Edgeline technology is said to be so ink-efficient that if HP were to sell these printers, they would never match the money they make from consumables (cartridges etc) now.
Wonder if this amazing technology will ever trickle down to consumer printers (that suck expensive ink like a crack head)...
In 2003 Townshend was cautioned by the police after acknowledging a credit card access to a website alleged to advertise child pornography in 1999. He claimed in the press and on his website to have been engaged in research...
Dell probably has a lot of OSs installed on various computers. I had Ubuntu installed on a laptop for a few days a few months back (wasn't for me). Like many people, he probably thought:this is interesting, let's have a look". It certainly doesn't mean it's his only or primary system.
Your router broadcast itself into the public space, unencrypted and unsecured. YOU gave network access to ME.
So, if I leave my keys in my car, I'm not just stupid, really I'm giving away my car and anyone should be able to hop in and drive away without repercussions? Really?
No seriously, you're full of shit. It's not yours, you know it's not yours, and you are being dishonest with yourself by trying to justify your dishonesty. It's not morally justifiable. Makes one wonder, if you have no qualms about this kind of dishonesty, what else are you also dishonest about? Petty theft of other people's food from the break-room refrigerator, perhaps?
I'm so sick and tired of their shoddy products, obnoxious business tactics, and anti-customer attitude.
You know, you're not required to buy anything from Microsoft, if that's the way you feel. And if it bothers you that much, ignore them and think about something else.
I share your sentiments. Unfortunately, only a very small percentage of Web surfers even know who DoubleClick are, Google may very well decide the loss of your dollars are worth the dollars of the unwashed masses.
Maybe if they had these computers they could start to learn SKILLS which will be useful to them in generating money for themselves and their region.
And then join India and Siberia in taking jobs away from us.
But on a serious note, these people don't need toy computers, especially when the actual cost of a real computer is not that much more. More than likely when these things are given away, they will for the most part end up on eBay after having been converted to something that these people find more useful, money.
I know that this was a huge oversimplification, but the concept remains. *Most* government programs are inefficient due to lack of competition. I want my government small, and to do what government is supposed to do...govern and get rid of these people: "I work for the government. I'm a "civil servant". I make high 5 figures, and I'm not management. I'm a member of a union. I will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever."
Why? You think it's conducive to team building and happy productive employees that get paid reasonably good wages to hold the possibility of layoffs a la corporate greed over their heads? I'm the original poster, and I'll tell you this: The agency I work for has very high standards, excellent employees, and is an all-around great place to work. This is good since we fly planes. It would be extremely hard to attract the quality of personnel that we have if we didn't offer an extremely stable employment environment. We rely on the continuity of experienced employees that don't have to worry about keeping an eye on the Help Wanted ads. All jobs should be like this, people would be a lot happier. With happiness comes productivity.
When I hear people bitch about the benefits that government employees enjoy, I think two things: Most wish they had those same benefits, and are jealous that they do not. The fact of the matter is, the reason that most people outside the rarefied air of the executive class don't have these benefits is corporate greed.
Don't blame government employees that they have it so good, blame corporate pigs that they screw their employees.
Bias. Slander/Libel. Misrepresentation of academic credentials...and other malfeasances. These are unique to wikipedia? Hardly. These very things happen in the mainstream mass media from outlets we all know -- for example, the New York Times. Have they forgotten about Jayson Blair?
The fact that something occurs in some other forum does not really have any relevance to Wikipedia's problems, especially as an excuse.
The main problem here is not that Wikipedia has these problems, but that it gets so much undue focus: is it a problem or a strength?
My issue with Wikipedia is that as much as people bleat on and on about how it's not supposed to be an authoritative source, they also tend to wink when it's used as one, and fanatically defend its value as if it where one.
No, really it wasn't flamebait or a troll. I think many people have done as I have, because it's just a fact. Russia and it's former republics are not the only areas but certainly a major source of spam / malware. My point was that this may be problematic for high tech companies from those parts of the world.
With such huge amounts of malware and spam comming out of Russia and the former Soviet Union, I'll bet a lot of people (like me) block whole ip ranges from those areas, and are not inclined to change that anytime soon.
In this case, the response will be "well, your software is a joke -- completely insecure."
Don't be so sure. That may not be the reason Massachusetts chose AutoMARK over Diebold. People like to talk about how unsecure Diebold machines are, but there may be other issues to consider like usability. Remember, one of the primary considerations Massachusetts gave for choosing AutoMARK was assesability by disabled people.
The thing about this is that Forks isn't near any border crossing points, and is in fact in the middle of the Olympic Peninsula. More likely they where trolling for illegals migrant workers. But it really stinks like a "police state" sort of mentality.
Don't you think users want the lesser of two evils?
I think users want Mozilla to build a browser that takes into account common usage patterns, and not respond with flip comments that it's being used wrong.
