1. When someone makes a comment supporting MicroSoft.
2. When someone makes a comment bashing Apple.
3. When someone responds to their own post.
4. When someone screws up tags>br.
5. When someone suggests Cowboy Neal as an option in Slashdot polls.
He's got them on the list. And they'd none of them be missed. They'd none of them be missed.
There's some history to that location. I believe that before it was a parking lot, there was a supermarket there, built where there had been old bowling alley that stood on the site of the Palais, which is where Richard would come dancing on Saturday nights.
That's just my theory, there may be some kinks to work out.
Another tactic that clearly has an effect: speaking out, even when done anonymously. It hardly seems a coincidence that the Project Paperless patents were handed off to a web of generic-sounding LLCs, with demand letters signed only by “The Licensing Team,” shortly after the “Stop Project Paperless” website went up. It suggests those behind such low-level licensing campaigns aren’t proud of their behavior. And rightly so.
No, the best approach is to discuss the case with competent legal counsel.
That might not be true in this case. According to this story at Ars Technica
The best strategy for target companies? It may be to ignore the letters, at least for now. “Ignorance, surprisingly, works,” noted Prof. Chien in an e-mail exchange with Ars.
Her study of startups targeted by patent trolls found that when confronted with a patent demand, 22 percent ignored it entirely. Compare that with the 35 percent that decided to fight back and 18 percent that folded. Ignoring the demand was the cheapest option ($3,000 on average) versus fighting in court, which was the most expensive ($870,000 on average).
A friend of mine has an issue where someone is posing as her on Facebook with a well-photoshopped picture of a woman standing in just panties with my friend's face shopped on (lighting and shadows added). The fake account keeps making friend requests to her real friends. This has been going on for nearly a week, and she and many others have reported the profile as fake, impersonating her, and the profile picture as against FB policy, but no one from Facebook is doing anything, possibly because some tier 1 flunky sees the names don't match and assumes no impersonation is occurring.
How long before this become's FB's problem from a legal standpoint since they're tacitly supporting the behavior?
Our AC friend has a good point here. We're tempted to say "you get what you pay for" in regard to a free service, but actual harm (to finances, reputation, person, property, etc.) is quite a bit worse than nothing. My father-in-law said this very thing happened to him a couple weeks ago -- minus the photochopped sexy, fortunately. The impostor was friending (re-friending?) his friends and ultimately asking for money. I think my father-in-law was tipped off by another pastor that he went to seminary with who suspected something fishy and asked the doppelganger a question about consubstantiation, transignification, and transubstantiation, in what I thought was a rather unusual method of revealing a facebook fraud.
FYI, before someone jumps in saying "this is why I don't use Facebook", this can happen even easier to someone who doesn't use Facebook, and it would be theorically harder to clear up.
There's something we should pay attention to. It's not just harder to clean up -- it would probably take you much longer to even learn of the impersonation. I assume that in my father-in-law's case, the lack of an existing account would have delayed arousing the suspicions of his friends, possibly allowing the faker to collect some real money.
So-called "brogramming" is simply a fictional creation made for movies by non-engineers and non-programmers.
The closest you'd come to seeing this in reality might be a group programming project at a university.
I've done some coding in my career. Sometimes it was 100% of my job. And the only time I ever did (or saw) anything that could be remotely termed "brogramming" was as a teenager, when my friends and I traded off creating the most obnoxious version of a BASIC program to print our names over and over on a display model C=64 in the local Venture* store. (I believe the "winner" of that contest was the guy who POKEd in alternating rainbow pattern text and background colors.)
"Brogramming" bears about as much similarity to the real world as Jack Bauer and the "ticking time bomb". Real crappy code is created in a much more banal and boring fashion.
*Fun fact about Venture: The probationary "trainee" cashiers got registers with unlabeled ten-key pads, so they had to learn the numbers by touch.
It also helps to never give out your cell # except to friends and family. I found that a lot of the businesses I was giving my phone number to were somehow passing it along to telemarketers (I could tell because sometimes I would vary my name slightly just to see).
