It's a near-universal in manufacturing that the increased labour/stock-management costs of maintaining differentiated hardware generally wipe out the savings of the cheaper components. This is why the controllers on many high-end consumer cameras are identical to those of their commercial cousins, hence all the hacks that give the consumer the commercial UI, with all its extra tweaks and controls.
Farnell and RS will simply have decided that the decreased production-line and stock-chain complexity of having two near-identical SoCs wipes out the benefit of having a slightly cheaper SoC in the cheaper model. Particularly given that in this case everyone expects the cheaper model to be in less demand....
Git is a userspace application, Tanenbaum and Torvalds disagree about the best way to design a kernel, that's a totally different topic..
That's 20th century thinking, you dinosaur. In the 21st century, you cannot disagree with someone without hating them and everything they stand for. I am now obliged to call you an idiot for disagreeing with me, or in modern parlance: "being wrong". w0t??? U iz a bag of FAIL!!!! I bet you're a communist who votes for pinkos!!!
Here, I have another solution:
Figure out how many charge backs are common in a single year. Add one to that number, call it "the C Limit". Pay pal simply states that any book that has reached it's C limit can not be paid for using Pay Pal.
But that means actual WORK has to be done by Pay Pal.
The problem is that Paypal shouldn't be tracking my purchases to that level of detail. They should be a dumb conduit, and should only be rating the merchant and purchaser in a more general sense.
The seven days and the Adam and Eve story would appear to be two distinct creation stories, as opposed to episodes within one. One could argue that Genesis should be two books -- one very short one (the seven days, aka Genesis) and a longer one (Adam and Eve and their descendants). However, you're correct in saying that the story of Adam and Eve explicitly mentions wives turning up from outside the family. The logic behind this is encoded in biblical language: a man's "seed", and women being "fertile" or "barren". The Judaic tradition appears to have viewed a child as coming from the father, and the mother being little more than an incubator. This allowed men to take women from outside the tribe but their children to still be members of that tribe. The effect of this tradition can be seen today, where an African tribe claims to be a lost tribe of Israel based on paternal heredity. Y-chromosome analysis confirms their origins, but aside from the Y chromosome, they're genetically and physically indistinguishable from neighbouring tribes.
Garbage collection with the condition that your garbage doesn't contain condoms?
Well if a hospital was to put human waste in domestic disposal they'd get closed down -- that sort of stuff goes in the incinerator. In many countries, there are rules about handling even a few drops of blood in the workplace (eg cleaning up after a nosebleed). Human semen is a potential biohazard, and there are legitimate reasons to impose secure disposal. Have I missed your point?
What about selling the christian bible? Why do they get a free pass to depict consenting (and non-consenting) non-related (and related) adults (and children) performing incest and other sexual acts.
Now obviously it's a subjective judgement, but porn is material designed to provide titillation. Nothing in the Bible is presented as a turn-on, it's all fairly dry and matter-of-fact.
And yes, many people don't understand the difference. Consider that most rape scenes and almost-raped-but-saved-at-the-last-minute scenes in mainstream TV and cinema are indeed played for titillation, and I've often felt very uncomfortable watching them. But then compare with the French film Irreversible, criticised for gratuitous sexual violence, but in fact one of the most disgustingly unerotic films ever made -- which was kind of the point. It was a conscious rejection of the graphic depiction of rape-as-erotica, not of rape-as-subject.
The deviancy in the Bible is subject, not erotica.
I installed Linux on a flash drive so that I could use the same uniform environment and files on my home PC and my netbook, and even use my work laptop for personal use when sitting in departures or a hotel room on business. So that's three different computers acting as though they're simply one computer.
I've always said the ultimate personal computer would be a pocket-sized device that could be used in multiple form-factors with various peripherals, and that anyone who needed extra "oomph" would have a desktop docking station with a faster processor that used the device as a simple disk drive.
