I can guarantee that there are firemen that are off-duty but that are still paged when there's an emergency. Being an off-duty fireman means that you're not reliable during that period but if there's an emergency (9/11 anyone?), you can bet they'll try to call you in immediately. If you fail to respond, nothing happens. If you respond and go to work, you might save some lives.
Fire doesn't give a shit about the firemen's schedule and criminals try to take advantage of the policemen's schedule. When there's a REAL emergency, I doubt they won't bother to call in off-duty workers.
What about legitimate phone calls? If I was working in a prison (guard / janitor / warden / whatever), I wouldn't like to know that my phone is being sniffed. There are many situations when you need to have a mobile phone with you while you're in prison (visiting lawyer). How can you prove that the trackers won't be easily fine-tuned to listen to phone calls in the near-by area? There will always be idiots that will want to tune in on the neighborhood and there might be important companies around prisons where a no-signal is A LOT cheaper than someone finding out secret conversations. What if these sniffers are portable and someone takes them out of the prison and moves them next to an important government facility or company hq and listens to their conversations?
That being said, I think a jam is less bad than listening to conversations.
cout >> "I have no patience to program anything useful and I hate having to write code";
You're right about this one, because you got the operator wrong:
cout << "I have no patience to program anything useful and I hate having to write code";
I guess I was wrong in the first place:)
No, they were pegged because of this: for a while, Internet Explorer was actually part of the operating system. Many parts of windows would simply NOT function if you removed Internet Explorer. The core of IE is also used in many places by MS products, including Windows Help for example. Basically, they bullied their way into the browser market by forcing everyone who had Windows to have IE on their computers. The case has been settled, unfortunately.
I agree to the mods, this theory sounds quite interesting. Could you please cite some sources (preferably more than one; Wikipedia doesn't count) which support this? P.S. I'm serious, let me know where you've found the theories to support this one, no sarcasm intended!
Of course, we're talking about a company here, but I was bitching to the idea that I can't see how an entity can act upon another entity's property without a search warrant, when the prior is not some form of police organization (police, FBI, etc) recognized by the government and the latter is the rightful owner of that entire property, in any form of democracy. This is pretty common in communism.
This case is so far from the usual copyright bitching of the RIAA that it doesn't smell like anything besides stupidity.
As long as the cars can be seen in public, it's legal to take pictures of them and make the pictures public. Something similar has been previously discussed (I don't remember the exact story now) and someone pointed out a link to the photographer's rights. Basically, you can take pictures of the inside of the store as long as the owner doesn't tell you to stop doing that and you have the right to publish the pictures you have taken before you have been told to stop. With cars, it's even better. They're public domain. It's my car, therefore I can sell it, I can take pictures of it, I can do whatever I want with it. They didn't loan me the right to drive around with their product.
In the names of all the gods, this is similar to a story about King Solomon: there was a guy who borrowed a donkey from someone, in exchange for money; the owner saw this person sitting by the donkey in the afternoon, hiding from the sun in it's shadow and sued the person because he only borrowed the donkey, he didn't say anything about the shadow. This isn't about donkeys, it's about cars and as long as I own anything, I can do whatever I want with it or anything related to it, such as the manual or the paint - even drive it into a wall if it's a car - because it's MY property. Next thing, they're going to sue people who wreck their cars because they give the company a bad image.
Basically, they said they're just recommending you the same things you can find on this page and saying that the Attorney General didn't care about their happy customers (which have no idea that they got just a few tips for thousands of dollars). To me, that's like being charged for stealing and saying "But why won't you listen to other people I've come in contact with, because I never stole from them? I'm also confident that I don't steal, either and I really believe myself!"
You forgot to add, a simple book on the common cold is bigger than the encyclopaedia of SEO. Besides, regarding what the GP said, this isn't about mom&pops learning SEO, it's about whoever builds the websites learning SEO. When you make a website (we're talking about complex pages here, not just a Dreamweaver family page), you already have basic HTML, CSS, JavaScript knowledge. If this was about a personal static page and you wanted it to rank up in search engines, then I'd agree: you don't know anything about the web and any "SEO expert" that promises anything should be shot in the balls.
My point is (yes, I have a point) that if you have more than just a Dreamweaver site, you can't learn about SEO and anyone promising anything is clearly a scam. If you have something more complex, you can learn about SEO yourself and you don't need to pay a single cent to anyone for this. Now if I was sick, I'd have tons and tons of background information to learn about medical procedures before I'd try anything I'd read. Besides, we're talking about do-it-yourself stuff here. If this was about online information gathering, you clearly can't trust that in the medical world because it's extremely difficult to validate someone as a knowledgeable person and you should go see a doctor who has a diploma and has been recognized by people you trust (*cough*) as an expert in the medical field. When it comes to SEO, there is no high authority to validate these companies/individuals.
In my search for SEO, I've discovered that the following are the most important things you should take into account:
Don't use frames/iframes/tables for design. Use DIVs.
Don't use Ajax for anything you want the search engine to index.
