Yeah, I wouldn't want to anyway. Would be worried about damaging the phone from my weight on it. I only use the front pocket. I used to use the skinny edge (knee) pocket when pants with those extra pockets were more popular.
A front pants pocket? Who keeps their phone in a front pants pocket?
I do. Of course I don't know a huge smartphone, so I can still fit mine in my front pants pocket and sit down comfortably with it in there and not strain the device.
Oh, and by the way, mercury is a toxic substance with pretty specific rules with respect to disposal. I doubt leaving it in an abandoned warehouse is complying with those rules.
I wasn't really arguing against you, I was more interested in hearing how you think we can to solve this without some sort of government regulations that either enact price controls, or keep the income range from the top to the bottom from being so huge.
It seems on the Right side of the political spectrum the response is workers who aren't able to make a decent living at their jobs, regardless of how hard they work, must not be competitive on the job market. A view that ignores that there aren't currently enough well-paying jobs for everyone to get one even if they were all skilled, and that there has to be somebody to do the shitty jobs out there -- and they have to live, too. It's more a fancy way of saying "I got mine, fuck them".
And people want to raise the minimum wage to $15/hour in places that don't have California's cost of living. Same thing will happen there, costs will rise sharply and mostly on goods and services provided to the lower and middle class.
So then prices will increase and we'll be in the same boat we are now -- poor people just plain not being paid enough to really make ends meet.
They will just pass this cost and its legal costs onto the consumer.
Of course they will. It's either that or they own a money printing press, right? I see this all the time: "they'll just pass the cost on to consumers". I'm at a loss to determine what you think the alternative would be.
The alternative would be to take the cost of the loss and legal costs as a hit against T-W's own profits for the quarter -- that wont happen of course, cause then it would be a punishment for the company itself (and we can't have that!). But that is how these things are meant to impact companies.
Wrong! Stop peddling that nonsense! Microsoft has repeatedly and specifically said you do not and will never have to pay a yearly subscription for Windows once you've purchased it. What it means is that there will be no more windows 'versions', that this will just be in place updates from this point.
The only problem with this is, if Microsoft is truly going to do away with system versions and move to a "rolling release" style like some other software projects -- where will they get their Windows revenue from now on?
I mean, I know they get money from system builders but if all releases will just be updates now that means Windows 10 will be the last version anyone has to buy retail. And with computers being more than powerful enough for general consumer use for years now, and Windows system requirements being rather stagnant, people aren't going to have much reason to ever buy another machine besides hardware failure of their computer.
At some point Microsoft will have to put out an update you have to pay to get -- and that's a release.
Oh. You're welcome. Of course it remains to be seen if you still thank me later. Lots of people didn't like the second part of the first series because of the change in setting, or the second series (Sword Art Online II) because then it becomes about guns.
It does seem like Tesla Motors is the only company that believes an electric car should look like a "normal full-size car,"
They don't have any other models to fall back on, so they are forced to "conservatively" design a car that is visually "acceptable" to just about everyone.
The big automakers have much more freedom to experiment with different designs>
The big automakers aren't "experimenting". Making an electric power-plant that fits their performance and mileage needs to compete is difficult so they're using the easiest target to get there -- a chassis that's the lightest and chintziest possible while still meeting safety requirements.
Look at the body style of that car, and compare to a Toyota Prius -- not a huge difference in vehicle body style. Look at that car and compare to econoboxes of old (Ford Feista) -- still a hatchback box. Just has before. Where's the "experimenting" in copying old designs for electric and high-efficiency vehicles?
Slashdot Mirror
Call me back when he doesn't have to use two crutches with the legs.
Tidal streams losslessly. What his excuse for not putting his music on there?
Maybe. A bit cellphone hipster.
At the very least maybe my problem is I don't have huge pockets -- because I don't have huge pants.
Need to start being more American-sized or wear a suit so I have an inside breast pocket to keep a smartphone in.
Yeah, I wouldn't want to anyway. Would be worried about damaging the phone from my weight on it. I only use the front pocket. I used to use the skinny edge (knee) pocket when pants with those extra pockets were more popular.
A front pants pocket? Who keeps their phone in a front pants pocket?
I do.
Of course I don't know a huge smartphone, so I can still fit mine in my front pants pocket and sit down comfortably with it in there and not strain the device.
