Those of us who are able infer that they are recordings of top artists performing Chopin's works. Those of us with nothing better to do post comments like yours. Those of us who are have nothing better to do and are asleep at the switch mod up comments like yours.
And those with no clue of history post anonymous comments like yours. You could've googled George Sand, but I assume you had something better to do.
Still, a bunch of ignorant AC apologists will probably mod me down in your defense. Why do I even bother?
I know you're trolling, but everyone else can relax. Chopin's not exactly a long-form kind of guy. The Ramones of Romanticism, if you will. It'll all still fit on a couple-hundred CDs. Or a couple big USB sticks if you want to go all 21st century on it. It'll be OK. No one's actually gonna be forced to download it if they don't want to.
He was referring to section 3(d) "are for the sale of certain items before the seller has control or possession of the item". For reference, the heading of section 3 is "Prohibited Activities".
Looks like Sir Garlon pwnt you without even going invisible. Presumably you aren't much of a knight.
I remember debate camp. Kids would frequently just wing copies of Time magazine at the other side's heads and were instantly deemed the "pwner" with high-fives all around . . . . That was awesome.
But as to the term in question: wouldn't that make PayPal unsuitable for Kickstarter-style projects? Or for drop-shippers. Or for any business practicing "JIT Inventory control?" Or do they just interpret that vague section however they feel like any given day? That's actually worse, since how's a seller of something to know how the agreement is interpreted before finding himself in violation? And it could change from day to day.
This is thanks to the US patriot act, bank secrecy act and possibly some other nanny state laws. Large transactions are red flagged and reported. The owner of the account must provide an explanation of what they are doing with the money.
When did "nanny state" morph from a term disparaging laws that could be construed as protecting people from themselves into a general intensifier for any law or government program with which one disagrees?
Banking regulations like the large transaction flag, the positive ID to open an account, the BS Patriot [sic] Act requirements are intrusive, and I don't like them either, but they're not sold as "consumer protection" or anything like that. Calling "War on Drugs" and "War on Terrorism" money-related laws/regs "nanny-state"ism is the kind of the stretch that finally busts all the goo out of Stretch Armstrong and his lizard frenemy thing.
A bigger question is why. What do PayPal gain by "randomly" freezing accounts like this?
You'd think the goodwill hit would be more costly than the interest on the frozen funds for the time they hold the cash until forced to finally pay it back.
They've already got your customers in check, but they go ahead and take an extra pawn, because -- why not? Who else they gonna play with?
And yet, all this bad publicity -- for years and years -- and still no viable, widely accepted, competitor.
Personally, I'd rather their records be full of disinformation about me.
Personally, I'd like that, too. Emotionally speaking, I'd like all corporate entities to have completely bogus data on me, just to mess with them. Like: "Occupation: Foole".
It's when the real-world downsides hit that my wife gets cranky. Like if we couldn't get a mortgage or a business buy-in loan for her.
You mistake my use of sarcasm quotes. Yes, the law mandates the report, but their lobbyists got to help write the law to make it ok to collect that information which has a dual use of updating your credit report. Since it is dual use, it ain't really free.
Updating the credit agency's records that way isn't entirely a one-sided benefit for them. Plenty of credit hassles result from two "Jah-Wren Ryel"s being mistaken for each other or even combined into one unholy entity. I'd like to think that a correct address might reduce the chances of that happening. I said I'd like to think that. I have no way to verify it one way or another.
Incorrect. The word "gullible" is deprecated. It was removed from all dictionaries years ago. Look it up.
What you're thinking of is not "+1 gullible", but "doubleplus ungood thinking".
Never gets old. My sister pulled the old "you know the word "gullible" isn't in the dictionary" trick on a roommate long ago. Unlike you, roommate couldn't spell the word, attempted to look it up, failed, and declared "Oh my God, you're right!"
... and yet they thought "key lime pie" was too unfamiliar?
These are people who keep KitKat bars in the fridge, what can you expect? Unless they've got a mouse problem at the Googleplex, then it actually makes sense.
So if Tesla doubles production, it would consume the entire world's production of li-ion cells. So the measly 21k cars Tesla produces use half of the world's production already? Maybe I can't read and/or do math though.
It's not your math, it's the lack of data in TFAs. I can't find the number of cells per Tesla battery in any of the articles, either. Maybe I just got bored paging through. Stupid ADD. Anyway. searching around gives guesses of 7500 to 8000 cells in the top-of-the-line pack. So another 20000 cars would be 160 million more cells. If a laptop uses four to eight cells per battery, that's a lot of laptops worth of cells.
