The difference is that geeks care about such things in advance because they can imagine where all of that leads, while normal people concentrate much more on what it does right this minute. But that doesn't mean they don't end up running into trouble later.
For my two cents i can never understand why normal people do not want to be able to carry a spare battery. This will always be the deal braker for me with an iPhone. Why do I have to send the whole unit back to apple for this? My Sony Walkman I had in the 1980's let me change the batteries when the old ones ran out, why can Apple not master it now?
I have no objection to it being a proprietary battery that costs a fortune either. They can even sell me an additional charger that allows me to plug and charge batteries directly without the phone. I will probably even then leave my spare battery on the charger for weeks until I know I am going to need it, thereby giving a lifetime of a few months before memory effect kicks in and I have to buy a new spare battery. I swear they will get a small fortune out of me.
Just please, please let me have the option so I can go away for a few days and not give a crap about there being a plug socket of the correct format for a hundred miles. I also like travelling light so am not keen on always carrying a charger and universal plug socket adapter.
Especially when even with these things I have to leave my phone stationary and plugged in while it charges. If I am out and about I am terrible for forgetting to do this before I crash out, especially if alcohol is involved (or a women, but that hardly ever happens).
On a slightly different, but very related issue, it is funny how the people here often rail against Apple's managed platform, but not against Google's very aggressive collection of user data, for their own uses with Android. Very interesting and very funny to me.
Site your sources please. I know google track every search I do via their search engine and I am fine with that since they provide me with a damn fine search system so they will want something in return. I do not have a massive issue if they do track everything I do with my (HTC Hero) phone, but I would like to know how they get the data off my phone since I would be paying for that as part of my data plan.
Hamas runs several orphanages and public welfare organizations.
Makes sense to run orphanages I suppose. Orphans who had their parents run over by an Israeli tank or killed by an Israeli shell are probably pretty easy to mould into suicide bombers when they get a little bit older. Might as well start training them early.
All companies have idiots, this is not something that can be helped. Being an idiot is not grounds for dismissal so you just have to limit the damage they can do, but sometimes they need the ability to do a certain amount of damage in order to do their job. You cannot also just downgrade someones role because they cannot do not do it perfectly, you need to try and educate them how to do it first.
I recently had to clean up a virus infection caused by an employee who clicked on a dodgy link in an email. It was first thing on a Friday morning and he just made a legitimate mistake. He realised what he had done immediately and pulled the network lead out of his PC but by then the damage was done. I know that in a perfect world you would only employ people who could do their job before they started work but in the real world you often employ people who make mistakes, they are human after all.
Whoever modded you Flamebait was dead wrong. Open disclosure is one of the major principles of security, and security through obscurity is an awful thing to trust in. It's true that openly available systems can be more susceptible to attacks, but a sufficiently robust system should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.
I know that many people on slashdot would scream that obscurity provides no security at all this is actually not the case. It should never be the only method of security being relied on but it can be a single element of a wider secure system.
Keeping your source code secret does not actually preclude many eyes from looking at it since you can hunt out the best in the field of code security and get them to sign an NDA before looking at the code. I know this is more work that just open sourcing the code, but it is certainly an approach that has merit for large companies with deep pockets who also worry about protecting their ideas from copying.
Open Disclosure has it merits, but it is not the be all and end all of creating a secure system since it relies on the people who notice holes being honest about reporting them. Some people will always have an interest in just sitting on a possible flaw until they can exploit it, this is especially true for government spooks.
Basically, there are perfectly valid arguments for and against the concept of security through obscurity so it is not quite as clear cut as you make out that it should not be used at all.
I have not actually seen the source code that Google had stolen so this all purely theoretical as to whether it was secure or not. I am only saying that the idea that the fact they want to now change code that they know has been compromised does not necessarily make it insecure by design.
Although Apple's attitude reeks of paranoia, I do have some sympathy for them wanting to ban Flash.
There is another problem with allowing flash, it is a very flexible platform that will allow you to put insane load on the processor. That would allow a cross platform benchmark that would very quickly reveal exactly how slow the iPhone processor really is.
The reason they keep the exact specs of the iPhone processor under wraps is that they know it does not compare favourably to the competition. This is not actually a problem though if you can control how people interact with the CPU and ensure it is not overloaded by doing things like running to many applications at once or stupid flash based junk.