Or perhaps a bit more -- it wouldn't take much USB bandwidth to use the phone as a touchpad and soundcard too, for example.
Actually, music itself would likely benefit greatly, just not the labels. As piracy has already demonstrated, free access to studio recordings has made the consumer perception of the value of live concerts greater. That is why ticket prices keep outpacing inflation.
Except that in the last few years, there has been a collapse in the music festivals market in the UK, with a great many going bust due to poor ticket sales, and bands going unpaid.
Anecdotally, I've personally noted a pretty good number of once free venues switching to cover charges for better known (locally) acts which are remain unsigned by major labels. At least on my personal scale, this demonstrates positive force towards greater valuation of live music.
Alternatively, it could be a sign that venue-owners are becoming increasingly risk-averse in a shrinking economy. Venues that charge for entry usually pay their acts a percentage of takings.
The very pressure of reduced prices and increased availability forces authors to review their peer / competition work and produce something better.
The very pressure of zero price and universal availability forces authors to review their career and go and do something they'll get paid for instead....
Has it occurred to you that I just hate the entrenched view of 'us' versus 'them'?
If that is your problem, they you have again missed your own point, because your entire argument is "us and them".
Take this example:
Still, feel free to be ignorant, isolated, bigoted and small-minded. Seems to fit well with the Scottish Nationalist cadre, but please, don't pretend you represent the kind, generous, friendly and engaging majority living in Scotland.
IE. anyone who supports Scottish independence is "them": ignorant, isolated, small-minded bigots. Anyone who doesn't support independence is therefore "us", who are presumably broad-minded, well-educated and tolerant. Except one of your "us" (ie yourself) just started swearing at me and insulting me with a broad generalisation.
Now, as a quintilingual working towards my fourth degree with mixed Scottish, Irish and English ancestry and having worked in Scotland, Ireland, England, Wales and Spain, as well as visiting every country in Western Europe except Portugal, I wonder how anyone would mistake me for being ignorant, isolated or small-minded. Such a view would be rather ignorant, isolated, bigoted and small-minded, if you ask me.
The simple and necessary action (reviewing, confirming, and releasing the video) was done very shortly after we became aware of the issue -- several hours ago.
Too little, too late. The fact that you were not "aware of the issue" earlier is the problem. The fact that you were not aware of it shows that your systems or procedures issued a notice in response to the OP's appeal. That response claimed that you had reviewed the video. However, the nature of the response proves that you had not. This is fraud, and you should have procedures in place to prevent corporate fraud -- it's a simple question of good governance.
Your company's mission is one that many people would support, but actions like this generate ill will. In my reckoning, the source of the problem is that your business plan is impossible to execute within the financial constraints of your chosen revenue stream -- ie. YouTube doesn't pay enough per play for you to be able to afford enough staff to review videos.
The problem, then, is YouTube, but what can you say, because even though they don't pay enough for the workload they generate, they're your main source of income.
So as I've said all along, YouTube is a leech, making money off everyone and hiding behind the "mere conduit" defense while marketing their brand to the hilt.
I'm also willing to venture that after going through the figleaf of a process of he-said, she-said, he-said, that there is little recourse
There is only the courts. The OP now has written evidence of fraud. When the automatic system gave Rumblefish credit, YouTube and Rumblefish had plausible deniability -- "it was a computer error" -- case closed. But now they have claimed to have looked at it, and made a decision. They've forked themselves: it's either fraud because they've claimed to listen to something but haven't, or it's fraud because they've listened to something that clearly isn't theirs and claimed it's theirs.
Unfortunately, because this is yet another "small target", it's individually hardly worth taking to court. But given that it happens again and again and again, something needs to be done.
Both YouTube and Rumblefish need taken to court. We need an injunction against YouTube that obliges them to stop allowing "bad faith" claims from the likes of Rumblefish, effectively forcing them to re-evaluate such claimants if there is a significant volume of challenges (with threat of higher penalties than otherwise) and we need someone from Rumblefish thrown in jail for fraud, extortion and racketeering.