Make sure all your pages can be reached by links, not by forms.
Use common sense - don't try to hide text or add text, use alt attributes for images, etc.
Make sure you enjoy looking at your own website.
Use common sense.
Why would you need an expert to TELL you to do that? If they were doing it themselves, then I'd agree: you're lazy or don't have the time and you're paying someone to redesign your website but that would be a web designer who has the skills to take the above into account, not a SEO expert.
My BIOS takes just over one minute! It wastes exactly 30 seconds looking for for IDE drives, twice. Once in POST and once just before boot. And I can't change that in the BIOS settings. And yes, I've got the latest update. And no, the mobo isn't really new, it's a few years old. And yes, it's ASUS.
I'd be happier if they'd fix that instead of coming up with this kind of trash. They aren't booting Windows in four seconds. The boot process takes place at shutdown, therefore it takes four seconds to restore Windows to the state it was after it booted after you asked it to shut down (yeah, I know, it's confusing). Their boot is really just a part of the whole boot process.
Sometimes you just want to keep something a secret because you don't want obscure off-shore companies to reproduce whatever you've patented on a boat in international waters and then compete with you.
No, because it already exists and it's common knowledge; it's been around for too long. For example, I doubt you could patent the hammer or drinking from bottles.
Who the hell doesn't know their math? The parent is right. 30 days non-stop is ten times more: it's 2,592,000 seconds which makes it 2.47 TB if you were to go non-stop at 1 MB/sec. Mods: Please remove the Flamebait mark from the parent or go back to 5th grade and study some math.
If you want to reach 250 GB in 30 days, you'd have to use 1 MB/sec for 2h 22min every day which is 8.33 GB every day. That's almost two DVDs/day. Who has enough time to download and watch two whole movies every day probably has enough money to pay for going over 250 GB.
Honestly, I'm expecting comments to smash my last paragraph. What could you do with more than 8 GB per day?
You should be modded funny for the way you've said that.
It's "a bit harsh to ban other games" ?
Where have you been? It's awfully wrong to ban you from playing anything if you haven't broken the rules of the game. Just because I once said "your face looks like poop" to my uncle doesn't mean I shouldn't be allowed to play hopscotch with my friends after I drew the court!
Slashdot Mirror
I can guarantee that there are firemen that are off-duty but that are still paged when there's an emergency. Being an off-duty fireman means that you're not reliable during that period but if there's an emergency (9/11 anyone?), you can bet they'll try to call you in immediately. If you fail to respond, nothing happens. If you respond and go to work, you might save some lives.
Fire doesn't give a shit about the firemen's schedule and criminals try to take advantage of the policemen's schedule. When there's a REAL emergency, I doubt they won't bother to call in off-duty workers.
What about legitimate phone calls? If I was working in a prison (guard / janitor / warden / whatever), I wouldn't like to know that my phone is being sniffed. There are many situations when you need to have a mobile phone with you while you're in prison (visiting lawyer). How can you prove that the trackers won't be easily fine-tuned to listen to phone calls in the near-by area? There will always be idiots that will want to tune in on the neighborhood and there might be important companies around prisons where a no-signal is A LOT cheaper than someone finding out secret conversations. What if these sniffers are portable and someone takes them out of the prison and moves them next to an important government facility or company hq and listens to their conversations?
That being said, I think a jam is less bad than listening to conversations.
But who would want a Safari or a Fire Fox? What the devil is a Chrome? Let's just Explore the Internet.
You can put as many browsers as you want, just make sure you name them right so the people will know what to use.
Now we just need to get some "volunteers" to get on a spaceship...
I propose that we send all first posters!
cout >> "I have no patience to program anything useful and I hate having to write code";
You're right about this one, because you got the operator wrong: :)
cout << "I have no patience to program anything useful and I hate having to write code";
I guess I was wrong in the first place
I like your style...
4. (see #3)
6. (see #4)
Lemme guess, you're one of those assembly or BASIC programmer who enjoys his jmp/goto commands?
I just love how easy it is to spot computer programmers when they're trying to make their point.
No, they were pegged because of this: for a while, Internet Explorer was actually part of the operating system. Many parts of windows would simply NOT function if you removed Internet Explorer. The core of IE is also used in many places by MS products, including Windows Help for example. Basically, they bullied their way into the browser market by forcing everyone who had Windows to have IE on their computers. The case has been settled, unfortunately.
I agree to the mods, this theory sounds quite interesting. Could you please cite some sources (preferably more than one; Wikipedia doesn't count) which support this?
P.S. I'm serious, let me know where you've found the theories to support this one, no sarcasm intended!
Thanks,
Tom
You've posted in the wrong Universe, silly!
Of course, we're talking about a company here, but I was bitching to the idea that I can't see how an entity can act upon another entity's property without a search warrant, when the prior is not some form of police organization (police, FBI, etc) recognized by the government and the latter is the rightful owner of that entire property, in any form of democracy. This is pretty common in communism.