One of the reason that Apple have been so successful is by being careful exactly what information they release about each product. The first generation iPhones suffered lag issues in the same way as the early HTC Hero's. This was subsequently fixed by a software update just like the Hero. In the case of the Hero people could find out the CPU spec and then whine about how under powered it was even though it was not really the main thing causing the lag anyway.
Quite often when bringing a hardware and software based device to market people have a habit of reading too much into benchmarks of the hardware even though this often misleading. By writing very clever software you can do an awful lot with even the most underpowered hardware. If you think back to what you could get out of early computers like the Amiga or Atari (512K versions) then this should come as no surprise.
I have a sneaky feeling that if HTML5 falls by the wayside then we may see flash on the iPhones that get multitasking support since we already know that not every iPhone is destined to get this.
What worries me about that chart is that Ruby is dropping. Wasn't Ruby supposed to be gaining momentum and be the Next Big Thing? Being overtaken by Objective-C I can understand, given the iPhone's popularity, but Delphi? That can't be right.
The thing is, the TIOBE metric is about number of hits found for a particular language. That will give a higher figure for a purely academic language (ie - Pascal) than a heavily used commercial counter part (ie - VBSCRIPT). The reason is that a monkey could VBSRCRIPT in their sleep without needing to search for help on it so their will not be very many links on the web suggesting methods. Pascal is going to have more hits as far more novice programmers will use the web to compare notes when they are learning it at university.
I learnt Pascal when I was studying but it has long since fallen off my CV as I was never asked about it while applying for jobs. A quick search elicited this site which seems to more reflect the spread I would expect for commercial languages:
Interestingly, if you click on the relative link it will show the rate of change in percentage that indicates why people keep referring to Ruby as the next big thing:
XMMS blows the living crap outta all other players closeley folled by QMMP plus you get no stupid iTunes infestations
Providing you do not have to maintain the code. The problem is that XMMS development finished years ago in 2007 so it is becoming less and less relevant. It also has no support for GTK2 so unless someone wants to take over the project and redevelop it in GTK2 then it is not something anyone should recommend using on modern systems.
If you really like the interface then Audacious is pretty close and uses the same themes. That is what I switched to when Gentoo hardmasked XMMS.
You're definitely insulting those of us who worked on it.
Only if you think you invented it. It is quite possible for you to work on copying a competitors design if the original design in is not patented. You might even improve it in the process.
Please bear in mind I have never used an Apple PC so have no idea if what the GP was saying is true, but I have been asked to design systems that were similar to a competitors and I like to think I also improved on their design in the process. It's not like I had any access to their code so providing the product is not patented it is fair game, you just will have trouble patenting yours too due to their prior art.
It takes a while to figure out how it works, but I just searched for a DVD Recorder (TARIC CODE = 8521900090) and the import duty was 13.9%. Here is the result for non-magnetic tape video recording apparatus:
I am sure there is the odd product that is not covered by duty, but you seem to think everything imported to the EU from China pays no duty, that is plainly not true.
Wrong, Sony is forcing you all the time to upgrade the firmware. Using new games might require a firmware upgrade, using the shop requires firmware upgrade, using Home requires firmware upgrade, using DRMed videos requires firmware upgrade and so on. Of course you can say "no" to the upgrade, but then you have basically a brick, as you can't do anything that requires a firmware upgrade.
None of this actually forces you to install the firmware. It might be a very strong encouragement if you want to play games, but there are an awful lot of people here who would buy a console and never use it for gaming. Those people are not going to be forced by any of the stuff you mention above.
The original poster was just talking about buying a console to run Linux on, he did not say he was buying one to play games and run linux so the guy you replied to had a valid point.
Where have all the smart people gone from Slashdot? It seems to be full of clueless kneejerk reaction retards now..
And you seem to be one of them...
Oh I see, you just wanted to get the insult in and did not care about being factually accurate, nice attitude.
Whether a third party uses the project as well is - as you say - of neutral value to me. And I don't see how that changes whether the use consists of incorporation in a closed source product or simple end-user use.
The answer to this is that it does not. Unless you believe that open source code is better for everyone as it contributes something back to the community.
The GPL (3) is not just about stopping people closing code that was previously open source. It is also about encouraging you to release your code as open source if you use other open source code in your product. This is about the idea that if you benefit from there being large amounts of open source code on the web then you should be forced into giving something back as well.
