1. One piece of paper as long as required. Alphabetically. 2. An X is an X. A dash is not an X
Other markings invalidate the ballot. 3. You are only given one ballot, you can only cast one ballot.
They watch you put it in the box (it is folded first)
MS outperformed, they got set up as the default and made their software good enough. If we look only at PC hardware People bought MS DOS, not PC DOS, not Dr DOS
There were a few windowing environments and task swapping/multitasking Deskview (sp?) GEM, OS/2, GEOS People still bought MSDOS (Dosshell swapping later and MS windows multitasking)
They also leveraged their default status, when they went QBasic and the default editor, did anyone notice it was very similar to the QuickBasic and QuickC environments? (I loved QuickC 2.5 at the time)
123-> Excel Wordperfect -> Word
They simply make a good enough product, and work on the weak points till it's no longer clearly inferior to the competition. It's a very effective way to compete.
I just go to the library or rip the CD. What I'd love is a program that will rip and encode the CD (like Grip) but will wait for internet access to rename the files. This way I could easily rip the CD without needing internet access at that time to name the files.
I didn't know CRIA was filing lawsuits. Since making personal copies of audio recordings is explicitly allowed in Canadian copyright law what grounds are they using to sue?
I spent my summers working starting around 12, I always had a paperroute, babysitting or summer job. I went to university, and worked through graduating with a small debt. Then somewhere around 28 I finally took a tropical vacation.
Through school I was living on a few hundred dollars a month, and I lived in some REALLY nasty places, but I stuck it out. After school I got a good job and kept my standard of living down for 2 years, got some savings and now I'm enjoying myself a bit more.
It's easy to sit back and say "Well, they must have made bad decisions" when you've had it easy. It's even easier say that when you watched them make the bad decisions, while you were deciding to work hard and live within your means. From the beginning of HS to the end of University is a long hard time to watch other people live it up, while you're slogging away working on "the future". but hey, maybe I'm biased too.
You need to understand more about how credit reporting works. First these inquiries don't hurt your credit (see the other poster)
If you give your permission why should it be illegal. If you have bad credit, not just a few missed payments, but a longstanding history of not paying bills you might not be a financially stable or responsible person. I wouldn't want to trust my business to someone who simply can't manage to pay their cable bill on time.
I think proper reading and interpretation of the report is important, also an understanding of the circumstances surrounding them.
Is the good credit history from rich parents or hard work. Is the bad credit history from circumstances outside your control, or the inability to control spending.
Most people I interact with have no spending control, they blame their poor credit on things happening, not their failure to have an emergency fund, or that they eat out 4 nights a week, have 2 cars, a boat and a pair of motorcycles.
I'm not talking about "Global warming skeptics", I'm talking about specific issues in the CO2 Global warming arguement that I find problematic.
I'm not even claiming they're wrong, just that I think these are key issues that should be resolved.
I agree human activity has increased the amount of CO2 in the air. I doubt that the increase in CO2 is due solely to human activity, this is due to the simple fact that CO2 does cycle significantly without humans.
Perhaps those other sources of CO2 could also be controlled? I'm not suggesting any of the current actions are wrong, I just think there are a lot of unanswered questions that people seem to be unconcerned with. They'd much rather sit in pseudo science "isn't it obvious" land. Although acting without understanding may be appropriate in this case, it's bad policy and we should at least be trying to find the right answer.
I believe in global warming, I believe CO2 plays a part. I'll even accept that it is quite likely human behaviour is a contributing factor.
However AFAIK there is no solid proof that human activity is a major or even significant factor in the changes over the last 200 years. This claim has been made many times, but so has the claim that human activity is only responsible for some tiny fraction of global CO2 emissions.
I haven't seen anyone link this apparent discrepancy, or prove/disprove either statement.
I would like to see someone prove their answers to the following.
1. Our current cycle of global warming isn't natural. Note "hasn't happened before" isn't proof. 2. Human activity is a major factor in global warming. 3. Identify the other factors influencing global warming. If it was ONLY human activity there wouldn't be other factors to cause a positive feedback loop, then we wouldn't hit the tipping point "soon"
#1 is unlikely to happen because it really doesn't matter. Natural or not global warming could be disasterous. Plus many experts rely on panic for funding. This is why expensive cause of the day gets all the attention.
#2 This is actually possible.
#3 This is possible, but someone other than anti-* environmentalists will likely have to do it.
There already is a limited education use exemption in Canadian Copyright law, saying it applies to blogs too sounds reasonable. I think it is acceptable for a teacher to print out or save a copy of a blog that they are discussing in class.
Yeah it's scary, but the mechanism is very simple.
Fraudulently transfer ownership to the criminal.
Sell the property to a third party, take the money and run.
The thing I don't understand is how the owner loses it. If someone steals your car and you can prove you're the origional owner you get it back. With a house it's quite simple to prove you're the owner.
