They "regurgitate" some searches that are given to them, voluntarily, by IE users who choose to submit their anonymous browsing activity to Microsoft. If you actually read the follow-ups to the story, you'd see it's not actually a story about anything other than people getting their facts wrong and not bothering to check.
So he's a jackass and a bully for calling out a hate-monger for being a hate-monger? That's bad? You are saying we should tolerate intolerance, which would mean we have to tolerate Dan Savage's points, and as he's running the more popular website, he should be nearer the top in rankings.
I'd say the person who put it online in a part of a website dedicated to sexualised images of children, and the site which knowingly lets that happen. Cut those two out, and the problem is gone.
They do that so no errant screws or objects are left in the machinery, so when the fuel is finally put in, it functions as it should without burning everyone's face off in a brilliant flash. This is a good thing.
It's theoretically more accessible, but unless you have an interface on every device you want to access the data with, then it's not accessible at all. I'm sure you're fine with WebDAV or SSH, but most people just want an experience like Dropbox, where they can have a client on every device they own (phones, computers of all sizes, etc.), and don't need to mess around with anything to get it working.
That's hardly scientific. Maybe the temperature changed, or the wind, or the driver's style, or whatever. One TV experiment does not good science make.
But jQuery has done wonders to make cross-browser JS coding ridiculously easy. You can use only the parts you want, such as the ajax stuff, and use them however you want. I don't know why you're so butt-hurt by it - did it touch you inappropriately?:)
You are comparing the best analogue performance with the worst digital performance. No wonder you came to your conclusions. If, however, we compare the actual performance encountered every day by users across the globe, digital shits all over analogue. Just as you can find a few examples of bad digital encoding, anyone who can remember using a VHS or LaserDisc player (your holiness excluded:)) can regale you with wondrous tales of ghosting; dying media; loud, clumsy players; limited media availability; and so on and so forth. It's an easy game to play.
You pardon for someone being found guilty under a just law, and remove the conviction for an unjust law, which is what will happen when the current "protecting freedoms" act or whatever it's called gets passed. Pardoning him is like saying "yeah, he's cool, but all those other gay guys are still guilty". That's not nice.
Gets the ball rolling? There's already an act in the final stages of getting passed which takes care of all of this, and a lot more. The ball's been rolling for ages, and has nearly finished its course.
So you think Alan Turing should get a pardon, while all the living folks with criminal convictions still have them? How's that fair? Why not just wait for the probable new law to come into effect, and all of this will be taken care of without any argument. Let's fix the problem with the living, then we can get all misty-eyed for who was, admittedly, a truly wonderful human being.
This shouldn't be about Turing, but those alive today.
The pardon doesn't help those who are currently living with a criminal record, does it? The new legislation, which is pretty sure to pass, will take care of all this. Asking for Alan Turing to get a pardon now is like erecting a tribute to a murder victim while said victim is still struggling with their killer - priorities, people! Let's focus on living people still suffering from the same laws you are condemning, and get them where they should be, ok? Then we can worry about truly awesome dead guys.
Could you expand your logic, please? Should marriages be annulled if one partner spends their time doing something arguably bad to the world (like pollution, chopping down rain forests, etc.), which is bad for the human race? And if so, who gets the kid? How should the child be paid for, if the parents are now rendered bankrupt by having to repay all the tax breaks they received during marriage?
Also, it is very possible that most decent human beings, regardless of what gender or sexuality, actually care about other people. I can't speak for you, but I care, and not because it benefits me or my genes or your genes or whatever, but because humanity's pretty cool when we're not being dicks. *ahem*.
Slashdot Mirror
They "regurgitate" some searches that are given to them, voluntarily, by IE users who choose to submit their anonymous browsing activity to Microsoft. If you actually read the follow-ups to the story, you'd see it's not actually a story about anything other than people getting their facts wrong and not bothering to check.
So he's a jackass and a bully for calling out a hate-monger for being a hate-monger? That's bad? You are saying we should tolerate intolerance, which would mean we have to tolerate Dan Savage's points, and as he's running the more popular website, he should be nearer the top in rankings.
