There's nothing "wrong" with it. It's what we must accept so that our good friends at the RIAA can make sure we're not stealing their excellent music, performed by such brilliant, talented artists like Britney Spears. wait a minute, wait a minute, you're trying to say that the RIAA might be involved with a design feature that causes people that listen to music on their PCs to have 5-10% of the download speed for doing things like sharing MP3s? that's impossible!
Regardless of how many people can actually get it to work just fine, means that a good number of people won't and will call up and waste their CSRs call time fixing problems caused by clueless owners. right, but if there's anything that Alienware knows how to do it's pad in lots of extra price into a high-end PC, so can't they just pad it a little more to cover the calls?
but can you confirm that they're not doing the same thing to your bittorrent connections? i'd be surprised if they even discriminate with that blocking
Internet Explorer was released for Mac and UNIX when Netscape had a decent market share, but when it died they stagnated and died. IE for *all platforms* stagnated once Netscape crunched. i believe the main reason that the MacOS one stagnated even moreso than its PC cousin was the fact that Apple released its own browser, Safari.
The upshot of this is that the ISPs are peering with the BBC so they don't get complaints from customers that one of the biggest sites in the world is slow or have to pay over the odds to an upstream provider and the BBC is peering with ISPs to make sure that they don't get hit with a bill for the 10s of Gbps of bandwidth they have available to them. this same motivation would prevent them from extorting the BBC now, if they weren't colluding in making a demand for payment. if just one or two of these ISPs came to the BBC and said "you have to pay us or we'll degrade your traffic", but BBC would say "ok, degrade it" and they'd again be put in the position of having to explain to their customers why they have poor access to the BBC website. if the ISPs ban together and throw competition to the wind, then they can make such a demand without giving customers an avenue to vote with their feet on the outcome.
The safety of products sold is a prime reason to use a retailer and not buy wholesale yourself. Will Amazon or CVS or Wal-Mart sell unsafe products? no they won't, because the regulations that you're decrying prohibit them from doing so. without those regulations at the non-Chinese end of the chain, who knows what would make it all the way from the wholesalers to the public. the products that they put into the pet food that's been recalled in America? they can't understand why we're so upset with that, it's been selling just fine in the local Chinese market for years.
Either way, I'll pay the $15 to get started and to see what happens. I've spent that much buying a friend and I coffee at Starbucks. Starbucks-onomics makes a lot of things seem more tolerable:)
I'm not sure if you noticed, but there's both more iPhones on the market this looks false, but it's hard to track down accurate iPhone sales numbers. the PSP reported sales of 6.7 million units as of January and in the most recent 6 month period moved 1.2 million more units, for a total of about 8 million sold. iPhone initially reported 500k units sold the first weekend, but that was later revised to 146k and it's doubtful that they really kept up that pace since the initial rush wasn't running into supply shortages as bad as some other devices have seen
exactly, i think he doesn't understand that what's being proposed is that the house could deploy a bot to masquerade as a player and its profits are the house's profits.
Instantly the house gains $906. Just because 1 guy played 8,640 hands. If that player were a bot they would have gotten $0, for a loss of $906. all the bot needs to do is be up more than $906 on 8640 hands to beat the rake money (and the bot doesn't have to pay a rake really), so the question is really if the bot is good enough to do that
1. half the argument in the original ask-slashdot post is that we pay too much for even the crappy service we do get, which can't be explained away with "maybe we don't want to do it the Japanese way" because i'm sure you do want cheap service to go with your non-fancy phone
2. the other half of the argument is that if you wanted a really nice phone you can't get one, because the entire range of devices goes from "no-frills" to "out-dated everywhere else in the world". the fact that you personally (and people like you) may not want a fancy phone doesn't mean that your preference should be the upper edge of the market, because the fact is that there are some people that want a fancy phone and the market underserves them
Someone can correct me if I am wrong but it looks like your supposed to put your feeds into the website then link to the one feed there. yes, "you put your feed in there", exactly.
