toe/finger/etc), the doctor can cut it back to the root... no root and the nail doesn't grow back. In the case of ingrowns, they can just remove one side of the nail root and the middle part will grow back, but it won't grow out the side and thus cause painful ingrowths.
I've heard of people having wisdom teeth etc grow back too... sometimes I think I'm on my second set.
Is there any fine-print on the effectiveness of the program, or how well they follow it? For example if a heroin addict goes to group every Wednesday, but still shoots up every Monday, Tues, Thurs, and Friday during lunch break... is he still protected?
I suppose in this case it would be if the guy goes to Wankaholics anonymous but still sneaks in a quickie at the computer during every lunch break.
This doesn't take into the account that while the guy might have a sex addiction, it does *not* require that he use company equipment to satisfy it. I had heard of one occasion where a woman was a clinical nympho who was offered regular breaks to satisfy her problem, but I'm guessing she was not allow to do such with the office equipment.
Well, since the body is sometimes too good at repelling foreign organisms, then a particular hard-to-repel virus might be useful if the dangerous effects could be removed. However, part of the strength and danger in HIV is that it targets and attacks yours defensive cells (a simplified explanation yes)... so how effective it would be without that part I don't know. However, one could in theory use a fairly benign virus-like organism to attack another, or such things.
I don't see how the remark is particular racist (it didn't mention targeting it against anyone in particular), but without further explanation I would agree that it wasn't a particular useful comment, especially since I *could* see various governments tailoring viruses to target "the enemy"
I do wonder though, how many naturally-occuring viruses etc are out there that target "bad" things, rather than harming the host. Heck, how about a virus (with a known cure) that would target excess fat/cellulite... fat people rejoice. Of course, mutation is a bitch, so it would be very very dangerous ground to tread in case it decides to change and either get out of control or start rampaging around attacking non-desired cells...
Also, since HIV targets the immune system, when someone has AIDS - the later stages of the disease in which the immune system is broken (targeted by HIV are T-cells) vaccination may no longer work, since the immune system is no longer capable of producing antibodies, unless the T-cell count can be brought back to a level in which antibodies can be made.
Can you even use a vaccine after-the-fact? I thought the point of such was something akin to forewarning one's immune system ahead of time, training it on how to target invading organisms before they storm the fortress. Once they're inside though, my understanding was that a vaccine was not overly useful. A body might even learn to target invaders on its own, but not fast enough to kill some of the nastier ones before they took down the host. Would a vaccine in the early stages outpace the spread of a virus, or is it too-little-too-late once you've already got it?
My question would also be: how do they test it in humans. I'd imagine they can combine infected and uninfected blood in a lab (with both vaccinated and non-vaccinated samples), but who's going to be the first live test? My guess would be a loving partner with an infected spouse (note that not all infections come from having sex with an infectee, there have been cases of tainted blood transfusions etc)
I suppose in the end people will get it just to be safe, as well, but the first while will be interesting.
While I know (or at least I'm hoping) that the parent was a joke, the scary thing is that some people will think this way. AIDS is the big bogeyman of unprotected sex, but there are plenty of other nasty things you can get that have a lot less publicity. Yes, some won't kill you, some are treatable (though one should note that "treatable" and "curable" are two different things entirely), but the fact is that many of these are still very common, Unpleasant, painful, repulsive, and still possibly disabling, or fatal
While a vaccine or cure for AIDS will no doubt be a wonderful thing, I would very much expect an increase in other nasties to follow suit until they move back into the spotlight.
I think that there seems to be confusion between addiction and disability. While you might not fire somebody for a recognised disability (and some addictions tend to fall along those categories), I've never heard of having to hold on to somebody because they're addicted.
If that were the case, it would mean that when Bobby and Johnny get caused smoking pot in the back during work hours, or when Sally gets caught with a needle in her veins in the washroom, they could claim that the company could not fire them because they were addicts. I think not.