Excluding attempts at avante garde experimentation, scenes in well written stories are told from a single character's point of view (POV in writer slang). The POV character may vary from scene to scene, but sometimes a writer deliberately breaks up a scene so he can show it from a different character's POV, but if he does it too often it becomes disconcerting. It's called "head hopping"; the author using his control of the narration to repeatedly jerk readers' consciousness out of one character's head and insert it into another. However if the *reader* were able to choose at will, he could switch POV when it seemed natural to him, or when he was sick of being in one of the characters' head.
How, then, would the author control the supply of information? If the reader choses to "head hop" to a character that's not listening when a vital clue is given, the reader's understanding of the story is destroyed.
In Fiction, yes, the authors have slacked off a bit. Done right it becomes Dragon's Lair or Choose Your Own Adventure. We're still locked into the classical style from inertia by the big media companies that don't want to do any work to package 6 endings into a book.
It's not inertia, it's art. While a truly good piece of interactive fiction would be a sign of unsurpassed mastery of literary technique, it doesn't fulfill the artist's main goal: to create a work, to tell a story.
A story with no single plot is destined to be forgotten, as each alternative ending obscures the memory of every other one.
No surprise. What else would one expect from an authoritarian police state? That's what the UK has become, with the US hot on it's heels in a race to see which country can remove the most privacy, rights, & freedoms from their citizens the fastest.
It's what has always happened throughout history when a government grows too large and powerful. But of course, anyone suggesting smaller government in either nation is painted as a lunatic-fringe extremist that hates the poor, and is probably a racist to boot.
Sorry, I don't think you understand the UK at all. The UK does not have "big government". Most industry is completely unregulated, except by "voluntary codes", and there's no punishment for breaking a "voluntary code". All public utilities are long-since privatised, and when UK banks failed and needed a government bailout, there was no talk of "nationalisation" -- instead the government simply bought shares and leaves the board to make all the decisions.
The current government is currently dismantling state education and healthcare, selling off bits and bobs and giving independent companies a blank cheque to "provide services".
There are very many people who want us to believe that "authoritarianism" and "big government" are synonymous, but they most certainly are not.
Trust me, I'd actually vote for an independent Scotland so that the fucking Scots can't keep voting for anti-English policies. Then I'll claim dual citizenship because - get this - I'm fucking British, not English, not Scottish, not Irish, not Welsh. I have an equal right to live, work and fuck anywhere in the United Kingdom and I will retain that right.
You have spectacularly missed your own point. You object to other people's self-image: because it clashes with your own self-image, you consider it an imposition. Your reaction? To assert your own self-image at the cost of others' self-image. Which is itself an imposition.
Furthermore, while you deny the existence of "Scottishness", you simultaneously show disdain for Scottish people -- "the fucking Scots". This is actually the core of the problem that many Scottish people have with the very concept of "Britishness": that all too often it is exclusive of the plurality of Britishnesses. Things that are particularly English, or specific to certain English regions, are considered "British", but things that are particularly Welsh or Scottish tend never to be accepted as British. So while something might be "as British as Lancashire hotpot and Yorkshire pudding", nothing would ever be described as "as British as a male-voice coliery choir sitting down to a plate of haggis".
Britishness is imposed upon Scotland, and we don't like someone else telling us who we are.
Meanwhile, the rest of the world speaks a common language and looks on you with contempt.
Well, you should get studying again, because the world's common language is American English. It's not all that different from what you speak, but given how vociferously you defend your self-identity, it's probably going to be very hard for you to write colorize, even just a couple times.
The laws vary by state. Are you saying that in the UK you can hop a fence and it's not a crime? In my state, you cannot.
There are two different legal systems in the UK. Scottish law does have an offence called "entering lockfast premises". So it's illegal to bypass a barrier and enter an otherwise-secured area.
