A friend of mine was swimming in a lake in the eighties and some ball lightening appeared.
That's not ball lightening, that's just shrinkage. Happens to men when they're swimming all the time. Usually not when the water's in the eighties though.
The cellular customer service reps are trained to state that it is a "one time only courtesy" any time they credit an account. I know this from very recent dealings with both T-Mobile and Cingular. Nobody else can insist upon receiving the same refund because their circumstances are not exactly the same, and because a "courtesy" refund is not an admission that the billing was incorrect.
Also I have a recommendation to anyone who has been unable to settle a grievance with a cellular service company. Send them a letter. An honest to God paper, snail-mail letter. Explain your problem as objectively as possible, mention your failed phone or e-mail based attempts to get it settled, and offer to file complaints with the BBB and the FCC if you don't receive proper assistance. This worked wonders for me with T-mobile. The 20 minutes it took to write that letter were far better spent than the hours I wasted on hold, being transferred between reps (each requiring a brand new explanation), and performing pointless troubleshooting steps with my phone. E-mail is worthless for this sort of problem with companies this large. You will receive an auto response every time. A real human will read your paper letter and will almost certainly respond.
The Opera comment is probably a reference to the Ubuntu forum post reached with the "detailed descriptions" hyperlink in the Slashdot summary. The relevant portion is:
6) During the upgrade, update-manager mentions that/usr/X11R6/bin is going to be replaced with a symlink. Unfortunately I'd installed opera-static, which left its own worthless symlink in/usr/X11R6/bin that update-manager wasn't aware of. Since there's a file in the directory, update-manager refuses to remove and re-link/usr/X11R6/bin and borks out. This is sensible enough. I enter the dir, remove the symlink, purge the package and re-run update-manager.
7) update-manager says that my system is screwed (installation in incomplete state, no packages can be added/removed/whatever).
The poster's recommendation is:
My question is why when update-manager encounters the (predictable)/usr/X11R6/bin problem it halts instead of presenting the option to open a terminal, fix the problem, and then continue the upgrade.
Log into the zoho writer site using the demo account and browse through the documents that are auto saved as people try it out. I've seen medical documents, an employee's request for time off from Tweeter, a letter to an insurance company, all kinds of stuff. The demo account is insecure by design, of course. But I can't help but feel a little concerned about having all of my personal documents in the hands of an online service.
I got a chuckle when I read the "Who cares?" paragraph in the article. Sure, it may be that the student is reasonably computer literate but has no preference for one desktop operating system over another. Or, just maybe he or she doesn't give a damn about computers and thinks the stuffed shirt asking the question is a putz. I mean, find the most nerdy unathletic kid in school and ask whether he or she prefers Brine or STX lacrosse sticks and you'll probably get a similar response.
What I hate are the "news" stories that promote the airing network's other programming. For example, the local Fox affiliate "reports" ad nauseam about the latest American Idol happenings while that show is running. There are usually pieces about what Jack Bauer is up to during 24's season as well. These aren't presented as if they're just providing programming information (e.g., "Coming up next on Fox...") but rather as legitimate news. I often suspect that other fluff pieces are also supporting the commercial interests of the network's parent company or subsidiaries. For example a story about a new theme park opening, or an artist who has released a new album, or a movie premiere. So much media and entertainment is owned by big business that it doesn't require much imagination to believe that such stories are crafted to be a subtler form of advertising.
Actually, they get plenty back from IE. I couldn't even count the number of web-based applications I've had to use at work that require IE. This is because they've been written to take advantage of whatever proprietary, non standards-based technology MS has decided to add to their web browser. As long as people keep writing applications that depend on IE, and as long as IT directors continue to use these applications, MS will continue to profit. After all, if it requres IE it's going to require Windows too.
That is, unless these applications work on Mac or UNIX/Linux versions of IE, which I doubt. But anyway what kind of fool would want to run IE on anything but Windows?
You don't have to use MS's help function to be vulnerable. If you browse a malicious web site using IE or open e-mail with a reader that handles html messages your system could be compromised. Take a look at the CERT advisory.
Do the users where you work not have Internet or e-mail access? Then I guess you are safe.