Worse, by far were the debt collectors calling for people I'd never heard of -- or even not asking for anyone in particular, just wanting a return call to some number to "clear up a file on my desk". Then if I did call them back and tell them they had the wrong guy, sometimes they'd stop for a while -- at least till that junk debt collector resold the debt to another.
It wasn't all bad. One agency had a particularly entertaining tactic: each week or so a different person would leave a message. Since it was always the same voice actor, he had to use different names with appropriate accents for each persona. My favorite was fake Scotsman Alistair McTavish.
Curiously, it seems that while people who do owe money have certain rights when dealing with collections agencies, people who don't actually owe money don't seem to have quite the same level of protection from harassment. You'd think that harassing non-debtors would be a self-limiting thing, since you (presumably) couldn't collect anything from someone without an overdue debt, but they were oddly persistent.
The question to ask is since it is proven that people will pay $30-60 a month for Internet service, why would Google offer it for free? Just to build market share? I doubt it.
The one-time charge for "lifetime" service gets you the lowest tier data service Google is offering. There are other monthly-billed packages with higher bandwidth and bundled TV service, too. Google's looking to wire -- fiber? -- entire neighborhoods at a time, rather than one house here, one house there all over town. Your neighborhood ("fiberhood," as Google calls it) gets on the list only if they have enough commitment from residents.
The man rakes in way north of $400k a year from just his paycheck and subsequent pension... do you seriously think he's going to quibble over a $300 ETF?
I thought your carrier could keep you from unlocking your phone (if they so chose) even after the termination of the contract. If a carrier isn't legally obligated to unlock your phone if you pay the ETF or let the contract expire -- and they decide they don't want to -- then unlocking it yourself would still be a case of breaking their DRM, right? And now that it's illegal for you to do it yourself, a company that was previously more "generous" might decide to get a little stingy just because they can.
If you can find decent English subtitles, let us know. So far I've only seen MTV Star Wars in the original Klingon, and I've got no idea what's going on.
Actually Mr Anonymous, many of the best episodes of classic sci-fi series like Star Trek and Stargate were all based on time-travel. Yesterday's Enterprise, Anyone?
In other words, you are wrong and it is actually the complete opposite. Time Travel scares away novice sci-fi writers because they cannot wrap their heads around the paradoxical nature of such concepts, while the great writers are able to mold the concept into compelling, memorable science fiction.
OK, how about this? Time travel is the violin of SciFi plot devices. If you can't play it well, it hurts the audience.
It is perfectly honorable and respectable to want to be trained and ready to protect your country. What is not honorable and respectable is politicians allowing unconstitutional wars.
And then we've come full circle when your politicians do that, because then it becomes honorable and respectable to not join the armed forces, lest your commitment to your country and fellow citizens be abused and misused. Except that doesn't worry or bother the politicians, since in wartime, army joins you.
18,735 - suicide by firearm
11,493 - murder by firearm
554 - killed from accidental firearm discharge
31,578 - accidental death from poisoning
All of these numbers pale in comparison to this:
108,000 - killed from adverse prescription drug reactions.
Clearly the firearms angle is over stated.We should be banning doctors.
It's not exactly a legitimate comparison. What percentage of people shot see improvement of their previous conditions vs. those using prescription drugs? I, for one, would rather try amoxicillin for certain infections first, rather than gunshot.
I know. In some stores, I'm usually a 10, but others an 8 or even a 12. You've got to take at least three of each to the fitting room. It's ridiculous.
I also understand that MRSA (a very serious, and potentially lethal bacteria, if untreated) has been brought on by over sanitization. That's what makes MRSA so serious. It resists almost all antibiotic treatments. Studies have been coming out showing where hospitals that are not as clean have lower rates of MRSA infection.
MRSA is resistant to antibiotics due to the overuse of . . . antibiotics. I think you're conflating MRSA with theories about the polio epidemic.
Slashdot Mirror
1. When someone makes a comment supporting MicroSoft.
2. When someone makes a comment bashing Apple.
3. When someone responds to their own post.
4. When someone screws up tags>br.
5. When someone suggests Cowboy Neal as an option in Slashdot polls.
He's got them on the list. And they'd none of them be missed. They'd none of them be missed.
as to why he was buried in a parking lot.