Entering someone's house/building without authorisation is a criminal offence, but you cannot be taken to court for this alone. It can only be presented on a charge sheet with another crime. If you break a window or door to get in, it's chargeable. If you walk in and punch someone, it's chargeable. If you walk in and steal a TV. It's chargeable. But if you walk in and walk out, it's not chargeable.
Yes, and as cyber-vandal was discussing the EDL and the BNP, it's a fair assumption that he's probably English. Which makes his use of the US term [market] liberalism (as a euphemism for a free-market capitalism, as opposed to the traditional meaning of individual freedom) even more of a sign of ignorance.
Flamebait? For comparing a right-wing xenophobe who uses minorities as scapegoats (Geert) to the Nazis? And when the previous poster had already introduced the comparison? I'm guessing the people who moderated me down are right-wing bigots themselves, then.
Dr. Shechner did take those rules into account, but he pointed out (correctly) that while most people habitually suspend disbelief in campy action scenes, it is self-evident that in this case, people could not suspend their disbelief. Crashing a plane is a "peril", and while jumping out in a rubber life-raft is ridiculous, it's escaping peril. Ditto for escaping a rolling ball of rock in a mine cart.
But a nuclear bomb is not a peril, it's not a joke, it is sheer, guaranteed, total obliteration. It is a fiery certain death, and modern consciousness doesn't accept that you can bodge your way out of it. Popular culture has often allowed you to cheat certain death, even to the point of literally playing dice with the devil (or in Bill and Ted's case, Battleships and Twister). But not The Bomb. The Bomb is final.
Yeah, Nordic countries can't compete because they've banned the whip and insisted that people are treated at least a little better than caged hens.
Nordic operations are generally very efficient and effective. Why? Because overworked, overtired, overstressed workers make mistakes. Nordic labour laws go a long way to preventing people becoming overworked, overtired or overstressed. So Nordic workers make less mistakes.
Pay peanuts, get monkeys. Do you want your data centre run by monkeys?
Slashdot Mirror
It's a near-universal in manufacturing that the increased labour/stock-management costs of maintaining differentiated hardware generally wipe out the savings of the cheaper components. This is why the controllers on many high-end consumer cameras are identical to those of their commercial cousins, hence all the hacks that give the consumer the commercial UI, with all its extra tweaks and controls.
Farnell and RS will simply have decided that the decreased production-line and stock-chain complexity of having two near-identical SoCs wipes out the benefit of having a slightly cheaper SoC in the cheaper model. Particularly given that in this case everyone expects the cheaper model to be in less demand....
Git is a userspace application, Tanenbaum and Torvalds disagree about the best way to design a kernel, that's a totally different topic..
That's 20th century thinking, you dinosaur. In the 21st century, you cannot disagree with someone without hating them and everything they stand for. I am now obliged to call you an idiot for disagreeing with me, or in modern parlance: "being wrong". w0t??? U iz a bag of FAIL!!!! I bet you're a communist who votes for pinkos!!!
Welcome to the Century of the Misanthrope.
Here, I have another solution: Figure out how many charge backs are common in a single year. Add one to that number, call it "the C Limit". Pay pal simply states that any book that has reached it's C limit can not be paid for using Pay Pal.
But that means actual WORK has to be done by Pay Pal.
The problem is that Paypal shouldn't be tracking my purchases to that level of detail. They should be a dumb conduit, and should only be rating the merchant and purchaser in a more general sense.
The seven days and the Adam and Eve story would appear to be two distinct creation stories, as opposed to episodes within one. One could argue that Genesis should be two books -- one very short one (the seven days, aka Genesis) and a longer one (Adam and Eve and their descendants). However, you're correct in saying that the story of Adam and Eve explicitly mentions wives turning up from outside the family. The logic behind this is encoded in biblical language: a man's "seed", and women being "fertile" or "barren". The Judaic tradition appears to have viewed a child as coming from the father, and the mother being little more than an incubator. This allowed men to take women from outside the tribe but their children to still be members of that tribe. The effect of this tradition can be seen today, where an African tribe claims to be a lost tribe of Israel based on paternal heredity. Y-chromosome analysis confirms their origins, but aside from the Y chromosome, they're genetically and physically indistinguishable from neighbouring tribes.