I have already spent time writing the code, why should I care if somebody uses it for their own? As long as there are other people like you or me who also make their code available, we have both gained something.
The answer is it makes no difference to you apart from on a principled level. If you have spent time on something, why should someone else be able to sell it at a profit and not pass any of that profit on to you? Even if they do a large amount of extra work, should they be able to take the small amount of work you put in and get that for free?
BTW - I am not the worlds greatest GPL advocate. I personally prefer the BSD licence that really does give more freedom to the end user. Unfortunately that freedom does include the freedom for them to build a closed source, for profit product out of your hard work.
There's a difference between being derivative and being an attempt at a 1:1 copy.
The problem with this is the metalab seem to be implying Mozilla ripped them off, they actually have no idea who it was (based on RTFA, not doing any additional research).
It seems that Metalab submitted a design for this project, but it is not the design that mozilla used. Mozilla went with a different design that was ripped off from Metalabs homepage. That might just mean someone else saw the same invite to tender that Metalab did and searched various design company websites until they found something half decent they could steal. This sort of stuff goes on all the time from half arsed designers who cannot be bothered to raise there game.
Mozilla still should have caught it earlier though, especially as they had received a tender from the same company.
Ok--living and breathing. Got it. This [hyscience.com] child was only in his mothers womb for 3 months--and he survived. So would his abortion at 2.9 months been 'ok' in your book?
The child survived? Or was the child kept alive by medical science basically fulfilling all his bodily functions for him in an incubator?
The reality is that we could grow a child outside the womb already, it is just illegal to engage in this sort of research. Does this mean that every time a sperm reaches an egg a new life instantly spring into existence?
Is it murder to turn off a life support machine to someone who is clinically brain dead?
We can already take people to hospital and provide all the functions of their organs without the brain being involved. In these situations we eventually switch off the incubator keeping them alive, are you actually saying that is murder?
I know if I contact them, they'll argue that it's my equipment (it's not - nothing has changed on my side of the network for a couple of years now), and they'll never admit to it being their problem...
You are probably right, but you imply you have not even tried. My advice is to try and contact them letting them know you have a problem.
They may be able to suggest a fix. It may be some weird conflict between your equipment and theirs so listen to any suggestions they make, try them, and if it does not fix it change it back. All this will cost you is a bit of time. If you do not have time to spare then change to a different supplier and see if everything works perfectly with them instead, just remember that they could be worse and you just locked yourself in to their service for a year.
I had a similar problem years ago with TalkTalk. They are certainly not the best ISP but they did confirm to me that the problem was at their end, and that they would be upgrading the routing into my local exchange in about 3 months time and that this would fix it. In about 3 months time, the issue was fixed at their end. I could have moved ISP, but it stopped being so urgent when I knew it was only temporary and I was too lazy to put up with the hassle.
For stupid corporate users, it's easy. You label the IE6 shortcut Intranet and you label the FireFox (or Opera or Safari, or whatever) shortcut Web. You configure IE to use a proxy that only goes to the Intranet and you configure the other browser to connect outside. You tell Windows to use the browser you want for the web as the default handler for http URLs.
You mean label IE7 or IE8? Very few companies are going to deploy anything other than IE on a windows platform. They just want users to use something that is familiar to them. Oh, but it is not supported by MS to have multiple versions of IE installed on the same PC so that rules this out.
You cannot keep cheating from happening unless you control the server (and even then it's not trivial).
But half the time people start just banning better players. Our clan are running into serious problems because we are the best clan on our map and other clans hate losing. The result, they ban us from their server. We play AA2 CSAR at are the top clan on battle tracker but still certain clans look for any excuse to ban us from their server.
Hopefully the Valve system will mature into something where we can stop cheaters and still let us people who put years of practice in get a game owning noobs.
Well, then what happens when I try to take my copy of the game to a friend's house to show him how awesome the online part is, or because he has a better gaming setup than I do, or any number of reasons? From the description, it sounds like if I do that, I'm going to have to pay $20 for the privilege.
This should come as no surprise, as this is expressly forbidden by the licence on most games. The licence usually says you may only install it on a single machine at any one time. This has been the case for years its just that you were able to ignore this licence in the past, now they are enforcing it.
She is abnormal in that she sounds way above the average public school kids in academic achievement.
