Or even more simply: We will issue your refund in the form of a company check which you will revieve in 2 - 3 weeks. It's an annoyance when you return something, but it give them time to verify the return first. A lot of places will already due this on large cash purchases...If you used a CC they should just bill the CC for the difference in price between what you claimed to have returned and what you did return.
It seemed a lot like people watching car races for the crashes. Lots of people I know basically tuned out of the coverage once they knew it was up safely, like they were just waiting for it to go boom after takeoff.
It might also be that once it was up safely and the external tank was away (and it's video feed cut out) there wasn't much more to see. On NASA TV (via the web) at that point they went back to covering Jeb and Laura Bush (who i will point out got lots of coverage on NASA TV BEFORE the lauch too). They "tuned out" because there was little left to see.
No it goes this way:You sign up and pay $10 dollars. When you get 10M friends to sign up and each pay $10 you get your moon trip. When each of them gets 10M firends to sign up they get their moon trip.....it'll work, i swear.:)
Microsoft says, "If you sell MS XP in great quantity and exclusively, then we'll give you a huge discount." That's no different from Pepsi saying to 7/11, "We'll give you this nice drinks fridge for free if you promise to only put pepsi products inside it." If 7/11 wants the fridge, they must abide by Pepsi's generous terms, or pass on the deal.
Wrong, there's a big difference. It would be illegal (both in the US and many other countries) for Microsoft to say that just as it would be illegal if the Pepsi deal had been theat the 7/11 could only sell pepsi. It's lgal for MS to make a deal where they get paid per PC Dell ships (reguardless of the OS) or if they say We will give you a volume discount if you buy X number, but asking for exclusivity is in most cases going to get you into legal trouble.
This IS becomming an issue. In the southern states some people have been having issues with pharmicies that don't carry or dispense birth control. There is a question as to weather this is leagal or not. So yes it will and is happening......
Here's the concern....30 MILLION households of VOTERS who's representitives and congressmen passed a law that took away their TVs, some of whom will wonder why the new set they JUST bought doesn't work! Go to walmart (or target, or kmart, or bob's shack of tvs) and look at the TV selection as someone who doesn't know about this, and see if there's any warning on any of the TVs that won't work when the plug is pulled......
Is it acceptable to make me pay for a v-chip in my TV when I never use it? How about is it acceptable to make me pay taxes that pay for schools when I don't have kids? Sometimes we have to pay to support things that we don't use, but that doesn't make them a bad idea. I happen to think that this law has a good intention, but is a bad law (because as many others have pointed out) it would be hard to enforce and probably very ineffective. In all honesty how would you (assuming that you are a parent) be "readily able to keep their kids from seeing pornographic content"? Kids have a way of finding way around safe guards (How long to most DRM anti-copy scheems last before someones breaks them?). I wouls suspect that most parents cannot watch their children every second. What method would you use? Even though I don't have children I would be willing to pay a small (not more then a couple of bucks a month) surcharge on my internet bill to make EFFECTIVE tools avaliable to parents that could be used help them as parents (which is clearly a hard job that is getting harder all the time).
Or more easily just deciding that the middle man is "sharing" the data and sueing him. After all he IS the one transmitting the copy, even if he is only a proxy.
It's a genuinely exploitable problem, although it only affects multi-user machines where the users don't trust one another, which means that it isn't a problem for most users.
Actually if the computer is infected (or running spyware) this exploit could be harmful to single user machines.....
Thanks to Wine for making sure Windows programs dominate the Linux desktop
While I understand your argument, it DOES also make switching easier. I use wine (actually cxoffice) on my gentoo box. It allowed me to switch from windows quickly and fairly easily. As time goes on and I find OSS projects that I like to use instead of the windows app under wine I switch to them. There are still some that I haven't found replacments that I like for so I use the windows apss. There are a number of windows apps i have stopped using for OSS replacments. If it wern't for cxoffice i would have had to switch all my programs at once, which would have been a huge task, perhapse large enough to make me think it was just easier to deal with windows then to make the switch.