I read a book written by a "memory expert" (an entertainer, really) many years ago who used a similar method. I don't remember the method exactly, but it had to do with making bizarre visual associations for things. For instance, when you saw a ten of diamonds, you might think of a giant diamond under a tanning light. ("Tan of diamond") If you saw a king of clubs, you might think of a guy sitting on a throne in a crowded dance club.
To order them you find some way to associate these two images in series. For example, imagine that the tanned diamond walks in the door of the nightclub. The king of the club sees him and calls him over to join his collection of royal treasures. People who are practiced at this sort of thing can come up with such images and associations very quickly, and they're surprisingly easy to remember for short periods.
There's nothing challenging about memorizing a sequence of playing cards. It's really easy if you use a simple trick. Ummmmm... Unfortunately I ahhhhh... forgot what the trick is.
Safe speed should ALWAYS be defined by road condition and vehecle capability.
Here is a short list of some other things that are out of your control that can affect safe speed:
* Other drivers
* Bicyclists
* Pedestrians
* Wildlife
* Mechanical failures
* Human error
If the sign on the road reads 50, it doesn't automatically means that you're safe at 49 but dangerous at 51.
That's why speed limits are just that--limits. They're (supposed to be) engineers' best estimates of the fastest safe speed under good conditions.
Speeding is not a victimless crime. It results in more accidents, higher death rates and more severe injuries. Just because a single incidence of speeding may not cause an accident, that doesn't make it a victimless behavior.
If I fire a gun into the air in an urban area I will likely be arrested, and for good reason. It doesn't matter that nobody got hurt that time. That behavior is dangerous to others, and therefore we have laws against it.
Do you think someone who was recently made a quadriplegic by a speeding driver would say that speeding's cost is borne solely by his "government's budget"? I doubt it.
Speeding laws are made by legislative bodies, not by police departments. That's not to say that PD's don't have some influence over lawmakers, but it's a stretch to say that they can create laws for their own financial benefit. Whether they're abused for that purpose or not is another matter.
As for the first point, surely you're not going to argue that drinking doesn't impair one's ability to drive. Check your definition of impair. Webster's says: to damage or make worse by or as if by diminishing in some material respect. That doesn't mean you can't drive when drunk, only that your driving gets worse.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, I get it now. VT = Vestigial Teat, right?
That's not ball lightening, that's just shrinkage. Happens to men when they're swimming all the time. Usually not when the water's in the eighties though.
Yeah, that's typical too.
In other words it's an exploit affixed before there's a fix that fixes the exploitable the exploit exploits.
The cellular customer service reps are trained to state that it is a "one time only courtesy" any time they credit an account. I know this from very recent dealings with both T-Mobile and Cingular. Nobody else can insist upon receiving the same refund because their circumstances are not exactly the same, and because a "courtesy" refund is not an admission that the billing was incorrect.
Also I have a recommendation to anyone who has been unable to settle a grievance with a cellular service company. Send them a letter. An honest to God paper, snail-mail letter. Explain your problem as objectively as possible, mention your failed phone or e-mail based attempts to get it settled, and offer to file complaints with the BBB and the FCC if you don't receive proper assistance. This worked wonders for me with T-mobile. The 20 minutes it took to write that letter were far better spent than the hours I wasted on hold, being transferred between reps (each requiring a brand new explanation), and performing pointless troubleshooting steps with my phone. E-mail is worthless for this sort of problem with companies this large. You will receive an auto response every time. A real human will read your paper letter and will almost certainly respond.
Or in Earthlink's case, a 'lose-ly' connected system. Or perhaps 'lousily'.
The Opera comment is probably a reference to the Ubuntu forum post reached with the "detailed descriptions" hyperlink in the Slashdot summary. The relevant portion is:
The poster's recommendation is:
Log into the zoho writer site using the demo account and browse through the documents that are auto saved as people try it out. I've seen medical documents, an employee's request for time off from Tweeter, a letter to an insurance company, all kinds of stuff. The demo account is insecure by design, of course. But I can't help but feel a little concerned about having all of my personal documents in the hands of an online service.
What is Police Raid? Striped clothing with parity?