Sorry, but that does not matter that much. What matters more in every field is the ability to work well as part of a team, not being brighter than your colleagues. I know this is always an unpopular thing to post, be the reality is that mediocre but socially well adjusted people make better employees than maladjusted geniuses.
Here's a little tip that I discovered by accident. On a NewEgg order, if you hit "cancel" on the Verified-by-Visa page, the order still goes through.
I have recently build an ecommerce site for someone and noticed that our account on a payment gateway allows us to disable this crap. When disabled, it still displays but the user can skip it or whatever and the purchase still goes through. We have had the account for years. When the client switched it to their account on the same payment processing company the option to disable it was greyed out. It seems it is mandatory for some (maybe newer?) setups but not existing ones.
As a customer it makes no difference to me anyway. It might be an extra step I have to go through but since the password is set to a generic password I can always remember it does not inconvenience me much. Typing one word into a silly box only takes a second or two.
Yeah, but to be a state examined teacher does that mean you're required to teach a particular curriculum? I think the point was this family didn't agree with the state's method of teaching and wanted to teach their own content.
TFA seems to suggest that the family had a problem with their children learning anything other than what agreed with their religion. Evolution was not mentioned but you can bet it was on the list. Even objecting to your kids learning about other religions I view as utterly backward.
They seemed to not want their kids to have a balanced education, instead they wanted them indoctrinated into their own religion from an early age.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference is that geeks care about such things in advance because they can imagine where all of that leads, while normal people concentrate much more on what it does right this minute. But that doesn't mean they don't end up running into trouble later.
For my two cents i can never understand why normal people do not want to be able to carry a spare battery. This will always be the deal braker for me with an iPhone. Why do I have to send the whole unit back to apple for this? My Sony Walkman I had in the 1980's let me change the batteries when the old ones ran out, why can Apple not master it now?
I have no objection to it being a proprietary battery that costs a fortune either. They can even sell me an additional charger that allows me to plug and charge batteries directly without the phone. I will probably even then leave my spare battery on the charger for weeks until I know I am going to need it, thereby giving a lifetime of a few months before memory effect kicks in and I have to buy a new spare battery. I swear they will get a small fortune out of me.
Just please, please let me have the option so I can go away for a few days and not give a crap about there being a plug socket of the correct format for a hundred miles. I also like travelling light so am not keen on always carrying a charger and universal plug socket adapter.
Especially when even with these things I have to leave my phone stationary and plugged in while it charges. If I am out and about I am terrible for forgetting to do this before I crash out, especially if alcohol is involved (or a women, but that hardly ever happens).
On a slightly different, but very related issue, it is funny how the people here often rail against Apple's managed platform, but not against Google's very aggressive collection of user data, for their own uses with Android. Very interesting and very funny to me.
Site your sources please. I know google track every search I do via their search engine and I am fine with that since they provide me with a damn fine search system so they will want something in return. I do not have a massive issue if they do track everything I do with my (HTC Hero) phone, but I would like to know how they get the data off my phone since I would be paying for that as part of my data plan.
Hamas runs several orphanages and public welfare organizations.
Makes sense to run orphanages I suppose. Orphans who had their parents run over by an Israeli tank or killed by an Israeli shell are probably pretty easy to mould into suicide bombers when they get a little bit older. Might as well start training them early.
They missed an idiot. Pure and simple.
All companies have idiots, this is not something that can be helped. Being an idiot is not grounds for dismissal so you just have to limit the damage they can do, but sometimes they need the ability to do a certain amount of damage in order to do their job. You cannot also just downgrade someones role because they cannot do not do it perfectly, you need to try and educate them how to do it first.
I recently had to clean up a virus infection caused by an employee who clicked on a dodgy link in an email. It was first thing on a Friday morning and he just made a legitimate mistake. He realised what he had done immediately and pulled the network lead out of his PC but by then the damage was done. I know that in a perfect world you would only employ people who could do their job before they started work but in the real world you often employ people who make mistakes, they are human after all.
Whoever modded you Flamebait was dead wrong. Open disclosure is one of the major principles of security, and security through obscurity is an awful thing to trust in. It's true that openly available systems can be more susceptible to attacks, but a sufficiently robust system should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.
I know that many people on slashdot would scream that obscurity provides no security at all this is actually not the case. It should never be the only method of security being relied on but it can be a single element of a wider secure system.