Garbage collection with the condition that your garbage doesn't contain condoms?
Well if a hospital was to put human waste in domestic disposal they'd get closed down -- that sort of stuff goes in the incinerator. In many countries, there are rules about handling even a few drops of blood in the workplace (eg cleaning up after a nosebleed). Human semen is a potential biohazard, and there are legitimate reasons to impose secure disposal. Have I missed your point?
What about selling the christian bible? Why do they get a free pass to depict consenting (and non-consenting) non-related (and related) adults (and children) performing incest and other sexual acts.
Now obviously it's a subjective judgement, but porn is material designed to provide titillation. Nothing in the Bible is presented as a turn-on, it's all fairly dry and matter-of-fact.
And yes, many people don't understand the difference. Consider that most rape scenes and almost-raped-but-saved-at-the-last-minute scenes in mainstream TV and cinema are indeed played for titillation, and I've often felt very uncomfortable watching them. But then compare with the French film Irreversible, criticised for gratuitous sexual violence, but in fact one of the most disgustingly unerotic films ever made -- which was kind of the point. It was a conscious rejection of the graphic depiction of rape-as-erotica, not of rape-as-subject.
The deviancy in the Bible is subject, not erotica.
But now I'm bursting for a wee-wee*, so don't expect much activity on /. in the next few minutes....
* We don't want Paypal objecting about bad language now, do we?
My answer to that is fairly simple.
I installed Linux on a flash drive so that I could use the same uniform environment and files on my home PC and my netbook, and even use my work laptop for personal use when sitting in departures or a hotel room on business. So that's three different computers acting as though they're simply one computer.
I've always said the ultimate personal computer would be a pocket-sized device that could be used in multiple form-factors with various peripherals, and that anyone who needed extra "oomph" would have a desktop docking station with a faster processor that used the device as a simple disk drive.
Or perhaps a bit more -- it wouldn't take much USB bandwidth to use the phone as a touchpad and soundcard too, for example.
No true slashdotter would be so rude.
Actually, music itself would likely benefit greatly, just not the labels. As piracy has already demonstrated, free access to studio recordings has made the consumer perception of the value of live concerts greater. That is why ticket prices keep outpacing inflation.
Except that in the last few years, there has been a collapse in the music festivals market in the UK, with a great many going bust due to poor ticket sales, and bands going unpaid.
Anecdotally, I've personally noted a pretty good number of once free venues switching to cover charges for better known (locally) acts which are remain unsigned by major labels. At least on my personal scale, this demonstrates positive force towards greater valuation of live music.
Alternatively, it could be a sign that venue-owners are becoming increasingly risk-averse in a shrinking economy. Venues that charge for entry usually pay their acts a percentage of takings.
The very pressure of reduced prices and increased availability forces authors to review their peer / competition work and produce something better.
The very pressure of zero price and universal availability forces authors to review their career and go and do something they'll get paid for instead....
Has it occurred to you that I just hate the entrenched view of 'us' versus 'them'?
If that is your problem, they you have again missed your own point, because your entire argument is "us and them".
Take this example:
Still, feel free to be ignorant, isolated, bigoted and small-minded. Seems to fit well with the Scottish Nationalist cadre, but please, don't pretend you represent the kind, generous, friendly and engaging majority living in Scotland.
IE. anyone who supports Scottish independence is "them": ignorant, isolated, small-minded bigots. Anyone who doesn't support independence is therefore "us", who are presumably broad-minded, well-educated and tolerant. Except one of your "us" (ie yourself) just started swearing at me and insulting me with a broad generalisation.