As for the memory usage, it seems that the answer is always "it's not a memory problem - that's just the result of how Firefox uses it's page caching features to provide fast recall!". I'm not sure that makes a lot of sense to me, because it strikes me as odd that any kind of browser "feature" would possibly consume 500mb or more memory on a regular basis.
But if a large number of people us FF in a way that causes problems, it is a design flaw. Either that, or they just don't care what their users want.
It's kind of sketchy that they're not supporting older Windows or OS X versions
At a certain point, this sort of decision has to be made: Move forward, or live in the past. The technical issues that surround supporting old systems verses moving forward with more elegant solutions for modern systems.
But what I don't understand is why they continue to insist that there are no memory usage issues when there is a lot of practical evidence that there are?
Slashdot Mirror
Wonder if this amazing technology will ever trickle down to consumer printers (that suck expensive ink like a crack head)...
Why yes... "Research"... That's it...
Dell probably has a lot of OSs installed on various computers. I had Ubuntu installed on a laptop for a few days a few months back (wasn't for me). Like many people, he probably thought :this is interesting, let's have a look". It certainly doesn't mean it's his only or primary system.
But it was! The pages where stuck together. Clearly defective.
Maybe the American price. Probably not what Microsoft is charging in China, the Chinese price is almost certainly less.
Well... If you troll Google Earth over the San Fernando Valley (home of the American porn industry), you can spy in on all the outdoor porn shoots.
This one was submitted *BY* Mandriva => awilliamson@mandriva.com
If Vonage held the patents, they would be playing it just as hard-ball as Verizon.
So, if I leave my keys in my car, I'm not just stupid, really I'm giving away my car and anyone should be able to hop in and drive away without repercussions? Really?
No seriously, you're full of shit. It's not yours, you know it's not yours, and you are being dishonest with yourself by trying to justify your dishonesty. It's not morally justifiable. Makes one wonder, if you have no qualms about this kind of dishonesty, what else are you also dishonest about? Petty theft of other people's food from the break-room refrigerator, perhaps?
You know, you're not required to buy anything from Microsoft, if that's the way you feel. And if it bothers you that much, ignore them and think about something else.
The idea of replacing Exchange is not targeted at home users, it's targeted at companies.
Think "Internet Tubes".
I share your sentiments. Unfortunately, only a very small percentage of Web surfers even know who DoubleClick are, Google may very well decide the loss of your dollars are worth the dollars of the unwashed masses.
And then join India and Siberia in taking jobs away from us.
But on a serious note, these people don't need toy computers, especially when the actual cost of a real computer is not that much more. More than likely when these things are given away, they will for the most part end up on eBay after having been converted to something that these people find more useful, money.
Why? You think it's conducive to team building and happy productive employees that get paid reasonably good wages to hold the possibility of layoffs a la corporate greed over their heads? I'm the original poster, and I'll tell you this: The agency I work for has very high standards, excellent employees, and is an all-around great place to work. This is good since we fly planes. It would be extremely hard to attract the quality of personnel that we have if we didn't offer an extremely stable employment environment. We rely on the continuity of experienced employees that don't have to worry about keeping an eye on the Help Wanted ads. All jobs should be like this, people would be a lot happier. With happiness comes productivity.
When I hear people bitch about the benefits that government employees enjoy, I think two things: Most wish they had those same benefits, and are jealous that they do not. The fact of the matter is, the reason that most people outside the rarefied air of the executive class don't have these benefits is corporate greed.
Don't blame government employees that they have it so good, blame corporate pigs that they screw their employees.
The fact that something occurs in some other forum does not really have any relevance to Wikipedia's problems, especially as an excuse.
The main problem here is not that Wikipedia has these problems, but that it gets so much undue focus: is it a problem or a strength?
My issue with Wikipedia is that as much as people bleat on and on about how it's not supposed to be an authoritative source, they also tend to wink when it's used as one, and fanatically defend its value as if it where one.
No, really it wasn't flamebait or a troll. I think many people have done as I have, because it's just a fact. Russia and it's former republics are not the only areas but certainly a major source of spam / malware. My point was that this may be problematic for high tech companies from those parts of the world.
With such huge amounts of malware and spam comming out of Russia and the former Soviet Union, I'll bet a lot of people (like me) block whole ip ranges from those areas, and are not inclined to change that anytime soon.
So what does that mean? That the care enough to care less if they wanted? Or that they don't care at all? I don't understand...
More here: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/20 03628279_danny21.html
I think users want Mozilla to build a browser that takes into account common usage patterns, and not respond with flip comments that it's being used wrong.
But if a large number of people us FF in a way that causes problems, it is a design flaw. Either that, or they just don't care what their users want.
At a certain point, this sort of decision has to be made: Move forward, or live in the past. The technical issues that surround supporting old systems verses moving forward with more elegant solutions for modern systems.
But what I don't understand is why they continue to insist that there are no memory usage issues when there is a lot of practical evidence that there are?