I've used gmail for teh past few years and typically four times a year they add some feature. I'm sure once they have realized a final feature set and tested it on a google scale (millions of users) then they will finalize it. If it's not feature complete, then it's alpha software. Beta is when it has all the features, but bugs still remain.
Wouldn't a throat mic be easier to use? No specialized training required? Ability to use vocal chords required. Otherwise, Stephen Hawking would have been using one of those long ago.
I have my own wager. Sure, you can believe in the Christian God and follow the matrix to see that the supposed logical course is to believe. But I have the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Here's his matrix:
Believe and it's true: Eternal reward for you and your family. Believe and it's not true: You get to enjoy pasta. Disbelieve and it's true: Eternal punishment for you, your friends, and your family. Disbelieve and it's not true: No consequence.
So, you see, with my matrix you get a much higher reward for believing and a much higher punishment for disbelieving. So anyone considering Christianity using Pascal's wager must consider my wager as well, given that the matrix is far more extreme and is the only supposed logical choice.
Honestly, I kind of felt like the response was a subtle jab at how silly and stupid the question was. So you think the comment selected was meant to be taken seriously, which would justify calling it silly and stupid?
You mean to tell me that the RIAA are NOT the only ones who launch big music careers? That's right... and if you want to launch your big music career through video games, there's only one company that matters to you, and that's Electronic Arts. See, we the fine people at Electronic Arts realize that there are other video games out there whose developers would like you to believe they can offer the same thing, but that's utter rubbish. So if you're a really good band then don't waste your time with any other company. Come to us and give us your music for free, because after all (dramatic Jedi hand maneuver) only Electronic Arts can make you extremely popular and launch your career.
Actually we implemented an Rsnapshot server to run every 15 minutes and we kept 8 hours of backups. The nice thing was Rsnapshot did incremental very well. Sounds nice, but as the AC replied, that won't cover deletions within that window of time. It's probably also not legal in terms of SOX/HIPA compliance either. Of course, that probably doesn't apply to your company but there are many solutions out there which keep a record of absolutely everything.
As to the AD/Exchange conversion, I was still there when all the gear and software rolled in. It all came in during April 2007. I was talking to the other systems guy and asked what his gut estimate was for lights-on. He figured January 2008, here we are in March and it still isn't up. That's because they laid me off and the other systems guy all of a sudden got stupid on them. It's too funny. Yeah, it does sound like the systems guy got all stupid. Unless you work for GM and you're doing a really huge deployment for hundreds of thousands of people with some complex integration pieces, it's really not all that complex.
The nice thing about Qmail is it stores email in user home folders. They're flat files that are easily replicated and backed up. And you back up every incoming email at the time it comes in? If you're doing nightly backups, then you're not able to archive every email if someone deletes the email from their home folder.
When the new administration came in the Director of Admin was paranoid about the fact that I.T. could see her email folder. So they went out and spent a shitload of money on AD, Exchange, etc. That was a year ago. They still don't have it all running. Which only goes to show that your administration hired people who were incompetent. A year to get Active Directory and Exchange running? You've got to be kidding.
I guess to put it another way, some films you watch for the fantastic visuals, others you watch for the story. Or, to take a less piecemeal approach, a movie experience is a combination of the visuals, the audio, and the inherent movie content which includes story, acting, etc. You might watch Planet Earth for its great visuals but if you're playing the audio on not-very-good stereo speakers then you're missing out on a great part of the experience. HD content with a good setup gives you the best of all aspects of the movie and, while you may be satisfied with only a few of them, others want to get the best possible experience.
It seems a little arrogant to me for Apple to say they get 30% of my profits if I want to sell an iPhone app. End of story. No choice, take it or leave it. So charge 1/(1 - 0.1) = 43% more for your app. Or give your app away for free, start a 30 day trial counter, and when the counter expires ask for a credit card number and process the transaction yourself. Your problem is solved either way.
Last I checked Apple wasn't a charity. It sounds arrogant of you to deny Apple the ability to mark up your product given that they are selling it in their marketplace, promoting it on your behalf, and absorbing all the costs of the transaction and fulfillment. Somehow you think Apple should do this as a service to you at no cost? That is arrogant.