OK, so the input has increased by 2x. In terms of output, how do current servers compare to five years ago? If the output is only 1.5 and the power consumption doubles, that sucks. If you're getting 5-10x the power output, then perhaps it's not really such a big deal. Through refining and better engineering most things can be made smaller, faster, and more efficient over time, but there is still a point where efficiency and output diverge.
This is probably the most insiteful comment of the whole bunch.
If the customer keeps the items and his/her cash, then Amazon could theoretically go after the customer for the difference... in COURT
If Amazon decides to(without a valid authorization frmo the client) tell the CC company they are authorized to make the secondary charge, then they are liable both under the credit-card company's rules and quite possibly those of the law as well.
Whether or not amazon is owed money/items back is a legal matter, and amazon is not the law.
If the advertised cost is $20, and the subtotal page says $25+shipping, and I'm charged $25+shipping, it's my fault for not looking at the subtotal page carefully enough
Actually, many places (Canada for instance) have laws that say that if the price at the till (which online, could be translated to the checkout page) rings up higher than the price on the shelf, the customer is entitled to the item free or a discount (I'm not sure of the actual amount on that). This was to prevent stores that put up a tag price of $9.99 but left the price of $11.99 and profited off unwary customers. Screw-ups like this still happen fairly often in grocery stores are often somewhat lax about keeping everything up-to-date, which means that you often legally entitled to discounts or free items (I think the max per-item discount is $10, so if the item is under $10 it's free). Of course the flip-side is that many customers don't double-check their bill, and don't know the law, and therefore end up not getting the proper sale price.
This is of course very murky in online situations, but I've little doubt a clever lawyer could argue that the big banner page price is equivilent to the "shelf price" and that the final charge price should reflect that.
Now this case is something of an opposite to that (final checkout price lower than the advertised/displayed one), but there may also be laws to protect that.
What I would like to know about is what happens when an item has a deal attached and it goes on sale. For example my girlfriend recently bought a shirt on which the tag indicated it came with the matching skirt free. However the teller insisted that since the shirt was on sale that the tag-deal was not valid. Any lawyers care to comment on that (not that I'll be marching back up to demand refunds anytime soon, but it's good future-knowledge).
but but but I found it 20 cents cheaper down the street a week later, and you promise to match prices" nonsense is the end result.
Actually, it's not just about the price, but the package deal. If you paid for an item with a guarantee of X, and you didn't get that, then you can charge it back. If a merchant is one that allows "up to 30 days best-price guarantee" you have bought both your item and the guarantee, which the merchant is then bound to honor it. If there is no such guarantee, too bad so sad, and some people will whine about such. However, if the guarantee is in place, and the place next store comes up with a price $5 less, then the merchant is bound by agreement to refund you the difference.
I'm sure the law would say you stole the money, and so would anyone else
Are you a lawyer or a judge perhaps? Because, if not, then you can't be sure about anything the law would say. Even if you were, you could only state your own opinion unless you were actually involved in such a case.
Now yes, people might call you dishonest, but whether the law would is anyone's guess until it actually hits the courts.
Having been involved in such instances (been given more money than I paid, or billed incorrectly a low amount to my card because somebody missed a digit), in most cases the stores were very grateful when they are corrected, because otherwise they would have eaten the loss. However, in a physical store the solution would be to catch the person before they leave the store, because they have not actually "paid" for the invoice amount for the item in that case. It would be dubious if they could charge you with theft, but they could likely prevent you from leaving with the item until it is actually purchased.
The fact is that stores, banks, and others screw up all the time. Most of the time the customer doesn't profit from this, and most of the time you can get the issue resolved by going back to the store or dealing with your credit-card merchant. When you start involving credit-cards things get very murky as well, as there are many rules that go beyond law and deal strictly with the relationship between you, the merchant, and the CC company.