It must be an interesting loophole to avoid this. Otherwise people wouldn't care. If someone comes to my door claiming they own my house I should tell them to screw off. If I purchase a house in one of these scams, it's why I have title insurance.
I also don't understand how they can't track the hundreds of thousands of dollars back to the fraudsters? If they can't track this money, why do they require reporting of all transactions over $10k? It obviously doesn't work.
Mozilla is a large project maintained by a number of smart guys, job offers and trying to understand what they're thinking and where they're going is useful to MS.
Also if there are problem with Mozilla applications running properly on Vista, it is a problem for MS. Not that MS should care about Mozilla specifically, but if it doesn't work, a lot of other software won't either.
Your solutions both require the HARDWARE perform a certain way. Restrictions on the hardware or host OS are outside the scope of the GPL affecting software.
The GPL can not force hardware or other software to a certain behaviour. This is the loophole TIVO exploits, and also why many think the GPL v3 is over reaching it's rightful place and becoming more of a EULA than a copyright license.
I agree the GPL v3 seems to want to ensure you can run modified GPL code on the same hardware and has clauses to ensure this. The GPL v2 doesn't have such clauses.
The problem is probaly best explained with an example. I build a non GPL licensed computer, I want it to only run software written by Bob, so I make it check to ensure that only Bobs software runs on it.
The GPL requires one of two things. I not make my hardware like this, which is clearly outside the scope of the GPL. Or force Bob to allow ANYONE to identify their sofware as Bobs.
There are valid reasons for signed binaries, think trusted Java applets to avoid trojans. The GPL v3 may effectively prevent one from releasing such software.
Slashdot Mirror
1. One piece of paper as long as required. Alphabetically.
2. An X is an X. A dash is not an X
Other markings invalidate the ballot.
3. You are only given one ballot, you can only cast one ballot.
They watch you put it in the box (it is folded first)
For details
http://www.elections.ca/
Hire 10 times the counters, it's not that much of a stretch because you likely already have 10x the number of polling stations to begin with.
In each polling station you already have the people crossing names off the list, and watching things. At the end of the day, they count.
So you mean
"They got set up as the default and made their software good enough."
Note I didn't just say good, nor did I say not bad.
They just made it good enough so people didn't really look for an alternative.
MS outperformed, they got set up as the default and made their software good enough.
If we look only at PC hardware
People bought MS DOS, not PC DOS, not Dr DOS
There were a few windowing environments and task swapping/multitasking
Deskview (sp?) GEM, OS/2, GEOS
People still bought MSDOS (Dosshell swapping later and MS windows multitasking)
They also leveraged their default status, when they went QBasic and the default editor, did anyone notice it was very similar to the QuickBasic and QuickC environments? (I loved QuickC 2.5 at the time)
123-> Excel
Wordperfect -> Word
They simply make a good enough product, and work on the weak points till it's no longer clearly inferior to the competition.
It's a very effective way to compete.
You can't upload, but you can download.
I just go to the library or rip the CD.
What I'd love is a program that will rip and encode the CD (like Grip) but will wait for internet access to rename the files.
This way I could easily rip the CD without needing internet access at that time to name the files.
I didn't know CRIA was filing lawsuits.
Since making personal copies of audio recordings is explicitly allowed in Canadian copyright law what grounds are they using to sue?
I spent my summers working starting around 12, I always had a paperroute, babysitting or summer job.
I went to university, and worked through graduating with a small debt. Then somewhere around 28 I finally took a tropical vacation.
Through school I was living on a few hundred dollars a month, and I lived in some REALLY nasty places, but I stuck it out. After school I got a good job and kept my standard of living down for 2 years, got some savings and now I'm enjoying myself a bit more.
It's easy to sit back and say "Well, they must have made bad decisions" when you've had it easy.
It's even easier say that when you watched them make the bad decisions, while you were deciding to work hard and live within your means. From the beginning of HS to the end of University is a long hard time to watch other people live it up, while you're slogging away working on "the future". but hey, maybe I'm biased too.
You need to understand more about how credit reporting works.
First these inquiries don't hurt your credit (see the other poster)
If you give your permission why should it be illegal.
If you have bad credit, not just a few missed payments, but a longstanding history of not paying bills you might not be a financially stable or responsible person.
I wouldn't want to trust my business to someone who simply can't manage to pay their cable bill on time.
I think proper reading and interpretation of the report is important, also an understanding of the circumstances surrounding them.
Is the good credit history from rich parents or hard work.
Is the bad credit history from circumstances outside your control, or the inability to control spending.
Most people I interact with have no spending control, they blame their poor credit on things happening, not their failure to have an emergency fund, or that they eat out 4 nights a week, have 2 cars, a boat and a pair of motorcycles.