Oh, and by the way, mercury is a toxic substance with pretty specific rules with respect to disposal. I doubt leaving it in an abandoned warehouse is complying with those rules.
Yes, a business would always dispose of things properly.
+1, Creepy
I'm shaking my head already at this headline.
I wasn't really arguing against you, I was more interested in hearing how you think we can to solve this without some sort of government regulations that either enact price controls, or keep the income range from the top to the bottom from being so huge.
It seems on the Right side of the political spectrum the response is workers who aren't able to make a decent living at their jobs, regardless of how hard they work, must not be competitive on the job market. A view that ignores that there aren't currently enough well-paying jobs for everyone to get one even if they were all skilled, and that there has to be somebody to do the shitty jobs out there -- and they have to live, too. It's more a fancy way of saying "I got mine, fuck them".
And people want to raise the minimum wage to $15/hour in places that don't have California's cost of living. Same thing will happen there, costs will rise sharply and mostly on goods and services provided to the lower and middle class.
So then prices will increase and we'll be in the same boat we are now -- poor people just plain not being paid enough to really make ends meet.
What's your solution to this problem?
They will just pass this cost and its legal costs onto the consumer.
Of course they will. It's either that or they own a money printing press, right? I see this all the time: "they'll just pass the cost on to consumers". I'm at a loss to determine what you think the alternative would be.
The alternative would be to take the cost of the loss and legal costs as a hit against T-W's own profits for the quarter -- that wont happen of course, cause then it would be a punishment for the company itself (and we can't have that!). But that is how these things are meant to impact companies.
You forgot the magic words --- copyright infringement!
Maybe because no one wants to spend money advertising on a site associated with sexist, racist, immature dudebros.
Although that's where you're most likely to find people susceptible to advertising.
Wrong! Stop peddling that nonsense! Microsoft has repeatedly and specifically said you do not and will never have to pay a yearly subscription for Windows once you've purchased it. What it means is that there will be no more windows 'versions', that this will just be in place updates from this point.
The only problem with this is, if Microsoft is truly going to do away with system versions and move to a "rolling release" style like some other software projects -- where will they get their Windows revenue from now on?
I mean, I know they get money from system builders but if all releases will just be updates now that means Windows 10 will be the last version anyone has to buy retail. And with computers being more than powerful enough for general consumer use for years now, and Windows system requirements being rather stagnant, people aren't going to have much reason to ever buy another machine besides hardware failure of their computer.
At some point Microsoft will have to put out an update you have to pay to get -- and that's a release.
I don't think there's any reason to hunt them down.
Oh. You're welcome. Of course it remains to be seen if you still thank me later. Lots of people didn't like the second part of the first series because of the change in setting, or the second series (Sword Art Online II) because then it becomes about guns.
.hack? How old-hat.
It's Sword Art Online references nowadays.
Is this a legitimate article, or are we taking Slashvertisements to a new level?
Cuba will use Chinese equipment for DSL to the home and Wifi access points.
I think we can all say that our DSL and wifi equipment is Chinese in origin. ;)
"You wouldn't steal a car, would you?"
Who here trust Cisco?
Your bank.
You bank also trusts Microsoft, so let's consider that for a moment...
Let's save ourselves from unnecessary clickbait.
It makes me so depressed... I'm going to get a big dish of ice cream.
That's the concept car, not the test car. Concept cars almost never make it to production looking like they did at the initial roll-out.
You're right. If sports car concepts are any indication, it will be even less attractive in the production version.
It does seem like Tesla Motors is the only company that believes an electric car should look like a "normal full-size car,"
They don't have any other models to fall back on, so they are forced to "conservatively" design a car that is visually "acceptable" to just about everyone.
The big automakers have much more freedom to experiment with different designs>
The big automakers aren't "experimenting". Making an electric power-plant that fits their performance and mileage needs to compete is difficult so they're using the easiest target to get there -- a chassis that's the lightest and chintziest possible while still meeting safety requirements.
Look at the body style of that car, and compare to a Toyota Prius -- not a huge difference in vehicle body style.
Look at that car and compare to econoboxes of old (Ford Feista) -- still a hatchback box. Just has before.
Where's the "experimenting" in copying old designs for electric and high-efficiency vehicles?