For example, see here. The issue is one of contract law between the three aforementioned entities. In this case, the promise is from Visa to you that you are not liable for an unauthorized transaction. In the case of amazon, you have not authorized an additional billing to your account. There is no signature, no invoice/w button click, or other suck things. The invoice was presented, the amount (even if the amount was nothing) was paid. As the customer has not agreed upon additional charges, he or she cannot be billed under the card-rules unless he/she agrees to the additional amount.
No, but they could track you around town wherever there is an RFID reader. I'm fairly sure there are some in the doors of Wal-Mart, do you know where the rest might be?
Personally I don't have a complaint so long as the things are only installed on informed, sound-of-mind, adults... with consent.
Actually, I was thinking about this earlier for some reason, but I've always figured that maybe the racial/gender characteristics of primary characters was more representative of the people who designed them and/or programmed the games.
Of course this might not mix with the FF games (being I believe of Japanese origin but tending to have non-asian looking primary characters for the most part), but I've always figured the lack of black characters was due to less black programmers, as perhaps the lack of strong female characters (most of the ones that do exist showing up in slinky outfits) being due to lack of female coders or 3d designers.
Indeed. I've had various people complain about how annoying the "paperclip thing" was, but when I changed the avatar to the cat (available in Office 2k and I think XP) they thought it was rather cute.
Not that they didn't click it away most of the time, but when the cat wanders onto the screen on first startup and gives a little *meow* it usually manages a smile from the user.
I believe that heard recently on the news that they had upped the age to 16, or perhaps it was just that they were trying to.
I also believe that while the actual act between the two might be accepted under law, the pictures might still be illegal... depends on what judge you get I guess.
Of course they can fail. Solder joints can come loose, the capacitors themselves could have a undetected defect that becomes more apparent over time. As for factory testing, in a perfect would we could be sure that every one of the millions of units sold had every component that should be tested checked out properly, but the facts of life say that sometimes this doesn't happen, either due to accident, equipment issues (faulty testing/manufacturing equipment), human error if applicable, and even due to *gasp* cost cutting (like let's test every 1 of 3 and call the rest good).
There is no absolute, and no "doesn't fail, ever."
You're paying a fee for the Tivo service in general, you still get your value for that. In addition, one could hope that the this-commercial-is-crap vs this-commercial-is-liked data would do well to inform advertisers as to what people like, and thus reduce the amount of crap commercials (some commercials are actually damn funny)
Most PDA's I've seen run ARM. I tried installing an Opie version on my handheld but unfortunately the image-at-hand didn't handle the cardreader or infrared very well. With 2-4GB CF cards being rather affordable I'd say that you could do a lot with Linux on an ARM-based PDA... so I'd love to see more driver support for the various hardware in current-gen PDA's.
Besides, ARM rocks. A 400Mhz ARM-based PDA can perform amazingly well compared to a similarly clocked X86-based processor
So they wouldn't have to brew a new batch so often
Also, when your coffee is that hot, it quickly scalds most of your taste buds so you can't really taste the flavour. The caffeine is still there, which is what many want anyhow, but you can't taste the fact that the coffee is rather cheap and unpaletable (as far as coffee goes in general anyhow, I prefer mine with a generous dose of Irish Cream)
I've seen some beauties in my time, like the older ATI PCI-card I picked up long ago that has TV-in, but will only work for input if it's the primary card... d'oh.
A verbal contract is still a contract, and since it's in a press release it could likely be held as a contract as well. Whether it is specific to a given company or global in scope should not matter.
So if BB decide to see an OSS project, then the OSS project could likely hit them with "breach of contract"
Slashdot Mirror
I'm assuming that in such a case the cards would be either tagged or disabled? I know when my girlfriend's card went through a retailer that was found to have been hacked at the time (or had an employee stealing CC #'s) it was cancelled by the CC company and she had to wait on a new one.
He said the doctors told him that finger tips generally grow back just fine unless they are cut so far back that none of the nail bed is left.
Makes sense. If you pull out a hair, but the root remains, the hair grows back. If you use the electroshock hair removal or other such things (which fries the hair hair down to the root) it doesn't come back.