This case is so far from the usual copyright bitching of the RIAA that it doesn't smell like anything besides stupidity.
- dword
As long as the cars can be seen in public, it's legal to take pictures of them and make the pictures public. Something similar has been previously discussed (I don't remember the exact story now) and someone pointed out a link to the photographer's rights. Basically, you can take pictures of the inside of the store as long as the owner doesn't tell you to stop doing that and you have the right to publish the pictures you have taken before you have been told to stop. With cars, it's even better. They're public domain. It's my car, therefore I can sell it, I can take pictures of it, I can do whatever I want with it. They didn't loan me the right to drive around with their product.
In the names of all the gods, this is similar to a story about King Solomon: there was a guy who borrowed a donkey from someone, in exchange for money; the owner saw this person sitting by the donkey in the afternoon, hiding from the sun in it's shadow and sued the person because he only borrowed the donkey, he didn't say anything about the shadow. This isn't about donkeys, it's about cars and as long as I own anything, I can do whatever I want with it or anything related to it, such as the manual or the paint - even drive it into a wall if it's a car - because it's MY property. Next thing, they're going to sue people who wreck their cars because they give the company a bad image.
It's MY property! Hear that, communism?
Actually, have you searched on Google for google seo? Try this link: http://www.google.com/search?rls=ig&hl=en&q=google+seo+tools&btnG=Google+Search&aq=2&oq=google+seo
I've bothered to ask this question to the Visible.net SEO company and they've bothered to reply on their blog.
Basically, they said they're just recommending you the same things you can find on this page and saying that the Attorney General didn't care about their happy customers (which have no idea that they got just a few tips for thousands of dollars). To me, that's like being charged for stealing and saying "But why won't you listen to other people I've come in contact with, because I never stole from them? I'm also confident that I don't steal, either and I really believe myself!"
My point is (yes, I have a point) that if you have more than just a Dreamweaver site, you can't learn about SEO and anyone promising anything is clearly a scam. If you have something more complex, you can learn about SEO yourself and you don't need to pay a single cent to anyone for this. Now if I was sick, I'd have tons and tons of background information to learn about medical procedures before I'd try anything I'd read. Besides, we're talking about do-it-yourself stuff here. If this was about online information gathering, you clearly can't trust that in the medical world because it's extremely difficult to validate someone as a knowledgeable person and you should go see a doctor who has a diploma and has been recognized by people you trust (*cough*) as an expert in the medical field. When it comes to SEO, there is no high authority to validate these companies/individuals.
In my search for SEO, I've discovered that the following are the most important things you should take into account:
Why would you need an expert to TELL you to do that? If they were doing it themselves, then I'd agree: you're lazy or don't have the time and you're paying someone to redesign your website but that would be a web designer who has the skills to take the above into account, not a SEO expert.
Yeah, big deal that someone stole something you did.
My BIOS takes just over one minute! It wastes exactly 30 seconds looking for for IDE drives, twice. Once in POST and once just before boot. And I can't change that in the BIOS settings. And yes, I've got the latest update. And no, the mobo isn't really new, it's a few years old. And yes, it's ASUS.
I'd be happier if they'd fix that instead of coming up with this kind of trash. They aren't booting Windows in four seconds. The boot process takes place at shutdown, therefore it takes four seconds to restore Windows to the state it was after it booted after you asked it to shut down (yeah, I know, it's confusing). Their boot is really just a part of the whole boot process.
I have worked for a large utility and now work for a turbine manufacturer
God will strike you all down! (I have worked for Zeus and now work for Jehovah).
(yet, your mathematics seem to be right)
It could be that they're supporting intelligent design.
It's almost musical. In an avant-garde sort of way.
+1 UserIsHigh
the correct response is neither yes or no.
Thank you, Captain Obvious!
Sometimes you just want to keep something a secret because you don't want obscure off-shore companies to reproduce whatever you've patented on a boat in international waters and then compete with you.
No, because it already exists and it's common knowledge; it's been around for too long. For example, I doubt you could patent the hammer or drinking from bottles.
You should spend more time reading Slashdot, you've missed a lot in the past few months!
Who the hell doesn't know their math? The parent is right. 30 days non-stop is ten times more: it's 2,592,000 seconds which makes it 2.47 TB if you were to go non-stop at 1 MB/sec. Mods: Please remove the Flamebait mark from the parent or go back to 5th grade and study some math.
If you want to reach 250 GB in 30 days, you'd have to use 1 MB/sec for 2h 22min every day which is 8.33 GB every day. That's almost two DVDs/day. Who has enough time to download and watch two whole movies every day probably has enough money to pay for going over 250 GB.
Honestly, I'm expecting comments to smash my last paragraph. What could you do with more than 8 GB per day?
You should be modded funny for the way you've said that.
It's "a bit harsh to ban other games" ?
Where have you been? It's awfully wrong to ban you from playing anything if you haven't broken the rules of the game. Just because I once said "your face looks like poop" to my uncle doesn't mean I shouldn't be allowed to play hopscotch with my friends after I drew the court!