We start with some seriously breathless doom-and-gloom headlines and summary, then reading the articles we find this sort of thing:
The carmaker's rapid production scale-up has prompted Panasonic to expand capacity, by reopening previously idled plants, while simultaneously committing to build entirely new production lines.
So prices had been dropping, production had been cut, but now at least one cell maker has restarted idled lines. That doesn't exactly sound like a disaster in the making.
This is a pretty interesting development, but I'll be a lot more impressed when I read the headline: "World-First: Man Becomes Pregnant After Ovarian Tissue Graft"
Well here is the thing.
It would of happened in nature anyway, if he was born as any other animal he would of died young. If humans were still living as we were when we first came onto the planet, he would of.
"Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we are put in this world to rise above."
Please stop including redundant info in your emails. It wastes everyone's time including yours. The sooner we drop the above formalities the better.
I don't care if someone has a salutation or signature on their email -- I can usually skip the bookends without too much trouble -- as much as I detest it when I get mails with subjects including the words: "message, memo, note, about, re:, from, email, etc." as in, "subject: a note from Bob Smith re: inventory". Really? It's from Bob Smith? How would I have known? It's a note? So, not a box of chocolate or a flaming bag of dog poop contained digitally therein? That's good, I suppose. "From"? "Re"? Don't get me started. The only necessary, non-redundant word in the entire subject: "inventory". And if I'm reading it on some tiny smartphone screen, it probably got cut off! Arg.
On the other hand, I have vowed to myself that no one will ever get a positive review, recommendation or reference from me if they repeatedly write "noone" or other similarly annoying and readily detectable misspellings. Don't they ever wonder what the squiggly line is all about? I think the lack of curiosity implied here is what really hurts my wiener the most. Same goes for anyone using txt-speak in a medium without a 160 (or fewer) character limit. And punctuation, caps and paragraphs exist for a reason. If it takes me twice as long as it should to figure out what someone means, I'll be spending that extra time thinking how much I hate them. And if it's cc'd to a whole department, that time loss and irritation multiplier gets . . . multiplied.
Whole companies aren't immune from the plague, either. I worked at a firm where the annual employee evaluation form had checkboxes in the "reason for salary increase" section that included the option: "Merrit". I think everyone would agree with me that that's a bit of a red flag.
And for the sake of disclosure, in case you hadn't already guessed it, the most frequent criticism of my communication style is "long-winded". Followed by "pompous jackass".
'For at least six years, law enforcement officials working on a counter narcotics program have had routine access, using subpoenas, to an enormous AT&T database that contains the records of decades of Americans’ phone calls — parallel to but covering a far longer time than the National Security Agency’s hotly disputed collection of phone call logs.'
See that, NSA? Somehow the DEA managed to use the ordinary justice system without totally dismantling the Constitution.
Not that I think the War on Drugs (TM) is any less stupid and wasteful than the War on Terrism (TM), but at least we see that we don't need a parallel, secret justice [sic] system to "fight" it.
Cars getting better mileage, safer and so on can be regulated, because drivers actually want these things. Electronic nanny that is not 100% right all the time? Good luck with that.
It's not like we get what we want. Do you think that we in the US -- or the rest of the world, for that matter -- want all-knowing surveillance included with our telephones, computers, etc? But we get it, you know, because terrorism
Actually, the car thing might really be a better tradeoff in terms of lives (and money, injury, suffering, lost work and property damage) saved vs. cost, inconvenience and intrusion into our privacy, our lives and our rights. As in Europe, US auto deaths are in the tens of thousands a year (I just read ~34000). But I think it's safe to say that this wouldn't be any more popular in the US than Europe. I also seriously doubt that this sort of thing will actually be enacted anywhere. Human rights is one thing, people's cars is another.
I actually do not favor extremely intrusive car monitoring or communications monitoring. Not that this disclaimer will help, it'll be tl;dr for some slashdotter. I do wish to point out that far more serious government intrusions into liberties can -- and are -- be justified by leaders for far less serious threats to human life.
A phenomally [sic] expensive band-aid that will likely tear apart in an earthquake, adding an inrushing wall of water to the rest of the problems.
Because no one would think to anticipate earthquakes in the vicinity of San Francisco when designing such a structure? Or do you have some other insight that I'm missing?
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't exactly shocking news.
To save them and you the inconvenience of physically handing it over, I guess?
So no one in the porn industry is a 'professional' eh?
Douche bag you are.
That doesn't even come close to relating to the topic at hand, or this discussion in particular.
Those of us who are able infer that they are recordings of top artists performing Chopin's works. Those of us with nothing better to do post comments like yours. Those of us who are have nothing better to do and are asleep at the switch mod up comments like yours.
And those with no clue of history post anonymous comments like yours. You could've googled George Sand, but I assume you had something better to do.