Same with fingernails/toenails (and this one I have personal experience with). If you crush your toenail and there's some root left, it comes back. If - as I've experienced - you have a problem with ingrown nails (nail grows into the side of the toe/finger/etc), the doctor can cut it back to the root... no root and the nail doesn't grow back. In the case of ingrowns, they can just remove one side of the nail root and the middle part will grow back, but it won't grow out the side and thus cause painful ingrowths.
I've heard of people having wisdom teeth etc grow back too... sometimes I think I'm on my second set.
Is there any fine-print on the effectiveness of the program, or how well they follow it? For example if a heroin addict goes to group every Wednesday, but still shoots up every Monday, Tues, Thurs, and Friday during lunch break... is he still protected?
I suppose in this case it would be if the guy goes to Wankaholics anonymous but still sneaks in a quickie at the computer during every lunch break.
This doesn't take into the account that while the guy might have a sex addiction, it does *not* require that he use company equipment to satisfy it. I had heard of one occasion where a woman was a clinical nympho who was offered regular breaks to satisfy her problem, but I'm guessing she was not allow to do such with the office equipment.
Well, since the body is sometimes too good at repelling foreign organisms, then a particular hard-to-repel virus might be useful if the dangerous effects could be removed. However, part of the strength and danger in HIV is that it targets and attacks yours defensive cells (a simplified explanation yes)... so how effective it would be without that part I don't know. However, one could in theory use a fairly benign virus-like organism to attack another, or such things.
I don't see how the remark is particular racist (it didn't mention targeting it against anyone in particular), but without further explanation I would agree that it wasn't a particular useful comment, especially since I *could* see various governments tailoring viruses to target "the enemy"
I do wonder though, how many naturally-occuring viruses etc are out there that target "bad" things, rather than harming the host. Heck, how about a virus (with a known cure) that would target excess fat/cellulite... fat people rejoice. Of course, mutation is a bitch, so it would be very very dangerous ground to tread in case it decides to change and either get out of control or start rampaging around attacking non-desired cells...
Also, since HIV targets the immune system, when someone has AIDS - the later stages of the disease in which the immune system is broken (targeted by HIV are T-cells) vaccination may no longer work, since the immune system is no longer capable of producing antibodies, unless the T-cell count can be brought back to a level in which antibodies can be made.
Can you even use a vaccine after-the-fact? I thought the point of such was something akin to forewarning one's immune system ahead of time, training it on how to target invading organisms before they storm the fortress. Once they're inside though, my understanding was that a vaccine was not overly useful. A body might even learn to target invaders on its own, but not fast enough to kill some of the nastier ones before they took down the host. Would a vaccine in the early stages outpace the spread of a virus, or is it too-little-too-late once you've already got it?
My question would also be: how do they test it in humans. I'd imagine they can combine infected and uninfected blood in a lab (with both vaccinated and non-vaccinated samples), but who's going to be the first live test? My guess would be a loving partner with an infected spouse (note that not all infections come from having sex with an infectee, there have been cases of tainted blood transfusions etc)
I suppose in the end people will get it just to be safe, as well, but the first while will be interesting.
While I know (or at least I'm hoping) that the parent was a joke, the scary thing is that some people will think this way. AIDS is the big bogeyman of unprotected sex, but there are plenty of other nasty things you can get that have a lot less publicity. Yes, some won't kill you, some are treatable (though one should note that "treatable" and "curable" are two different things entirely), but the fact is that many of these are still very common , Unpleasant, painful, repulsive, and still possibly disabling, or fatal
While a vaccine or cure for AIDS will no doubt be a wonderful thing, I would very much expect an increase in other nasties to follow suit until they move back into the spotlight.
I think that there seems to be confusion between addiction and disability. While you might not fire somebody for a recognised disability (and some addictions tend to fall along those categories), I've never heard of having to hold on to somebody because they're addicted.
If that were the case, it would mean that when Bobby and Johnny get caused smoking pot in the back during work hours, or when Sally gets caught with a needle in her veins in the washroom, they could claim that the company could not fire them because they were addicts. I think not.