When it comes to mobile phone service, cable TV, Internet access, service interruptions are the norm -- and everyone seems willing to grin and bear it: 'We're so used cable and satellite television reception problems that we don't even notice them anymore. And television is mission critical? Besides, I bet most people don't experience significant cable TV interruptions. Satellite depends on the strength of the signal. Tap into Arecibo and you'll likely get 100% reception.
We know that many of our emails never reach their destination. [citation needed] I call bullshit on that one.
Mobile phone companies compare who has the fewest dropped calls (after decades of mobile phones, why do we even still have dropped calls?) Because it's a benefit to have a phone that doesn't draw so much power that your brain heats up just from using the device. Also, dropping a call indicates that you're in an area where there's no cell towers or because you've hopped from one tower to the next and the next tower has its connections maxed out.
And the ubiquitous BlackBerry, which is a mission-critical device for millions, has experienced mass outages several times this month. Blackberry is not a mission critical service. The people who use it as such are naive. If there truly is a market for five nines uptime for Blackberry, RIM would develop such a service and charge an order of magnitude more for it.
All of these services are unregulated, which means there are no demands on reliability, other than what the marketplace demands.' So here's the question for you: Why does the marketplace demand so little when it comes to these services? Because ultimately it's really not a big deal. So your satellite TV goes down for a bit... get a life. You drop a cell phone call... redial. Your Blackberry isn't receiving emails... get a life.
companies think that free=no good. In this case, perhaps they're right. Picture this: there's a company that makes a widely used free browser which is trying to develop a mobile version for cell phones. The product isn't even finished yet and is likely still in alpha stage. However, that hasn't stopped this company from approaching cell phone manufacturers to attempt to get this unproven product installed as the de-facto browser.
Oh, and the name of this company starts with "M". With that description, most people would guess incorrectly which company it is.
... a Linux port of AIR, its web application development software. AIR is the runtime, it is not web application development software. Flexbuilder build on top of Eclipse is the development software.
No, I'm saying Microsoft affects the market such that the benefits of a free market are unduly suppressed. The only thing you got right is that MS's freedom needs to be reduced. But Microsoft is currently enjoying the benefits of a free market. What you propose is a regulated market that only allows certain freedoms and not others. That's not a truly free market.
In essence, Microsoft is gaming the system, breaking the free market. So what you're saying is that Microsoft hoarded all of the freedom in the market, leaving no freedom for anyone else. If we reduce Microsoft's freedom, then this will free up more freedom for other companies to compete.
Euro an ECU are not the same thing, but when the second replaced the first one Sorry for nitpicking with the nitpick, but it's the "first" (the Euro) that replaced "the second" one (ECU). And apologies for nitpicking over a nit with the nitpicker's nitpicker, but temporally speaking the second replaced the first.
Am I the only one who saw "read 12000 more bytes" and thought in large capital letters: TL;DR? Same here, until I piped it through gzip. Makes for a much shorter and more interesting read then.
Even if a sex scene with no dialog somehow adds to the plot of a movie, removing it certainly does not *reverse* the meaning of the movie, as people were doing with my post. Agreed, but the absurdity of it was to make a point about being in control of your own creative works.
As I pointed out to Gordonjcp just a moment ago, I do not suggest changing the meaning of movies. But isn't that the point? To you, it doesn't change the movie in any meaningful way, but to the writer/director it's very meaningful.
Here's an example of clean Slashdot post edits. I've removed the morally objectionable content from your post. Of course, you don't mind, right?
What's so cool about morally objectionable content from movies?
For example, I like the Matrix trilogy, there is a completely necessary sex scene in the second movie. I force all who would wish to watch the movie to view that scene? Even glimpses requires good timing or a quick back-wind to resume the movie after the scene.
Many movies are like this. I want to see a movie with what many consider objectionable material, why are movie studios fighting this?
More to the point, air movies on TV.
Prohibiting things like this does nothing but reduce movie studios' monetary gains. I, for one, see movies that have objectionable material anyway.
I'm saying that someone should be able to buy one copy of a DVD and sell dozens or hundreds of burned copies.