There's some history to that location. I believe that before it was a parking lot, there was a supermarket there, built where there had been old bowling alley that stood on the site of the Palais, which is where Richard would come dancing on Saturday nights.
That's just my theory, there may be some kinks to work out.
I don't think you should be discussing a legal threat in a public forum.
Agreed. It is possibly dangerous.
From this article: Patent trolls want $1,000—for using scanner.
Another tactic that clearly has an effect: speaking out, even when done anonymously. It hardly seems a coincidence that the Project Paperless patents were handed off to a web of generic-sounding LLCs, with demand letters signed only by “The Licensing Team,” shortly after the “Stop Project Paperless” website went up. It suggests those behind such low-level licensing campaigns aren’t proud of their behavior. And rightly so.
Read this paper: Startups and Patent Trolls by Prof. Colleen V. Chien, Santa Clara University School of Law.
No, the best approach is to discuss the case with competent legal counsel.
That might not be true in this case. According to this story at Ars Technica
The best strategy for target companies? It may be to ignore the letters, at least for now. “Ignorance, surprisingly, works,” noted Prof. Chien in an e-mail exchange with Ars.
Her study of startups targeted by patent trolls found that when confronted with a patent demand, 22 percent ignored it entirely. Compare that with the 35 percent that decided to fight back and 18 percent that folded. Ignoring the demand was the cheapest option ($3,000 on average) versus fighting in court, which was the most expensive ($870,000 on average).
The "Professor Chien" referred to is a law professor and the author of Startups and Patent Trolls.
A friend of mine has an issue where someone is posing as her on Facebook with a well-photoshopped picture of a woman standing in just panties with my friend's face shopped on (lighting and shadows added). The fake account keeps making friend requests to her real friends. This has been going on for nearly a week, and she and many others have reported the profile as fake, impersonating her, and the profile picture as against FB policy, but no one from Facebook is doing anything, possibly because some tier 1 flunky sees the names don't match and assumes no impersonation is occurring. How long before this become's FB's problem from a legal standpoint since they're tacitly supporting the behavior?
Our AC friend has a good point here. We're tempted to say "you get what you pay for" in regard to a free service, but actual harm (to finances, reputation, person, property, etc.) is quite a bit worse than nothing. My father-in-law said this very thing happened to him a couple weeks ago -- minus the photochopped sexy, fortunately. The impostor was friending (re-friending?) his friends and ultimately asking for money. I think my father-in-law was tipped off by another pastor that he went to seminary with who suspected something fishy and asked the doppelganger a question about consubstantiation, transignification, and transubstantiation, in what I thought was a rather unusual method of revealing a facebook fraud.
FYI, before someone jumps in saying "this is why I don't use Facebook", this can happen even easier to someone who doesn't use Facebook, and it would be theorically harder to clear up.
There's something we should pay attention to. It's not just harder to clean up -- it would probably take you much longer to even learn of the impersonation. I assume that in my father-in-law's case, the lack of an existing account would have delayed arousing the suspicions of his friends, possibly allowing the faker to collect some real money.
I'd like a nice tablet for recipes, browsing, etc. Maybe a little easel so I can refer to it while I cook.
And oh yeah, it should be dishwasher safe.
So-called "brogramming" is simply a fictional creation made for movies by non-engineers and non-programmers. The closest you'd come to seeing this in reality might be a group programming project at a university.
I've done some coding in my career. Sometimes it was 100% of my job. And the only time I ever did (or saw) anything that could be remotely termed "brogramming" was as a teenager, when my friends and I traded off creating the most obnoxious version of a BASIC program to print our names over and over on a display model C=64 in the local Venture* store. (I believe the "winner" of that contest was the guy who POKEd in alternating rainbow pattern text and background colors.)
"Brogramming" bears about as much similarity to the real world as Jack Bauer and the "ticking time bomb". Real crappy code is created in a much more banal and boring fashion.
*Fun fact about Venture: The probationary "trainee" cashiers got registers with unlabeled ten-key pads, so they had to learn the numbers by touch.
It also helps to never give out your cell # except to friends and family. I found that a lot of the businesses I was giving my phone number to were somehow passing it along to telemarketers (I could tell because sometimes I would vary my name slightly just to see).