OK, so the input has increased by 2x. In terms of output, how do current servers compare to five years ago? If the output is only 1.5 and the power consumption doubles, that sucks. If you're getting 5-10x the power output, then perhaps it's not really such a big deal. Through refining and better engineering most things can be made smaller, faster, and more efficient over time, but there is still a point where efficiency and output diverge.
This is probably the most insiteful comment of the whole bunch.
If the customer keeps the items and his/her cash, then Amazon could theoretically go after the customer for the difference... in COURT
If Amazon decides to(without a valid authorization frmo the client) tell the CC company they are authorized to make the secondary charge, then they are liable both under the credit-card company's rules and quite possibly those of the law as well.
Whether or not amazon is owed money/items back is a legal matter, and amazon is not the law.
If the advertised cost is $20, and the subtotal page says $25+shipping, and I'm charged $25+shipping, it's my fault for not looking at the subtotal page carefully enough
Actually, many places (Canada for instance) have laws that say that if the price at the till (which online, could be translated to the checkout page) rings up higher than the price on the shelf, the customer is entitled to the item free or a discount (I'm not sure of the actual amount on that). This was to prevent stores that put up a tag price of $9.99 but left the price of $11.99 and profited off unwary customers. Screw-ups like this still happen fairly often in grocery stores are often somewhat lax about keeping everything up-to-date, which means that you often legally entitled to discounts or free items (I think the max per-item discount is $10, so if the item is under $10 it's free). Of course the flip-side is that many customers don't double-check their bill, and don't know the law, and therefore end up not getting the proper sale price.
This is of course very murky in online situations, but I've little doubt a clever lawyer could argue that the big banner page price is equivilent to the "shelf price" and that the final charge price should reflect that.
Now this case is something of an opposite to that (final checkout price lower than the advertised/displayed one), but there may also be laws to protect that.
What I would like to know about is what happens when an item has a deal attached and it goes on sale. For example my girlfriend recently bought a shirt on which the tag indicated it came with the matching skirt free. However the teller insisted that since the shirt was on sale that the tag-deal was not valid. Any lawyers care to comment on that (not that I'll be marching back up to demand refunds anytime soon, but it's good future-knowledge).
but but but I found it 20 cents cheaper down the street a week later, and you promise to match prices" nonsense is the end result.
Actually, it's not just about the price, but the package deal. If you paid for an item with a guarantee of X, and you didn't get that, then you can charge it back. If a merchant is one that allows "up to 30 days best-price guarantee" you have bought both your item and the guarantee, which the merchant is then bound to honor it. If there is no such guarantee, too bad so sad, and some people will whine about such. However, if the guarantee is in place, and the place next store comes up with a price $5 less, then the merchant is bound by agreement to refund you the difference.
I'm sure the law would say you stole the money, and so would anyone else
/w button click, or other suck things. The invoice was presented, the amount (even if the amount was nothing) was paid. As the customer has not agreed upon additional charges, he or she cannot be billed under the card-rules unless he/she agrees to the additional amount.
Are you a lawyer or a judge perhaps? Because, if not, then you can't be sure about anything the law would say. Even if you were, you could only state your own opinion unless you were actually involved in such a case.
Now yes, people might call you dishonest, but whether the law would is anyone's guess until it actually hits the courts.
Having been involved in such instances (been given more money than I paid, or billed incorrectly a low amount to my card because somebody missed a digit), in most cases the stores were very grateful when they are corrected, because otherwise they would have eaten the loss. However, in a physical store the solution would be to catch the person before they leave the store, because they have not actually "paid" for the invoice amount for the item in that case. It would be dubious if they could charge you with theft, but they could likely prevent you from leaving with the item until it is actually purchased.
The fact is that stores, banks, and others screw up all the time. Most of the time the customer doesn't profit from this, and most of the time you can get the issue resolved by going back to the store or dealing with your credit-card merchant. When you start involving credit-cards things get very murky as well, as there are many rules that go beyond law and deal strictly with the relationship between you, the merchant, and the CC company.