I can think of one right off..."SonicStage" it's the software that came with the sony MP3 players that my my wife and I got.. It wouldn't even load untill i did a reboot. It's not very good software either, which is too bad becuase other then that software we have really loved the MP3 players.
I am also a Gnetoo user. I wish i was as lucky with emerge updates. I have had it break thing, but usually fixing it has been quite simple. (I have to emerge one of the dependancies manually and then things work). I will point out that the OS install is only 1/2 the job. Installing with apt-get is MUCH faster then with emerge for most large applications. I like that it compiles them all local and I chose to use gentoo but it's not for everyone.
I would be 1 of those loud complainers. I have 4 analog TVs in my house and a nice big antenna on the roof. Even assuming that the converter boxes are cheep, it would give the same situation that I refuse to go to now with cable/sat. I do NOT want to have a box, it makes programming the VCRs harder, it means the picture-in-picutre on my TVs don't work well (I need a box for each window and in most cases i wouldn't be able to use the remote for one without the other changing too, and it means having that many more remotes....
If they go ahead as planned I will most likly just no longer watch any TV programming.....
Until the law has lots of other amendments attached to it, is reworded and no longer is the bill you supported except in name..... remember that virtually now bill gets ratified without changes.
How, may I ask, is this DELL's Fault? If the Purchasing Department is getting in the way of buying what's really needed, then that's a problem. They are their to get what is needed. I suspect that if this is the case, it's not DELL's fault for not carring AMD, it's the Purchasing Dept's for being so short-sighted.
Well if the Comcast TOS has a clause about not pirating copy-righted works and the RIAA asks their ISP's sys admin to ask, one could kinda see part ii working....if they squint hard enough......
Ok, i'll use your Scott Peterson Example. I also was unconvinced that he was guilty, as an avid reader of true crime novels, an individual who finds criminal psychology a fun hobby (i've read many books on this too), I see patterns that others might not. I believe that Scott Peterson MIGTH be guilty, but I am not convienced. That REALLY got him convicted wasn't his fishing trip and wasn't even his afair. What got SP convicted was the fact that he LIED to the police (several times that they caught him in lies) he LIED to his mistress, he acted VERY suspisious durring the search, and then once he started to get caught in his lies he prepared to run. If we assume for the moment that he is innocent, he just disproved your plan of attack! He didn't come forward with all the info he had right away, when the police found out anyway it looked bad for him and then the lies he told them looked even worse. If he is innocent he would have done MUCH better to tell the poilce everything up front, including the affair, so that he would get caught lying and make them look at him harder. You are correct that there IS risk in coming forward with in, it does make you a suspect, however if you don't come forward (or lie to the police when you are found out) it looks a lot worse then just being honest from the forefront. Remember that cops don't convict people, juries do and they sympathize with people who try and do the right thing, not with people they see as hiding and then lieing.
There ARE bad judges, but why should that make you leave law school? Now you are saying you agree with this broken system! I don't have much personal experince with judges but given the amount of crap (and in some cases threats) taht criminal judges have to put up with I would suspect that most of them are their because they want to be.....
However they will most likly find you anyway. You know that nosie neighbor who saw her comming out of your door, the phone number that her cell phone was calling ever night while her husband was at work, the waitress who remembers the two of you.... They may fixate on you as a suspect, but the sooner you come forward the better the chance of them finding who really did it and that will help to clear you. If you wait 2 or 3 days till they find you that's 2-3 days the guilty party has to distance themselves from the whole mess, then when suspission DOES fall on you they are less likly to find the guilty person and clear you. Better to be a suspect earlier with greater chance of being cleared then later with less chance of being cleared. MOST people, when having affairs, don't cover their tracks nearly as well as they think they do.
If you had an affair with someone who was raped/murdered on her way home you should come forward if they have your DNA or not. ANY information that you can give the police will help them in hopefully finding the true killer. If you don't, even if they don't have your DNA on file, they will most likly find you anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
The priot-artist appears to be Microsoft . So that's a very real possibility......the MS iPod?
I was focus on making it not-profitable for them, but your right it IS criminal. :)
Or even more simply: We will issue your refund in the form of a company check which you will revieve in 2 - 3 weeks. It's an annoyance when you return something, but it give them time to verify the return first. A lot of places will already due this on large cash purchases...If you used a CC they should just bill the CC for the difference in price between what you claimed to have returned and what you did return.