Still, a bunch of ignorant AC apologists will probably mod me down in your defense. Why do I even bother?
I know you're trolling, but everyone else can relax. Chopin's not exactly a long-form kind of guy. The Ramones of Romanticism, if you will. It'll all still fit on a couple-hundred CDs. Or a couple big USB sticks if you want to go all 21st century on it. It'll be OK. No one's actually gonna be forced to download it if they don't want to.
He was referring to section 3(d) "are for the sale of certain items before the seller has control or possession of the item". For reference, the heading of section 3 is "Prohibited Activities".
Looks like Sir Garlon pwnt you without even going invisible. Presumably you aren't much of a knight.
I remember debate camp. Kids would frequently just wing copies of Time magazine at the other side's heads and were instantly deemed the "pwner" with high-fives all around . . . . That was awesome.
But as to the term in question: wouldn't that make PayPal unsuitable for Kickstarter-style projects? Or for drop-shippers. Or for any business practicing "JIT Inventory control?" Or do they just interpret that vague section however they feel like any given day? That's actually worse, since how's a seller of something to know how the agreement is interpreted before finding himself in violation? And it could change from day to day.
This is thanks to the US patriot act, bank secrecy act and possibly some other nanny state laws. Large transactions are red flagged and reported. The owner of the account must provide an explanation of what they are doing with the money.
When did "nanny state" morph from a term disparaging laws that could be construed as protecting people from themselves into a general intensifier for any law or government program with which one disagrees?
Banking regulations like the large transaction flag, the positive ID to open an account, the BS Patriot [sic] Act requirements are intrusive, and I don't like them either, but they're not sold as "consumer protection" or anything like that. Calling "War on Drugs" and "War on Terrorism" money-related laws/regs "nanny-state"ism is the kind of the stretch that finally busts all the goo out of Stretch Armstrong and his lizard frenemy thing.
A bigger question is why. What do PayPal gain by "randomly" freezing accounts like this?
You'd think the goodwill hit would be more costly than the interest on the frozen funds for the time they hold the cash until forced to finally pay it back.
They've already got your customers in check, but they go ahead and take an extra pawn, because -- why not? Who else they gonna play with?
And yet, all this bad publicity -- for years and years -- and still no viable, widely accepted, competitor.
Gay has been used as a synonym for bad for a long time. The PC police may not like it but that doesn't change the facts.
I'm guessing you don't get invited to many parties. Or you're twelve. Am I right?
Personally, I'd rather their records be full of disinformation about me.
Personally, I'd like that, too. Emotionally speaking, I'd like all corporate entities to have completely bogus data on me, just to mess with them. Like: "Occupation: Foole".
It's when the real-world downsides hit that my wife gets cranky. Like if we couldn't get a mortgage or a business buy-in loan for her.
Does his TiVo also think he's gay?
Mine was always sure I wanted to watch "Diagnosis Murder" over and over.
Then again, that show had everything.
You mistake my use of sarcasm quotes. Yes, the law mandates the report, but their lobbyists got to help write the law to make it ok to collect that information which has a dual use of updating your credit report. Since it is dual use, it ain't really free.
Updating the credit agency's records that way isn't entirely a one-sided benefit for them. Plenty of credit hassles result from two "Jah-Wren Ryel"s being mistaken for each other or even combined into one unholy entity. I'd like to think that a correct address might reduce the chances of that happening. I said I'd like to think that. I have no way to verify it one way or another.
And you are +1 gullible
Incorrect. The word "gullible" is deprecated. It was removed from all dictionaries years ago. Look it up.
What you're thinking of is not "+1 gullible", but "doubleplus ungood thinking".
Never gets old. My sister pulled the old "you know the word "gullible" isn't in the dictionary" trick on a roommate long ago. Unlike you, roommate couldn't spell the word, attempted to look it up, failed, and declared "Oh my God, you're right!"
... and yet they thought "key lime pie" was too unfamiliar?
These are people who keep KitKat bars in the fridge, what can you expect? Unless they've got a mouse problem at the Googleplex, then it actually makes sense.
So if Tesla doubles production, it would consume the entire world's production of li-ion cells. So the measly 21k cars Tesla produces use half of the world's production already? Maybe I can't read and/or do math though.
It's not your math, it's the lack of data in TFAs. I can't find the number of cells per Tesla battery in any of the articles, either. Maybe I just got bored paging through. Stupid ADD. Anyway. searching around gives guesses of 7500 to 8000 cells in the top-of-the-line pack. So another 20000 cars would be 160 million more cells. If a laptop uses four to eight cells per battery, that's a lot of laptops worth of cells.