Now, as a quintilingual working towards my fourth degree with mixed Scottish, Irish and English ancestry and having worked in Scotland, Ireland, England, Wales and Spain, as well as visiting every country in Western Europe except Portugal, I wonder how anyone would mistake me for being ignorant, isolated or small-minded. Such a view would be rather ignorant, isolated, bigoted and small-minded, if you ask me.
The simple and necessary action (reviewing, confirming, and releasing the video) was done very shortly after we became aware of the issue -- several hours ago.
Too little, too late. The fact that you were not "aware of the issue" earlier is the problem. The fact that you were not aware of it shows that your systems or procedures issued a notice in response to the OP's appeal. That response claimed that you had reviewed the video. However, the nature of the response proves that you had not. This is fraud, and you should have procedures in place to prevent corporate fraud -- it's a simple question of good governance.
Your company's mission is one that many people would support, but actions like this generate ill will. In my reckoning, the source of the problem is that your business plan is impossible to execute within the financial constraints of your chosen revenue stream -- ie. YouTube doesn't pay enough per play for you to be able to afford enough staff to review videos.
The problem, then, is YouTube, but what can you say, because even though they don't pay enough for the workload they generate, they're your main source of income.
So as I've said all along, YouTube is a leech, making money off everyone and hiding behind the "mere conduit" defense while marketing their brand to the hilt.
I'm also willing to venture that after going through the figleaf of a process of he-said, she-said, he-said, that there is little recourse
There is only the courts. The OP now has written evidence of fraud. When the automatic system gave Rumblefish credit, YouTube and Rumblefish had plausible deniability -- "it was a computer error" -- case closed. But now they have claimed to have looked at it, and made a decision. They've forked themselves: it's either fraud because they've claimed to listen to something but haven't, or it's fraud because they've listened to something that clearly isn't theirs and claimed it's theirs.
Unfortunately, because this is yet another "small target", it's individually hardly worth taking to court. But given that it happens again and again and again, something needs to be done.
Both YouTube and Rumblefish need taken to court. We need an injunction against YouTube that obliges them to stop allowing "bad faith" claims from the likes of Rumblefish, effectively forcing them to re-evaluate such claimants if there is a significant volume of challenges (with threat of higher penalties than otherwise) and we need someone from Rumblefish thrown in jail for fraud, extortion and racketeering.
Excluding attempts at avante garde experimentation, scenes in well written stories are told from a single character's point of view (POV in writer slang). The POV character may vary from scene to scene, but sometimes a writer deliberately breaks up a scene so he can show it from a different character's POV, but if he does it too often it becomes disconcerting. It's called "head hopping"; the author using his control of the narration to repeatedly jerk readers' consciousness out of one character's head and insert it into another. However if the *reader* were able to choose at will, he could switch POV when it seemed natural to him, or when he was sick of being in one of the characters' head.
How, then, would the author control the supply of information? If the reader choses to "head hop" to a character that's not listening when a vital clue is given, the reader's understanding of the story is destroyed.
In Fiction, yes, the authors have slacked off a bit. Done right it becomes Dragon's Lair or Choose Your Own Adventure. We're still locked into the classical style from inertia by the big media companies that don't want to do any work to package 6 endings into a book.
It's not inertia, it's art. While a truly good piece of interactive fiction would be a sign of unsurpassed mastery of literary technique, it doesn't fulfill the artist's main goal: to create a work, to tell a story.
A story with no single plot is destined to be forgotten, as each alternative ending obscures the memory of every other one.
No surprise. What else would one expect from an authoritarian police state? That's what the UK has become, with the US hot on it's heels in a race to see which country can remove the most privacy, rights, & freedoms from their citizens the fastest.
It's what has always happened throughout history when a government grows too large and powerful. But of course, anyone suggesting smaller government in either nation is painted as a lunatic-fringe extremist that hates the poor, and is probably a racist to boot.