Keeping your source code secret does not actually preclude many eyes from looking at it since you can hunt out the best in the field of code security and get them to sign an NDA before looking at the code. I know this is more work that just open sourcing the code, but it is certainly an approach that has merit for large companies with deep pockets who also worry about protecting their ideas from copying.
Open Disclosure has it merits, but it is not the be all and end all of creating a secure system since it relies on the people who notice holes being honest about reporting them. Some people will always have an interest in just sitting on a possible flaw until they can exploit it, this is especially true for government spooks.
Basically, there are perfectly valid arguments for and against the concept of security through obscurity so it is not quite as clear cut as you make out that it should not be used at all.
I have not actually seen the source code that Google had stolen so this all purely theoretical as to whether it was secure or not. I am only saying that the idea that the fact they want to now change code that they know has been compromised does not necessarily make it insecure by design.
PS - I just went searching on Google and found a cool old Slashdot link posted by Cmdr Taco: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/23/2043209&mode=thread&threshold=1
Although Apple's attitude reeks of paranoia, I do have some sympathy for them wanting to ban Flash.
There is another problem with allowing flash, it is a very flexible platform that will allow you to put insane load on the processor. That would allow a cross platform benchmark that would very quickly reveal exactly how slow the iPhone processor really is.
The reason they keep the exact specs of the iPhone processor under wraps is that they know it does not compare favourably to the competition. This is not actually a problem though if you can control how people interact with the CPU and ensure it is not overloaded by doing things like running to many applications at once or stupid flash based junk.
One of the reason that Apple have been so successful is by being careful exactly what information they release about each product. The first generation iPhones suffered lag issues in the same way as the early HTC Hero's. This was subsequently fixed by a software update just like the Hero. In the case of the Hero people could find out the CPU spec and then whine about how under powered it was even though it was not really the main thing causing the lag anyway.
Quite often when bringing a hardware and software based device to market people have a habit of reading too much into benchmarks of the hardware even though this often misleading. By writing very clever software you can do an awful lot with even the most underpowered hardware. If you think back to what you could get out of early computers like the Amiga or Atari (512K versions) then this should come as no surprise.
I have a sneaky feeling that if HTML5 falls by the wayside then we may see flash on the iPhones that get multitasking support since we already know that not every iPhone is destined to get this.
What worries me about that chart is that Ruby is dropping. Wasn't Ruby supposed to be gaining momentum and be the Next Big Thing? Being overtaken by Objective-C I can understand, given the iPhone's popularity, but Delphi? That can't be right.
The thing is, the TIOBE metric is about number of hits found for a particular language. That will give a higher figure for a purely academic language (ie - Pascal) than a heavily used commercial counter part (ie - VBSCRIPT). The reason is that a monkey could VBSRCRIPT in their sleep without needing to search for help on it so their will not be very many links on the web suggesting methods. Pascal is going to have more hits as far more novice programmers will use the web to compare notes when they are learning it at university.
I learnt Pascal when I was studying but it has long since fallen off my CV as I was never asked about it while applying for jobs. A quick search elicited this site which seems to more reflect the spread I would expect for commercial languages:
http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=java%2C+c%2B%2B%2C+pascal%2C+c%23%2C+vb%2C+ruby%2C+perl%2C+python%2C+eiffel&l=
Interestingly, if you click on the relative link it will show the rate of change in percentage that indicates why people keep referring to Ruby as the next big thing:
http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=java%2C+c%2B%2B%2C+pascal%2C+c%23%2C+vb%2C+ruby%2C+perl%2C+python%2C+eiffel&l=&relative=1
Disclaimer - I know nothing about Ruby, but looking at the second graph I might learn.
XMMS blows the living crap outta all other players closeley folled by QMMP plus you get no stupid iTunes infestations
Providing you do not have to maintain the code. The problem is that XMMS development finished years ago in 2007 so it is becoming less and less relevant. It also has no support for GTK2 so unless someone wants to take over the project and redevelop it in GTK2 then it is not something anyone should recommend using on modern systems.
If you really like the interface then Audacious is pretty close and uses the same themes. That is what I switched to when Gentoo hardmasked XMMS.
You're definitely insulting those of us who worked on it.
Only if you think you invented it. It is quite possible for you to work on copying a competitors design if the original design in is not patented. You might even improve it in the process.