It seemed a lot like people watching car races for the crashes. Lots of people I know basically tuned out of the coverage once they knew it was up safely, like they were just waiting for it to go boom after takeoff.
It might also be that once it was up safely and the external tank was away (and it's video feed cut out) there wasn't much more to see. On NASA TV (via the web) at that point they went back to covering Jeb and Laura Bush (who i will point out got lots of coverage on NASA TV BEFORE the lauch too). They "tuned out" because there was little left to see.
No it goes this way:You sign up and pay $10 dollars. When you get 10M friends to sign up and each pay $10 you get your moon trip. When each of them gets 10M firends to sign up they get their moon trip.....it'll work, i swear. :)
Microsoft says, "If you sell MS XP in great quantity and exclusively, then we'll give you a huge discount." That's no different from Pepsi saying to 7/11, "We'll give you this nice drinks fridge for free if you promise to only put pepsi products inside it." If 7/11 wants the fridge, they must abide by Pepsi's generous terms, or pass on the deal.
Wrong, there's a big difference. It would be illegal (both in the US and many other countries) for Microsoft to say that just as it would be illegal if the Pepsi deal had been theat the 7/11 could only sell pepsi. It's lgal for MS to make a deal where they get paid per PC Dell ships (reguardless of the OS) or if they say We will give you a volume discount if you buy X number, but asking for exclusivity is in most cases going to get you into legal trouble.
This IS becomming an issue. In the southern states some people have been having issues with pharmicies that don't carry or dispense birth control. There is a question as to weather this is leagal or not. So yes it will and is happening......
Here's the concern....30 MILLION households of VOTERS who's representitives and congressmen passed a law that took away their TVs, some of whom will wonder why the new set they JUST bought doesn't work! Go to walmart (or target, or kmart, or bob's shack of tvs) and look at the TV selection as someone who doesn't know about this, and see if there's any warning on any of the TVs that won't work when the plug is pulled......
Hell even the iPod... what truly separates it from other players? Yeah the hardware is good, and it looks slick, but it's the interface.
Damn, and I thought it was the white headphones with the white cord......
Is it acceptable to make me pay for a v-chip in my TV when I never use it? How about is it acceptable to make me pay taxes that pay for schools when I don't have kids? Sometimes we have to pay to support things that we don't use, but that doesn't make them a bad idea. I happen to think that this law has a good intention, but is a bad law (because as many others have pointed out) it would be hard to enforce and probably very ineffective. In all honesty how would you (assuming that you are a parent) be "readily able to keep their kids from seeing pornographic content"? Kids have a way of finding way around safe guards (How long to most DRM anti-copy scheems last before someones breaks them?). I wouls suspect that most parents cannot watch their children every second. What method would you use? Even though I don't have children I would be willing to pay a small (not more then a couple of bucks a month) surcharge on my internet bill to make EFFECTIVE tools avaliable to parents that could be used help them as parents (which is clearly a hard job that is getting harder all the time).
Intel + Mac = IMac
I prefer Mac + Intel = Mattel.
Or more easily just deciding that the middle man is "sharing" the data and sueing him. After all he IS the one transmitting the copy, even if he is only a proxy.
It's a genuinely exploitable problem, although it only affects multi-user machines where the users don't trust one another, which means that it isn't a problem for most users.
Actually if the computer is infected (or running spyware) this exploit could be harmful to single user machines.....
Thanks to Wine for making sure Windows programs dominate the Linux desktop
While I understand your argument, it DOES also make switching easier. I use wine (actually cxoffice) on my gentoo box. It allowed me to switch from windows quickly and fairly easily. As time goes on and I find OSS projects that I like to use instead of the windows app under wine I switch to them. There are still some that I haven't found replacments that I like for so I use the windows apss. There are a number of windows apps i have stopped using for OSS replacments. If it wern't for cxoffice i would have had to switch all my programs at once, which would have been a huge task, perhapse large enough to make me think it was just easier to deal with windows then to make the switch.