Relabelling? Hardly. It's just Google indexing sites. Clearly the "vile and childish" site is more popular than Santorum's own.
I'd say the person who put it online in a part of a website dedicated to sexualised images of children, and the site which knowingly lets that happen. Cut those two out, and the problem is gone.
It hits an added, exposed fuel line.
They do that so no errant screws or objects are left in the machinery, so when the fuel is finally put in, it functions as it should without burning everyone's face off in a brilliant flash. This is a good thing.
True. You forgot cleaning costs, though, which still doesn't make it expensive by any means.
No phone support outside of the browser? Bummer.
It's theoretically more accessible, but unless you have an interface on every device you want to access the data with, then it's not accessible at all. I'm sure you're fine with WebDAV or SSH, but most people just want an experience like Dropbox, where they can have a client on every device they own (phones, computers of all sizes, etc.), and don't need to mess around with anything to get it working.
I'm not sure if a list of disjointed, relatively-popular keywords completely without context counts as a "record".
No, as "public" is not the same as "private", hence those two words existing for quite some time.
Golf balls are usually a rather different size and shape to aircraft...
That's hardly scientific. Maybe the temperature changed, or the wind, or the driver's style, or whatever. One TV experiment does not good science make.
The only ironic thing you stated was "police brutality". The rest really isn't ironic by any stretch of the imagination.
Yet another person who doesn't know what "police state" actually means.
But jQuery has done wonders to make cross-browser JS coding ridiculously easy. You can use only the parts you want, such as the ajax stuff, and use them however you want. I don't know why you're so butt-hurt by it - did it touch you inappropriately? :)
You are comparing the best analogue performance with the worst digital performance. No wonder you came to your conclusions. If, however, we compare the actual performance encountered every day by users across the globe, digital shits all over analogue. Just as you can find a few examples of bad digital encoding, anyone who can remember using a VHS or LaserDisc player (your holiness excluded :)) can regale you with wondrous tales of ghosting; dying media; loud, clumsy players; limited media availability; and so on and so forth. It's an easy game to play.
They spend that on Pop Tarts every morning.
You pardon for someone being found guilty under a just law, and remove the conviction for an unjust law, which is what will happen when the current "protecting freedoms" act or whatever it's called gets passed. Pardoning him is like saying "yeah, he's cool, but all those other gay guys are still guilty". That's not nice.
According to...? Oh, right.
Gets the ball rolling? There's already an act in the final stages of getting passed which takes care of all of this, and a lot more. The ball's been rolling for ages, and has nearly finished its course.
So you think Alan Turing should get a pardon, while all the living folks with criminal convictions still have them? How's that fair? Why not just wait for the probable new law to come into effect, and all of this will be taken care of without any argument. Let's fix the problem with the living, then we can get all misty-eyed for who was, admittedly, a truly wonderful human being.
This shouldn't be about Turing, but those alive today.
The pardon doesn't help those who are currently living with a criminal record, does it? The new legislation, which is pretty sure to pass, will take care of all this. Asking for Alan Turing to get a pardon now is like erecting a tribute to a murder victim while said victim is still struggling with their killer - priorities, people! Let's focus on living people still suffering from the same laws you are condemning, and get them where they should be, ok? Then we can worry about truly awesome dead guys.
Could you expand your logic, please? Should marriages be annulled if one partner spends their time doing something arguably bad to the world (like pollution, chopping down rain forests, etc.), which is bad for the human race? And if so, who gets the kid? How should the child be paid for, if the parents are now rendered bankrupt by having to repay all the tax breaks they received during marriage? Also, it is very possible that most decent human beings, regardless of what gender or sexuality, actually care about other people. I can't speak for you, but I care, and not because it benefits me or my genes or your genes or whatever, but because humanity's pretty cool when we're not being dicks. *ahem*.
Apart from the actual evidence, you are right - there is no evidence.