Please bear in mind I have never used an Apple PC so have no idea if what the GP was saying is true, but I have been asked to design systems that were similar to a competitors and I like to think I also improved on their design in the process. It's not like I had any access to their code so providing the product is not patented it is fair game, you just will have trouble patenting yours too due to their prior art.
To add insult to injury, in EU, chinese imports SIMPLY PAY NO TAXES, sinking the local producers in the process.
What utter rubbish. Here is the site on the eu website that will allow you to calculate the duty:
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/dds/cgi-bin/tarchap?Lang=EN
It takes a while to figure out how it works, but I just searched for a DVD Recorder (TARIC CODE = 8521900090) and the import duty was 13.9%. Here is the result for non-magnetic tape video recording apparatus:
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/dds/cgi-bin/tarduty?Taric=8521900090&SimDate=20100331&Action=1&ProdLine=80&Country=CN/0720&Type=0&Action=1&YesNo=1&Indent=-1&Flag=1&Test=tarduty&Periodic=0&Download=0&Lang=EN&Description=yes
I am sure there is the odd product that is not covered by duty, but you seem to think everything imported to the EU from China pays no duty, that is plainly not true.
Wrong, Sony is forcing you all the time to upgrade the firmware. Using new games might require a firmware upgrade, using the shop requires firmware upgrade, using Home requires firmware upgrade, using DRMed videos requires firmware upgrade and so on. Of course you can say "no" to the upgrade, but then you have basically a brick, as you can't do anything that requires a firmware upgrade.
None of this actually forces you to install the firmware. It might be a very strong encouragement if you want to play games, but there are an awful lot of people here who would buy a console and never use it for gaming. Those people are not going to be forced by any of the stuff you mention above.
The original poster was just talking about buying a console to run Linux on, he did not say he was buying one to play games and run linux so the guy you replied to had a valid point.
Where have all the smart people gone from Slashdot? It seems to be full of clueless kneejerk reaction retards now..
And you seem to be one of them...
Oh I see, you just wanted to get the insult in and did not care about being factually accurate, nice attitude.
Whether a third party uses the project as well is - as you say - of neutral value to me. And I don't see how that changes whether the use consists of incorporation in a closed source product or simple end-user use.
The answer to this is that it does not. Unless you believe that open source code is better for everyone as it contributes something back to the community.
The GPL (3) is not just about stopping people closing code that was previously open source. It is also about encouraging you to release your code as open source if you use other open source code in your product. This is about the idea that if you benefit from there being large amounts of open source code on the web then you should be forced into giving something back as well.
I have already spent time writing the code, why should I care if somebody uses it for their own? As long as there are other people like you or me who also make their code available, we have both gained something.
The answer is it makes no difference to you apart from on a principled level. If you have spent time on something, why should someone else be able to sell it at a profit and not pass any of that profit on to you? Even if they do a large amount of extra work, should they be able to take the small amount of work you put in and get that for free?
BTW - I am not the worlds greatest GPL advocate. I personally prefer the BSD licence that really does give more freedom to the end user. Unfortunately that freedom does include the freedom for them to build a closed source, for profit product out of your hard work.
There's a difference between being derivative and being an attempt at a 1:1 copy.
The problem with this is the metalab seem to be implying Mozilla ripped them off, they actually have no idea who it was (based on RTFA, not doing any additional research).
It seems that Metalab submitted a design for this project, but it is not the design that mozilla used. Mozilla went with a different design that was ripped off from Metalabs homepage. That might just mean someone else saw the same invite to tender that Metalab did and searched various design company websites until they found something half decent they could steal. This sort of stuff goes on all the time from half arsed designers who cannot be bothered to raise there game.
Mozilla still should have caught it earlier though, especially as they had received a tender from the same company.
Ok--living and breathing. Got it. This [hyscience.com] child was only in his mothers womb for 3 months--and he survived. So would his abortion at 2.9 months been 'ok' in your book?
The child survived? Or was the child kept alive by medical science basically fulfilling all his bodily functions for him in an incubator?
The reality is that we could grow a child outside the womb already, it is just illegal to engage in this sort of research. Does this mean that every time a sperm reaches an egg a new life instantly spring into existence?
Is it murder to turn off a life support machine to someone who is clinically brain dead?
We can already take people to hospital and provide all the functions of their organs without the brain being involved. In these situations we eventually switch off the incubator keeping them alive, are you actually saying that is murder?
