But this would all be settled if he got refunded his latest subscription payment.
It's usually considered silly to drag disputes over $14.99 to court. If you ever get into the kind of problems that courts are designed to handle, you will certainly notice they completely dwarf this issue, annoying and unfair as it may be.
Also, for paying that small a fee, you can't reasonably expect Blizzard to maintain a full fledged legal system to deal with every argumentative misfit that has a complaint. You're pretty much guaranteed a system of summary banning at that price level.
A lot of people are jumping to conclusions, but what's to say they're not delaying to make the copy protection scheme less intrusive and more practical for end users?
That 'Plate' scheme you describe doesn't sound like it can work.
You're saying that he buys X at an auction for 5g and then reauctions it for 20g. Why didn't the people who buy it for 20g outbid him in the first auction?? Why can he get people to pay 4 times as much at an auction than others can??
The waiting strategy is easy to proclaim when threre isn't anything out there to buy.
But if you're the kind of person who likes to buy movies, and you've gotten used to HDTV quality, think about what options you have.
1. Hard core waiting. You buy no movies until a format winner has emerged. But that can take several years, during which you don't get to experience the joy of movie buying.
2. Buy old format DVDs while you're waiting. Fine in a sense, but they will be clearly inferior to your everyday TV viewing. And if you're gonna rebuy them in HD later, are you really saving any money?
3. Take a chance on one of the HD formats. Even if it turns out to "lose", you can always play them on your player, so how big a risk is it really?
So I'm supposed to believe that the reason both the music and movie business experienced big drops in profitability at the same time as mass piracy in both fields became practical, is that both art form went through an unprecedented quality drop at the same time? And it has nothing to do with piracy?
That seems like quite a big coincidence, doesn't it? Unlikely so, even?
Sure, GM has a huge organization with a monumental bureucracy of uncountable levels and whole departments so far removed from the factory floor that they could be on a whole different planet.
But GM does actually produce a hell of a lot of cars, despite/because all this superstructure!
I can imagine that Al Queda has a fair amount of trainers etc. Or an enormous amount. It doesn't really matter. If you look at the end product, they produce very little actual terror. If it's because they ran out of killers and only have paper pushers left or whatever, is not really that interesting.
The original posts point remains. They're either incredibly inefficient at their core mission. Or they're not nearly as many and resourceful as we've been led to believe.
It's like Google maps. As you scroll out, it loads adjacent data and makes it look like you have the everything accessible, while it's really just loading things as needed.
Why would I have to tell a TiVo that I want to watch a show, doesn't it already know?
Well, how would it know if you never tell it?
In this scenario, you're told by someone about a show you didn't know about. If you didn't even know you wanted to see it before that, how could Tivo??
But in reality, politicians are too focused on short term electability to care much about such long term plans. Anything much beyond the next elections is ignored.
Not because politicians are bad people. The voters just won't elect those with your long term visions.
It's hard to quantify, but I'd say that business in general is better at long term planning than government.
Your battery argument is bogus. Laptops have infinitely better battery life than desktops, and work just as well when plugged in, which is how the vast majority are actually being used.
Batteries are really one of the two main advantages of laptops, the other being the portability.
The real anti battery argument you could have made (but didn't) is that in order to extend battery life, laptops get crippled versions of CPUs and other components, that bring down usefulnes even when plugged in.
If a lowly cell phone can actually cause a crash this way, I have to wonder how much damage a device engineered to actually do as much damage of this kind as possible would do?
And then wonder why no terrorist has tried to down a plane this way. Either as a passenger, or from the ground.
It seems that it would be an obvious design goal for an airplane that it should be able to hande interference of this kind.
I imagine that anything that reaches 600ft would achieve a velocity high enough that drag is a factor
They point you may be missing is that this demonstration does not need to reach any speeds higher than a pedestrian. It hovers!! At those speeds, air resistance can safely be ignored. And it would probably not be safe to go much faster than that anyway.