the privacy concerns for this seem to mirror those of any of the public feed browsers like Google Reader, it's probably a bad idea use them for private feeds
of course, this would be a completely different story if it were a close-source program they were relying on... because... ? ... money is an amazing motivator.
companies go out of business, too. and when their close-source programs are no longer supported, *no one* has the ability to pick up where they left off. Except any other company that can make the business case for acquiring the assets and continuing support. if it's money motivation that makes the difference, it'd surely be possible for someone that wants continued support for their openMOSIX deployment to spend that same money to get developer(s) to work on it, or for another company to step in and do it on behalf of several other companies that have deployments. since it's open source they might not even have to contact/pay anyone to gain access to the existing code to start from depending on how their intent to distribute their enhancements meshes with the original license.
d) Pictures of Kim Jong Il would be on the currency and all documents. There would be no hollywood stars, or media or celebrity watch, becuase there could only be one celebrity, the Great Leader. on the contrary, Kim Jong Il would probably be very involved with Hollywood and keep it around. from Salon:
Kim Jong Il likes Daffy Duck and fast cars, and before he became North Korea's dictator he wanted to be a film producer. He was born on the peak of a sacred mountain, he says, and his birth was attended by thunder and lightning. In 1978 he had spies kidnap his favorite South Korean actress in order to improve North Korean cinema.
People also forget that the way this all came into the news was that the correct chains of command were informed(executive and legislative branches) and it came from that. that is incorrect, this story came into the news because it was leaked (the NY Times broke it after being told that they had to sit on it rather than publish it just prior to the 2004 election), and the first response of the White House was to investigate the leakers rather than to inform FISA or Congress why they were not using proper channels. this was definitely not a project that anyone was supposed to be notified about.
BTW the program has been changed. they changed it after Ashcroft said he wouldn't approve it, but they won't say what was changed and they've said that while they're not doing so now they reserve the right to wiretap without notifying FISA
There were no US citizen directly wiretapped under this program. says the same people that won't release any details of the program to Congress, we just have to take their word on it i guess?
Slashdot Mirror
you're using the term "multiple points of failure" to describe a situation which is probably better described as "multiple single-points of failure"
wait a minute, wait a minute, you're trying to say that the RIAA might be involved with a design feature that causes people that listen to music on their PCs to have 5-10% of the download speed for doing things like sharing MP3s? that's impossible!
i'm not sure i can click Allow on 16 Vista security popups as fast as they repop, that sounds like whack-a-mole with a mouse
i can tell by your angry dismissal that you're a Leo, please step in this booth for a search, sir
but can you confirm that they're not doing the same thing to your bittorrent connections? i'd be surprised if they even discriminate with that blocking
it'll get posted again tomorrow just to maintain expectations
you can't copy and paste on an iphone, it was a pretty subtle joke
i knew it couldn't be as easy as applying it directly to my forehead
exactly, i think he doesn't understand that what's being proposed is that the house could deploy a bot to masquerade as a player and its profits are the house's profits.
i think you're missing two details:
1. half the argument in the original ask-slashdot post is that we pay too much for even the crappy service we do get, which can't be explained away with "maybe we don't want to do it the Japanese way" because i'm sure you do want cheap service to go with your non-fancy phone
2. the other half of the argument is that if you wanted a really nice phone you can't get one, because the entire range of devices goes from "no-frills" to "out-dated everywhere else in the world". the fact that you personally (and people like you) may not want a fancy phone doesn't mean that your preference should be the upper edge of the market, because the fact is that there are some people that want a fancy phone and the market underserves them
so what you're saying is that buying any Linden dollars at all at this point is a gamble
the privacy concerns for this seem to mirror those of any of the public feed browsers like Google Reader, it's probably a bad idea use them for private feeds
fast flux! apply directly to your bot-net
fast flux! apply directly to your bot-net
fast flux! apply directly to your bot-net