I know if I contact them, they'll argue that it's my equipment (it's not - nothing has changed on my side of the network for a couple of years now), and they'll never admit to it being their problem...
You are probably right, but you imply you have not even tried. My advice is to try and contact them letting them know you have a problem.
They may be able to suggest a fix. It may be some weird conflict between your equipment and theirs so listen to any suggestions they make, try them, and if it does not fix it change it back. All this will cost you is a bit of time. If you do not have time to spare then change to a different supplier and see if everything works perfectly with them instead, just remember that they could be worse and you just locked yourself in to their service for a year.
I had a similar problem years ago with TalkTalk. They are certainly not the best ISP but they did confirm to me that the problem was at their end, and that they would be upgrading the routing into my local exchange in about 3 months time and that this would fix it. In about 3 months time, the issue was fixed at their end. I could have moved ISP, but it stopped being so urgent when I knew it was only temporary and I was too lazy to put up with the hassle.
The firearm is in a locked hard container and checked in
Hand luggage is out then? :)
For stupid corporate users, it's easy. You label the IE6 shortcut Intranet and you label the FireFox (or Opera or Safari, or whatever) shortcut Web. You configure IE to use a proxy that only goes to the Intranet and you configure the other browser to connect outside. You tell Windows to use the browser you want for the web as the default handler for http URLs.
You mean label IE7 or IE8? Very few companies are going to deploy anything other than IE on a windows platform. They just want users to use something that is familiar to them. Oh, but it is not supported by MS to have multiple versions of IE installed on the same PC so that rules this out.
Our solution was to split the crew evenly amongst the sides.
We have no problem with doing this, but then we just get accused of ghosting even though our teamspeak server is public and anyone can join.
To be honest I always like to play against other players in my clan since it keeps you sharp playing people who are better than you.
You cannot keep cheating from happening unless you control the server (and even then it's not trivial).
But half the time people start just banning better players. Our clan are running into serious problems because we are the best clan on our map and other clans hate losing. The result, they ban us from their server. We play AA2 CSAR at are the top clan on battle tracker but still certain clans look for any excuse to ban us from their server.
Hopefully the Valve system will mature into something where we can stop cheaters and still let us people who put years of practice in get a game owning noobs.
Well, then what happens when I try to take my copy of the game to a friend's house to show him how awesome the online part is, or because he has a better gaming setup than I do, or any number of reasons? From the description, it sounds like if I do that, I'm going to have to pay $20 for the privilege.
This should come as no surprise, as this is expressly forbidden by the licence on most games. The licence usually says you may only install it on a single machine at any one time. This has been the case for years its just that you were able to ignore this licence in the past, now they are enforcing it.
What you said is certainly true today, but it is the cause of a lot of problems...
Hey, no argument here. But since I am a socialist you guys would probably think I am a communist or something.
Google isn't exactly the most responsible company out there,
Company? Or do you mean organisation?
It is a companies sole responsibility to make money for its shareholders.
She is abnormal in that she sounds way above the average public school kids in academic achievement.
Sorry, but that does not matter that much. What matters more in every field is the ability to work well as part of a team, not being brighter than your colleagues. I know this is always an unpopular thing to post, be the reality is that mediocre but socially well adjusted people make better employees than maladjusted geniuses.
Here's a little tip that I discovered by accident. On a NewEgg order, if you hit "cancel" on the Verified-by-Visa page, the order still goes through.
I have recently build an ecommerce site for someone and noticed that our account on a payment gateway allows us to disable this crap. When disabled, it still displays but the user can skip it or whatever and the purchase still goes through. We have had the account for years. When the client switched it to their account on the same payment processing company the option to disable it was greyed out. It seems it is mandatory for some (maybe newer?) setups but not existing ones.
As a customer it makes no difference to me anyway. It might be an extra step I have to go through but since the password is set to a generic password I can always remember it does not inconvenience me much. Typing one word into a silly box only takes a second or two.
Yeah, but to be a state examined teacher does that mean you're required to teach a particular curriculum? I think the point was this family didn't agree with the state's method of teaching and wanted to teach their own content.
TFA seems to suggest that the family had a problem with their children learning anything other than what agreed with their religion. Evolution was not mentioned but you can bet it was on the list. Even objecting to your kids learning about other religions I view as utterly backward.
They seemed to not want their kids to have a balanced education, instead they wanted them indoctrinated into their own religion from an early age.