1. Yes, it would take far less propulsion on the moon. Then again, you can use a much lighter prototype on Earth, so it should more or less even out. Besides, there's really nowhere else to go, so we'll have to make do with this planet for now.
2. You should find some time and place where there isn't much crosswind for the test. There are plenty of such places, including indoors.
3. Air resistance is pretty negligeble at small speeds, so I don't think the lateral movement part changes much. And gravity doesn't play into that part at all.
So I think these look like as good a set of criteria that you can get without actually testing on the mooon.
Note that it's inconsistent to both claim that you want to read the articles without registering, and that the articles are too bad to be worth reading.
Yeah, I know different people said these things. Just pointing it out.
A company where that can happen has a much bigger problem than languages. Such as a complete lack of teamwork and communication between it's developers!
Standardizing on a language will help a bit with the symptoms of that, I suppose, but unless you address the actual issue, I don't foresee great things for that kind of organization.
Not to get religious, but avoiding problems like this is one of the big "hidden" advantages of pair programming.
You're right that there is no dark side of the moon in the Pink Floyd sense.
But there are small patches where sunlight never reaches. Craters or valleys near the poles. Or caves for that matter.
There are similar places on earth, but they're not as dark and cold due to light and heat being carried by our atmosphere. On the moon, one side of a hill can be tropically hot and the other minus hundreds of degrees.
1. craigslist has wiped out much of the traditional classified ads industry 2. If craigslist starts charging, someone will take their place
It seems to me that 1 plus 2 equals that the traditional classified industry is dead, not because of craigslist specifically, but because the technology that made it possible.
Slashdot Mirror
You can easily burn any of your iTunes purchases to a CD, which you can then use in exactly the same way as a store bought CD.
Some people claim this results in noticably worse sound quality, but I've never seen any evidence for that.
But this would all be settled if he got refunded his latest subscription payment.
It's usually considered silly to drag disputes over $14.99 to court. If you ever get into the kind of problems that courts are designed to handle, you will certainly notice they completely dwarf this issue, annoying and unfair as it may be.
Also, for paying that small a fee, you can't reasonably expect Blizzard to maintain a full fledged legal system to deal with every argumentative misfit that has a complaint. You're pretty much guaranteed a system of summary banning at that price level.
A lot of people are jumping to conclusions, but what's to say they're not delaying to make the copy protection scheme less intrusive and more practical for end users?
That 'Plate' scheme you describe doesn't sound like it can work.
You're saying that he buys X at an auction for 5g and then reauctions it for 20g. Why didn't the people who buy it for 20g outbid him in the first auction?? Why can he get people to pay 4 times as much at an auction than others can??
So it seems that a double o is the marker for search engines.
Google, Yahoo, Accoona
Other markers I've noticed are that hamburger joints are yellow and red, and that ED drugs must end in -a.
The waiting strategy is easy to proclaim when threre isn't anything out there to buy.
But if you're the kind of person who likes to buy movies, and you've gotten used to HDTV quality, think about what options you have.
1. Hard core waiting. You buy no movies until a format winner has emerged. But that can take several years, during which you don't get to experience the joy of movie buying.
2. Buy old format DVDs while you're waiting. Fine in a sense, but they will be clearly inferior to your everyday TV viewing. And if you're gonna rebuy them in HD later, are you really saving any money?
3. Take a chance on one of the HD formats. Even if it turns out to "lose", you can always play them on your player, so how big a risk is it really?
So I'm supposed to believe that the reason both the music and movie business experienced big drops in profitability at the same time as mass piracy in both fields became practical, is that both art form went through an unprecedented quality drop at the same time? And it has nothing to do with piracy?
That seems like quite a big coincidence, doesn't it? Unlikely so, even?
You're right. That's the weak point in this argument.
It's hard to evaluate how much, since this is all done in secret.
Sure, GM has a huge organization with a monumental bureucracy of uncountable levels and whole departments so far removed from the factory floor that they could be on a whole different planet.
But GM does actually produce a hell of a lot of cars, despite/because all this superstructure!