Just as easy at to remember as any number that you can come up with. However it is the combination of all together that should be easy and that is not the case. 2900 or was it 9200? Or something else? Also not everybody understands the easieness of the geomatricaly placed numbers. I suppose all I can argue is that 963-2900 is trivially easy for me to remember whereas a number like 941-5723 would be much more difficult.
I filed a complaint with the Minnesota Department of Commerce, Market Enforcement Division, over this exact issue (my case no. is MO2603479). That was two years ago. I sent follow-up emails and left phone messages, and sent them this verdict recently. They have yet to reply, and unfortunately it appears they actually gave the other party in this suit a NEW mortgage originator's license under a new corporate name. I don't know what's going on over there. As others have indicated, and I hope isn't true, is that because the defendant's personal name was removed from the suit then likely the corporation that had the $19K judgment has likely folded and business is resumed under a new company. However, I hope you managed to collect on this one.
Keep in mind that giving you the RAW file means that you could make infinite copies of the photograph with no additional cost going to the photographer. And a photographer cannot give concerts to recoup his losses. Sorry if my sarcasm meter is off, but losses? If I pay a photographer $2500 for four hours of time, let's say that's an hour of setup, an hour of takedown, and two hours of shooting. Let's say for the hell of it that the setup/takedown time is worth $250 an hour. So that's $500 total. That prices the actual photography work at $1000 an hour, which should more than cover the person's time, equipment cost, domain knowledge, etc. Where are the losses that need to be recouped?
Slashdot Mirror
I have my own wager. Sure, you can believe in the Christian God and follow the matrix to see that the supposed logical course is to believe. But I have the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Here's his matrix:
Believe and it's true: Eternal reward for you and your family.
Believe and it's not true: You get to enjoy pasta.
Disbelieve and it's true: Eternal punishment for you, your friends, and your family.
Disbelieve and it's not true: No consequence.
So, you see, with my matrix you get a much higher reward for believing and a much higher punishment for disbelieving. So anyone considering Christianity using Pascal's wager must consider my wager as well, given that the matrix is far more extreme and is the only supposed logical choice.
Last I checked Apple wasn't a charity. It sounds arrogant of you to deny Apple the ability to mark up your product given that they are selling it in their marketplace, promoting it on your behalf, and absorbing all the costs of the transaction and fulfillment. Somehow you think Apple should do this as a service to you at no cost? That is arrogant.
Anyone else read this as "Manmade Food to Nourish Grand Canyon" and automatically think of that famous Charlton Heston movie?
Oh, and the name of this company starts with "M". With that description, most people would guess incorrectly which company it is.
... a Linux port of AIR, its web application development software. AIR is the runtime, it is not web application development software. Flexbuilder build on top of Eclipse is the development software.Here's an example of clean Slashdot post edits. I've removed the morally objectionable content from your post. Of course, you don't mind, right?
What's so cool about morally objectionable content from movies?
For example, I like the Matrix trilogy, there is a completely necessary sex scene in the second movie. I force all who would wish to watch the movie to view that scene? Even glimpses requires good timing or a quick back-wind to resume the movie after the scene.
Many movies are like this. I want to see a movie with what many consider objectionable material, why are movie studios fighting this?
More to the point, air movies on TV.
Prohibiting things like this does nothing but reduce movie studios' monetary gains. I, for one, see movies that have objectionable material anyway.
I'm saying that someone should be able to buy one copy of a DVD and sell dozens or hundreds of burned copies.
However it is the combination of all together that should be easy and that is not the case. 2900 or was it 9200? Or something else?
Also not everybody understands the easieness of the geomatricaly placed numbers. I suppose all I can argue is that 963-2900 is trivially easy for me to remember whereas a number like 941-5723 would be much more difficult.
exact issue (my case no. is MO2603479). That was two years ago. I sent follow-up emails and left phone messages,
and sent them this verdict recently. They have yet to reply, and unfortunately it appears they actually
gave the other party in this suit a NEW mortgage originator's license under a new corporate name.
I don't know what's going on over there. As others have indicated, and I hope isn't true, is that because the defendant's personal name was removed from the suit then likely the corporation that had the $19K judgment has likely folded and business is resumed under a new company. However, I hope you managed to collect on this one.