I got a chuckle when I read the "Who cares?" paragraph in the article. Sure, it may be that the student is reasonably computer literate but has no preference for one desktop operating system over another. Or, just maybe he or she doesn't give a damn about computers and thinks the stuffed shirt asking the question is a putz. I mean, find the most nerdy unathletic kid in school and ask whether he or she prefers Brine or STX lacrosse sticks and you'll probably get a similar response.
What I hate are the "news" stories that promote the airing network's other programming. For example, the local Fox affiliate "reports" ad nauseam about the latest American Idol happenings while that show is running. There are usually pieces about what Jack Bauer is up to during 24's season as well. These aren't presented as if they're just providing programming information (e.g., "Coming up next on Fox...") but rather as legitimate news. I often suspect that other fluff pieces are also supporting the commercial interests of the network's parent company or subsidiaries. For example a story about a new theme park opening, or an artist who has released a new album, or a movie premiere. So much media and entertainment is owned by big business that it doesn't require much imagination to believe that such stories are crafted to be a subtler form of advertising.
Why worry about adding all those extra cells? The "3 sheets" state can be achieved simply by leaving work and heading to the nearest bar.
RTFW?
That's just what the vested interests are worried about!
Actually, they get plenty back from IE. I couldn't even count the number of web-based applications I've had to use at work that require IE. This is because they've been written to take advantage of whatever proprietary, non standards-based technology MS has decided to add to their web browser. As long as people keep writing applications that depend on IE, and as long as IT directors continue to use these applications, MS will continue to profit. After all, if it requres IE it's going to require Windows too.
That is, unless these applications work on Mac or UNIX/Linux versions of IE, which I doubt. But anyway what kind of fool would want to run IE on anything but Windows?
Do the users where you work not have Internet or e-mail access? Then I guess you are safe.
A better method for saving your documents is the "save" function, often found under the File menu. Clicking on this once in a while is a good idea.
I am on crack! (Take note, Selective Service officers.)
I read a book written by a "memory expert" (an entertainer, really) many years ago who used a similar method. I don't remember the method exactly, but it had to do with making bizarre visual associations for things. For instance, when you saw a ten of diamonds, you might think of a giant diamond under a tanning light. ("Tan of diamond") If you saw a king of clubs, you might think of a guy sitting on a throne in a crowded dance club.
To order them you find some way to associate these two images in series. For example, imagine that the tanned diamond walks in the door of the nightclub. The king of the club sees him and calls him over to join his collection of royal treasures. People who are practiced at this sort of thing can come up with such images and associations very quickly, and they're surprisingly easy to remember for short periods.
There's nothing challenging about memorizing a sequence of playing cards. It's really easy if you use a simple trick. Ummmmm... Unfortunately I ahhhhh... forgot what the trick is.
Safe speed should ALWAYS be defined by road condition and vehecle capability.
Here is a short list of some other things that are out of your control that can affect safe speed:
* Other drivers
* Bicyclists
* Pedestrians
* Wildlife
* Mechanical failures
* Human error
If the sign on the road reads 50, it doesn't automatically means that you're safe at 49 but dangerous at 51.
That's why speed limits are just that--limits. They're (supposed to be) engineers' best estimates of the fastest safe speed under good conditions.
Speeding is not a victimless crime. It results in more accidents, higher death rates and more severe injuries. Just because a single incidence of speeding may not cause an accident, that doesn't make it a victimless behavior.
If I fire a gun into the air in an urban area I will likely be arrested, and for good reason. It doesn't matter that nobody got hurt that time. That behavior is dangerous to others, and therefore we have laws against it.
Do you think someone who was recently made a quadriplegic by a speeding driver would say that speeding's cost is borne solely by his "government's budget"? I doubt it.
Speeding laws are made by legislative bodies, not by police departments. That's not to say that PD's don't have some influence over lawmakers, but it's a stretch to say that they can create laws for their own financial benefit. Whether they're abused for that purpose or not is another matter.
As for the first point, surely you're not going to argue that drinking doesn't impair one's ability to drive. Check your definition of impair. Webster's says: to damage or make worse by or as if by diminishing in some material respect. That doesn't mean you can't drive when drunk, only that your driving gets worse.