I can imagine that Al Queda has a fair amount of trainers etc. Or an enormous amount. It doesn't really matter. If you look at the end product, they produce very little actual terror. If it's because they ran out of killers and only have paper pushers left or whatever, is not really that interesting.
The original posts point remains. They're either incredibly inefficient at their core mission. Or they're not nearly as many and resourceful as we've been led to believe.
It's like Google maps. As you scroll out, it loads adjacent data and makes it look like you have the everything accessible, while it's really just loading things as needed.
Why would I have to tell a TiVo that I want to watch a show, doesn't it already know?
Well, how would it know if you never tell it?
In this scenario, you're told by someone about a show you didn't know about. If you didn't even know you wanted to see it before that, how could Tivo??
Tivo is great, but it's not that great.
With the computers of 2025, maybe you only need $15M to make King Kong?
That's a nice idea.
But in reality, politicians are too focused on short term electability to care much about such long term plans. Anything much beyond the next elections is ignored.
Not because politicians are bad people. The voters just won't elect those with your long term visions.
It's hard to quantify, but I'd say that business in general is better at long term planning than government.
Your battery argument is bogus. Laptops have infinitely better battery life than desktops, and work just as well when plugged in, which is how the vast majority are actually being used.
Batteries are really one of the two main advantages of laptops, the other being the portability.
The real anti battery argument you could have made (but didn't) is that in order to extend battery life, laptops get crippled versions of CPUs and other components, that bring down usefulnes even when plugged in.
If a lowly cell phone can actually cause a crash this way, I have to wonder how much damage a device engineered to actually do as much damage of this kind as possible would do?
And then wonder why no terrorist has tried to down a plane this way. Either as a passenger, or from the ground.
It seems that it would be an obvious design goal for an airplane that it should be able to hande interference of this kind.
I imagine that anything that reaches 600ft would achieve a velocity high enough that drag is a factor
They point you may be missing is that this demonstration does not need to reach any speeds higher than a pedestrian. It hovers!! At those speeds, air resistance can safely be ignored. And it would probably not be safe to go much faster than that anyway.
1. Yes, it would take far less propulsion on the moon. Then again, you can use a much lighter prototype on Earth, so it should more or less even out. Besides, there's really nowhere else to go, so we'll have to make do with this planet for now.
2. You should find some time and place where there isn't much crosswind for the test. There are plenty of such places, including indoors.
3. Air resistance is pretty negligeble at small speeds, so I don't think the lateral movement part changes much. And gravity doesn't play into that part at all.
So I think these look like as good a set of criteria that you can get without actually testing on the mooon.
Note that it's inconsistent to both claim that you want to read the articles without registering, and that the articles are too bad to be worth reading.
Yeah, I know different people said these things. Just pointing it out.
It's been clear for many years that Dvorak is little more than a troll, who the world somehow never stops feeding.
Just ignore the guy.
The slogan you refer to has been updated. It's now "Land of the fee, Home of the slave".
We apologize for any inconvenience.
No, You the man!!
(I bet he's sick of that joke...)
A company where that can happen has a much bigger problem than languages. Such as a complete lack of teamwork and communication between it's developers!
Standardizing on a language will help a bit with the symptoms of that, I suppose, but unless you address the actual issue, I don't foresee great things for that kind of organization.
Not to get religious, but avoiding problems like this is one of the big "hidden" advantages of pair programming.
I'm not cleaning my room anymore!!
You're right that there is no dark side of the moon in the Pink Floyd sense.
But there are small patches where sunlight never reaches. Craters or valleys near the poles. Or caves for that matter.
There are similar places on earth, but they're not as dark and cold due to light and heat being carried by our atmosphere. On the moon, one side of a hill can be tropically hot and the other minus hundreds of degrees.
I find your two statements interesting together.
1. craigslist has wiped out much of the traditional classified ads industry
2. If craigslist starts charging, someone will take their place
It seems to me that 1 plus 2 equals that the traditional classified industry is dead, not because of craigslist specifically, but because the technology that made it possible.