We start with some seriously breathless doom-and-gloom headlines and summary, then reading the articles we find this sort of thing:
The carmaker's rapid production scale-up has prompted Panasonic to expand capacity, by reopening previously idled plants, while simultaneously committing to build entirely new production lines.
So prices had been dropping, production had been cut, but now at least one cell maker has restarted idled lines. That doesn't exactly sound like a disaster in the making.
Surely when you are merrit you need more money for your family?
Hadn't thought of that: the importance of being Merrit.
This is a pretty interesting development, but I'll be a lot more impressed when I read the headline: "World-First: Man Becomes Pregnant After Ovarian Tissue Graft"
What's next? Cloning drop bears?!?!?
Is that some kind of man-in-the-middle attack on SSH?
Well here is the thing. It would of happened in nature anyway, if he was born as any other animal he would of died young. If humans were still living as we were when we first came onto the planet, he would of.
"Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we are put in this world to rise above."
Please stop including redundant info in your emails. It wastes everyone's time including yours. The sooner we drop the above formalities the better.
I don't care if someone has a salutation or signature on their email -- I can usually skip the bookends without too much trouble -- as much as I detest it when I get mails with subjects including the words: "message, memo, note, about, re:, from, email, etc." as in, "subject: a note from Bob Smith re: inventory". Really? It's from Bob Smith? How would I have known? It's a note? So, not a box of chocolate or a flaming bag of dog poop contained digitally therein? That's good, I suppose. "From"? "Re"? Don't get me started. The only necessary, non-redundant word in the entire subject: "inventory". And if I'm reading it on some tiny smartphone screen, it probably got cut off! Arg.
On the other hand, I have vowed to myself that no one will ever get a positive review, recommendation or reference from me if they repeatedly write "noone" or other similarly annoying and readily detectable misspellings. Don't they ever wonder what the squiggly line is all about? I think the lack of curiosity implied here is what really hurts my wiener the most. Same goes for anyone using txt-speak in a medium without a 160 (or fewer) character limit. And punctuation, caps and paragraphs exist for a reason. If it takes me twice as long as it should to figure out what someone means, I'll be spending that extra time thinking how much I hate them. And if it's cc'd to a whole department, that time loss and irritation multiplier gets . . . multiplied.
Whole companies aren't immune from the plague, either. I worked at a firm where the annual employee evaluation form had checkboxes in the "reason for salary increase" section that included the option: "Merrit". I think everyone would agree with me that that's a bit of a red flag.
And for the sake of disclosure, in case you hadn't already guessed it, the most frequent criticism of my communication style is "long-winded". Followed by "pompous jackass".
'For at least six years, law enforcement officials working on a counter narcotics program have had routine access, using subpoenas, to an enormous AT&T database that contains the records of decades of Americans’ phone calls — parallel to but covering a far longer time than the National Security Agency’s hotly disputed collection of phone call logs.'
See that, NSA? Somehow the DEA managed to use the ordinary justice system without totally dismantling the Constitution.
Not that I think the War on Drugs (TM) is any less stupid and wasteful than the War on Terrism (TM), but at least we see that we don't need a parallel, secret justice [sic] system to "fight" it.
Offtopic much?
Hey now, he's the only thing standing between my nation and tyranny.
"Modern units"
110 m/s sounds pretty unsafe in heavy rain, even with no risk of hydroplaning or loss of grip.
Cars getting better mileage, safer and so on can be regulated, because drivers actually want these things. Electronic nanny that is not 100% right all the time? Good luck with that.
It's not like we get what we want. Do you think that we in the US -- or the rest of the world, for that matter -- want all-knowing surveillance included with our telephones, computers, etc? But we get it, you know, because terrorism
Actually, the car thing might really be a better tradeoff in terms of lives (and money, injury, suffering, lost work and property damage) saved vs. cost, inconvenience and intrusion into our privacy, our lives and our rights. As in Europe, US auto deaths are in the tens of thousands a year (I just read ~34000). But I think it's safe to say that this wouldn't be any more popular in the US than Europe. I also seriously doubt that this sort of thing will actually be enacted anywhere. Human rights is one thing, people's cars is another.
I actually do not favor extremely intrusive car monitoring or communications monitoring. Not that this disclaimer will help, it'll be tl;dr for some slashdotter. I do wish to point out that far more serious government intrusions into liberties can -- and are -- be justified by leaders for far less serious threats to human life.
A phenomally [sic] expensive band-aid that will likely tear apart in an earthquake, adding an inrushing wall of water to the rest of the problems.
Because no one would think to anticipate earthquakes in the vicinity of San Francisco when designing such a structure? Or do you have some other insight that I'm missing?