For example, see here. The issue is one of contract law between the three aforementioned entities. In this case, the promise is from Visa to you that you are not liable for an unauthorized transaction. In the case of amazon, you have not authorized an additional billing to your account. There is no signature, no invoice
No, but I'd imagine the lawyer bill wasn't exactly a happy thing for them. Unfortunately it sounds like both sides needed to foot those.
No, but they could track you around town wherever there is an RFID reader. I'm fairly sure there are some in the doors of Wal-Mart, do you know where the rest might be?
Personally I don't have a complaint so long as the things are only installed on informed, sound-of-mind, adults... with consent.
Actually, I was thinking about this earlier for some reason, but I've always figured that maybe the racial/gender characteristics of primary characters was more representative of the people who designed them and/or programmed the games.
Of course this might not mix with the FF games (being I believe of Japanese origin but tending to have non-asian looking primary characters for the most part), but I've always figured the lack of black characters was due to less black programmers, as perhaps the lack of strong female characters (most of the ones that do exist showing up in slinky outfits) being due to lack of female coders or 3d designers.
Indeed. I've had various people complain about how annoying the "paperclip thing" was, but when I changed the avatar to the cat (available in Office 2k and I think XP) they thought it was rather cute.
Not that they didn't click it away most of the time, but when the cat wanders onto the screen on first startup and gives a little *meow* it usually manages a smile from the user.
These guys probably only deal in copyrighted Canadian music, so if you take into consideration Celine Dion etc then that price sounds about right :-)
(p.s. I'm Canadian, and we laugh at Celine D and Bryan A jokes just as much as anywhere)
I believe that heard recently on the news that they had upped the age to 16, or perhaps it was just that they were trying to.
I also believe that while the actual act between the two might be accepted under law, the pictures might still be illegal... depends on what judge you get I guess.
Of course they can fail. Solder joints can come loose, the capacitors themselves could have a undetected defect that becomes more apparent over time. As for factory testing, in a perfect would we could be sure that every one of the millions of units sold had every component that should be tested checked out properly, but the facts of life say that sometimes this doesn't happen, either due to accident, equipment issues (faulty testing/manufacturing equipment), human error if applicable, and even due to *gasp* cost cutting (like let's test every 1 of 3 and call the rest good).
There is no absolute, and no "doesn't fail, ever."
You're paying a fee for the Tivo service in general, you still get your value for that. In addition, one could hope that the this-commercial-is-crap vs this-commercial-is-liked data would do well to inform advertisers as to what people like, and thus reduce the amount of crap commercials (some commercials are actually damn funny)
Most PDA's I've seen run ARM. I tried installing an Opie version on my handheld but unfortunately the image-at-hand didn't handle the cardreader or infrared very well. With 2-4GB CF cards being rather affordable I'd say that you could do a lot with Linux on an ARM-based PDA... so I'd love to see more driver support for the various hardware in current-gen PDA's.
Besides, ARM rocks. A 400Mhz ARM-based PDA can perform amazingly well compared to a similarly clocked X86-based processor
So they wouldn't have to brew a new batch so often
Also, when your coffee is that hot, it quickly scalds most of your taste buds so you can't really taste the flavour. The caffeine is still there, which is what many want anyhow, but you can't taste the fact that the coffee is rather cheap and unpaletable (as far as coffee goes in general anyhow, I prefer mine with a generous dose of Irish Cream)
Or for that matter, any other OS and an ATI card.
I've seen some beauties in my time, like the older ATI PCI-card I picked up long ago that has TV-in, but will only work for input if it's the primary card... d'oh.
A verbal contract is still a contract, and since it's in a press release it could likely be held as a contract as well. Whether it is specific to a given company or global in scope should not matter.
So if BB decide to see an OSS project, then the OSS project could likely hit them with "breach of contract"