Ok, now all we need to do is get one of each and Val Kilmer....much better then a surf board and a shotgun....
I can think of one right off..."SonicStage" it's the software that came with the sony MP3 players that my my wife and I got.. It wouldn't even load untill i did a reboot. It's not very good software either, which is too bad becuase other then that software we have really loved the MP3 players.
I am also a Gnetoo user. I wish i was as lucky with emerge updates. I have had it break thing, but usually fixing it has been quite simple. (I have to emerge one of the dependancies manually and then things work). I will point out that the OS install is only 1/2 the job. Installing with apt-get is MUCH faster then with emerge for most large applications. I like that it compiles them all local and I chose to use gentoo but it's not for everyone.
I would be 1 of those loud complainers. I have 4 analog TVs in my house and a nice big antenna on the roof. Even assuming that the converter boxes are cheep, it would give the same situation that I refuse to go to now with cable/sat. I do NOT want to have a box, it makes programming the VCRs harder, it means the picture-in-picutre on my TVs don't work well (I need a box for each window and in most cases i wouldn't be able to use the remote for one without the other changing too, and it means having that many more remotes....
If they go ahead as planned I will most likly just no longer watch any TV programming.....
Until the law has lots of other amendments attached to it, is reworded and no longer is the bill you supported except in name..... remember that virtually now bill gets ratified without changes.
How, may I ask, is this DELL's Fault? If the Purchasing Department is getting in the way of buying what's really needed, then that's a problem. They are their to get what is needed. I suspect that if this is the case, it's not DELL's fault for not carring AMD, it's the Purchasing Dept's for being so short-sighted.
Well if the Comcast TOS has a clause about not pirating copy-righted works and the RIAA asks their ISP's sys admin to ask, one could kinda see part ii working....if they squint hard enough......
Actually if he sues them for his money in small claims court, they can't send armies of lawyers.......
Ok, i'll use your Scott Peterson Example. I also was unconvinced that he was guilty, as an avid reader of true crime novels, an individual who finds criminal psychology a fun hobby (i've read many books on this too), I see patterns that others might not. I believe that Scott Peterson MIGTH be guilty, but I am not convienced. That REALLY got him convicted wasn't his fishing trip and wasn't even his afair. What got SP convicted was the fact that he LIED to the police (several times that they caught him in lies) he LIED to his mistress, he acted VERY suspisious durring the search, and then once he started to get caught in his lies he prepared to run. If we assume for the moment that he is innocent, he just disproved your plan of attack! He didn't come forward with all the info he had right away, when the police found out anyway it looked bad for him and then the lies he told them looked even worse. If he is innocent he would have done MUCH better to tell the poilce everything up front, including the affair, so that he would get caught lying and make them look at him harder. You are correct that there IS risk in coming forward with in, it does make you a suspect, however if you don't come forward (or lie to the police when you are found out) it looks a lot worse then just being honest from the forefront. Remember that cops don't convict people, juries do and they sympathize with people who try and do the right thing, not with people they see as hiding and then lieing.
There ARE bad judges, but why should that make you leave law school? Now you are saying you agree with this broken system! I don't have much personal experince with judges but given the amount of crap (and in some cases threats) taht criminal judges have to put up with I would suspect that most of them are their because they want to be.....
However they will most likly find you anyway. You know that nosie neighbor who saw her comming out of your door, the phone number that her cell phone was calling ever night while her husband was at work, the waitress who remembers the two of you.... They may fixate on you as a suspect, but the sooner you come forward the better the chance of them finding who really did it and that will help to clear you. If you wait 2 or 3 days till they find you that's 2-3 days the guilty party has to distance themselves from the whole mess, then when suspission DOES fall on you they are less likly to find the guilty person and clear you. Better to be a suspect earlier with greater chance of being cleared then later with less chance of being cleared. MOST people, when having affairs, don't cover their tracks nearly as well as they think they do.
If you had an affair with someone who was raped/murdered on her way home you should come forward if they have your DNA or not. ANY information that you can give the police will help them in hopefully finding the true killer. If you don't, even if they don't have your DNA on file, they will most likly find you anyway.