Sorry, I don't think you understand the UK at all. The UK does not have "big government". Most industry is completely unregulated, except by "voluntary codes", and there's no punishment for breaking a "voluntary code". All public utilities are long-since privatised, and when UK banks failed and needed a government bailout, there was no talk of "nationalisation" -- instead the government simply bought shares and leaves the board to make all the decisions.
The current government is currently dismantling state education and healthcare, selling off bits and bobs and giving independent companies a blank cheque to "provide services".
There are very many people who want us to believe that "authoritarianism" and "big government" are synonymous, but they most certainly are not.
Trust me, I'd actually vote for an independent Scotland so that the fucking Scots can't keep voting for anti-English policies. Then I'll claim dual citizenship because - get this - I'm fucking British, not English, not Scottish, not Irish, not Welsh. I have an equal right to live, work and fuck anywhere in the United Kingdom and I will retain that right.
You have spectacularly missed your own point. You object to other people's self-image: because it clashes with your own self-image, you consider it an imposition. Your reaction? To assert your own self-image at the cost of others' self-image. Which is itself an imposition.
Furthermore, while you deny the existence of "Scottishness", you simultaneously show disdain for Scottish people -- "the fucking Scots". This is actually the core of the problem that many Scottish people have with the very concept of "Britishness": that all too often it is exclusive of the plurality of Britishnesses. Things that are particularly English, or specific to certain English regions, are considered "British", but things that are particularly Welsh or Scottish tend never to be accepted as British. So while something might be "as British as Lancashire hotpot and Yorkshire pudding", nothing would ever be described as "as British as a male-voice coliery choir sitting down to a plate of haggis".
Britishness is imposed upon Scotland, and we don't like someone else telling us who we are.
Meanwhile, the rest of the world speaks a common language and looks on you with contempt.
Well, you should get studying again, because the world's common language is American English. It's not all that different from what you speak, but given how vociferously you defend your self-identity, it's probably going to be very hard for you to write colorize, even just a couple times.
The laws vary by state. Are you saying that in the UK you can hop a fence and it's not a crime? In my state, you cannot.
There are two different legal systems in the UK. Scottish law does have an offence called "entering lockfast premises". So it's illegal to bypass a barrier and enter an otherwise-secured area.
Entering someone's house/building without authorisation is a criminal offence, but you cannot be taken to court for this alone. It can only be presented on a charge sheet with another crime. If you break a window or door to get in, it's chargeable. If you walk in and punch someone, it's chargeable. If you walk in and steal a TV. It's chargeable. But if you walk in and walk out, it's not chargeable.
Yes, and as cyber-vandal was discussing the EDL and the BNP, it's a fair assumption that he's probably English. Which makes his use of the US term [market] liberalism (as a euphemism for a free-market capitalism, as opposed to the traditional meaning of individual freedom) even more of a sign of ignorance.
If Apple were a Scandinavian company, the phrase "holding it wrong" would never have entered our vocabulary.
Flamebait? For comparing a right-wing xenophobe who uses minorities as scapegoats (Geert) to the Nazis? And when the previous poster had already introduced the comparison? I'm guessing the people who moderated me down are right-wing bigots themselves, then.
Google is your friend. Give him all your data to look after.
But a nuclear bomb is not a peril, it's not a joke, it is sheer, guaranteed, total obliteration. It is a fiery certain death, and modern consciousness doesn't accept that you can bodge your way out of it. Popular culture has often allowed you to cheat certain death, even to the point of literally playing dice with the devil (or in Bill and Ted's case, Battleships and Twister). But not The Bomb. The Bomb is final.
Yeah, Nordic countries can't compete because they've banned the whip and insisted that people are treated at least a little better than caged hens.
Nordic operations are generally very efficient and effective. Why? Because overworked, overtired, overstressed workers make mistakes. Nordic labour laws go a long way to preventing people becoming overworked, overtired or overstressed. So Nordic workers make less mistakes.
Pay peanuts, get monkeys. Do you want your data centre run by monkeys?
(c)2012 Technology Management for Dummies