I'm not talking about "Global warming skeptics", I'm talking about specific issues in the CO2 Global warming arguement that I find problematic.
I'm not even claiming they're wrong, just that I think these are key issues that should be resolved.
I agree human activity has increased the amount of CO2 in the air. I doubt that the increase in CO2 is due solely to human activity, this is due to the simple fact that CO2 does cycle significantly without humans.
Perhaps those other sources of CO2 could also be controlled? I'm not suggesting any of the current actions are wrong, I just think there are a lot of unanswered questions that people seem to be unconcerned with. They'd much rather sit in pseudo science "isn't it obvious" land. Although acting without understanding may be appropriate in this case, it's bad policy and we should at least be trying to find the right answer.
I believe in global warming, I believe CO2 plays a part.
I'll even accept that it is quite likely human behaviour is a contributing factor.
However AFAIK there is no solid proof that human activity is a major or even significant factor in the changes over the last 200 years.
This claim has been made many times, but so has the claim that human activity is only responsible for some tiny fraction of global CO2 emissions.
I haven't seen anyone link this apparent discrepancy, or prove/disprove either statement.
I would like to see someone prove their answers to the following.
1. Our current cycle of global warming isn't natural. Note "hasn't happened before" isn't proof.
2. Human activity is a major factor in global warming.
3. Identify the other factors influencing global warming. If it was ONLY human activity there wouldn't be other factors to cause a positive feedback loop, then we wouldn't hit the tipping point "soon"
#1 is unlikely to happen because it really doesn't matter. Natural or not global warming could be disasterous. Plus many experts rely on panic for funding. This is why expensive cause of the day gets all the attention.
#2 This is actually possible.
#3 This is possible, but someone other than anti-* environmentalists will likely have to do it.
The article didn't really say much clearly.
There already is a limited education use exemption in Canadian Copyright law, saying it applies to blogs too sounds reasonable.
I think it is acceptable for a teacher to print out or save a copy of a blog that they are discussing in class.
Once you have him at gunpoint, the enemy acknowledges it and stops resisting he's captured.
At this point they're a prisoner, perhaps not fully secured, but they are a prisoner.
No, the title is actually transferred then sold to the unsuspecting buyer.
Why should the students have to attend class?
At University it was up to me if I wanted to show up or not.
They owned the house for over 30 years.
The neighbours owned their house since new almost 40 years ago.
I'm pretty sure it's legit.
They pay off the mortgage, or select properties without mortgages.
This isn't new, it's been going on for at LEAST 3 years.
I know because I was reading up on it when I bought my house 3 years ago.
Yeah it's scary, but the mechanism is very simple.
Fraudulently transfer ownership to the criminal.
Sell the property to a third party, take the money and run.
The thing I don't understand is how the owner loses it. If someone steals your car and you can prove you're the origional owner you get it back. With a house it's quite simple to prove you're the owner.
It must be an interesting loophole to avoid this. Otherwise people wouldn't care. If someone comes to my door claiming they own my house I should tell them to screw off. If I purchase a house in one of these scams, it's why I have title insurance.
I also don't understand how they can't track the hundreds of thousands of dollars back to the fraudsters? If they can't track this money, why do they require reporting of all transactions over $10k? It obviously doesn't work.
Isn't this what mp3.com did?
Then one day they shut down and wiped all the music, slighyly pissing off people.
The debate is over GNU emacs or Xemacs, they do work slightly different.
I prefer GNU emacs for general use.
I also use vim quite a bit too. I think it's worth learning both.
Use multiple LED's or a dispersion lens and you have no problem.
LED efficiency is very nice, and could be very useful in flood lights and other directional lighting.
Mozilla is a large project maintained by a number of smart guys, job offers and trying to understand what they're thinking and where they're going is useful to MS.
Also if there are problem with Mozilla applications running properly on Vista, it is a problem for MS. Not that MS should care about Mozilla specifically, but if it doesn't work, a lot of other software won't either.
Your solutions both require the HARDWARE perform a certain way.
Restrictions on the hardware or host OS are outside the scope of the GPL affecting software.
The GPL can not force hardware or other software to a certain behaviour. This is the loophole TIVO exploits, and also why many think the GPL v3 is over reaching it's rightful place and becoming more of a EULA than a copyright license.
I agree the GPL v3 seems to want to ensure you can run modified GPL code on the same hardware and has clauses to ensure this.
The GPL v2 doesn't have such clauses.
The problem is probaly best explained with an example.
I build a non GPL licensed computer, I want it to only run software written by Bob, so I make it check to ensure that only Bobs software runs on it.
The GPL requires one of two things.
I not make my hardware like this, which is clearly outside the scope of the GPL.
Or force Bob to allow ANYONE to identify their sofware as Bobs.
There are valid reasons for signed binaries, think trusted Java applets to avoid trojans. The GPL v3 may effectively prevent one from releasing such software.