I ditched my land line a few years ago, but even my cell number wasn't immune. I'd still get calls from "Rachel" and her friends, not to mention "OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooo!!!! This is your captain speaking . . ."
Worse, by far were the debt collectors calling for people I'd never heard of -- or even not asking for anyone in particular, just wanting a return call to some number to "clear up a file on my desk". Then if I did call them back and tell them they had the wrong guy, sometimes they'd stop for a while -- at least till that junk debt collector resold the debt to another.
It wasn't all bad. One agency had a particularly entertaining tactic: each week or so a different person would leave a message. Since it was always the same voice actor, he had to use different names with appropriate accents for each persona. My favorite was fake Scotsman Alistair McTavish.
Curiously, it seems that while people who do owe money have certain rights when dealing with collections agencies, people who don't actually owe money don't seem to have quite the same level of protection from harassment. You'd think that harassing non-debtors would be a self-limiting thing, since you (presumably) couldn't collect anything from someone without an overdue debt, but they were oddly persistent.
The question to ask is since it is proven that people will pay $30-60 a month for Internet service, why would Google offer it for free? Just to build market share? I doubt it.
The one-time charge for "lifetime" service gets you the lowest tier data service Google is offering. There are other monthly-billed packages with higher bandwidth and bundled TV service, too. Google's looking to wire -- fiber? -- entire neighborhoods at a time, rather than one house here, one house there all over town. Your neighborhood ("fiberhood," as Google calls it) gets on the list only if they have enough commitment from residents.
Pirate Bay does not work for live sports / events and stuff like NHL game center live has a poor frame rate
Conversely, cable TV is becoming a niche for viewing live sports broadcasts.
I searched the internet, but I couldn't find any news of a Comcast speed increase from this year. Did you just make this up?
I suspect that by "all customers," the first AC meant "all customers of TW," not "all customers of any ISP".
This is a story from last month (Dec 12 2012), and it's for all TWC customers.
What about the price cut? I didn't see a mention in the yahoo story, have you seen anything about that? Is it nationwide, too?
Does this mean that Time Warner is terrified that Los Angeles is next on the list to get Google Fiber?
Is there any other competition coming or recently arrived there?
(As an irrelevant but amusing aside, Chrome thinks "Los Angeles" is spelled wrong, but "LA" and "L.A." are not.)
The man rakes in way north of $400k a year from just his paycheck and subsequent pension... do you seriously think he's going to quibble over a $300 ETF?
I thought your carrier could keep you from unlocking your phone (if they so chose) even after the termination of the contract. If a carrier isn't legally obligated to unlock your phone if you pay the ETF or let the contract expire -- and they decide they don't want to -- then unlocking it yourself would still be a case of breaking their DRM, right? And now that it's illegal for you to do it yourself, a company that was previously more "generous" might decide to get a little stingy just because they can.
You're this guy? God bless you, man, for saving our liberties.
You sir, apparently did not watch the movies.
If you can find decent English subtitles, let us know. So far I've only seen MTV Star Wars in the original Klingon, and I've got no idea what's going on.
Actually Mr Anonymous, many of the best episodes of classic sci-fi series like Star Trek and Stargate were all based on time-travel. Yesterday's Enterprise, Anyone?
In other words, you are wrong and it is actually the complete opposite. Time Travel scares away novice sci-fi writers because they cannot wrap their heads around the paradoxical nature of such concepts, while the great writers are able to mold the concept into compelling, memorable science fiction.
OK, how about this? Time travel is the violin of SciFi plot devices. If you can't play it well, it hurts the audience.
"Notice the loss of hearing . . ."
It is perfectly honorable and respectable to want to be trained and ready to protect your country. What is not honorable and respectable is politicians allowing unconstitutional wars.
And then we've come full circle when your politicians do that, because then it becomes honorable and respectable to not join the armed forces, lest your commitment to your country and fellow citizens be abused and misused. Except that doesn't worry or bother the politicians, since in wartime, army joins you.
18,735 - suicide by firearm 11,493 - murder by firearm 554 - killed from accidental firearm discharge
31,578 - accidental death from poisoning
All of these numbers pale in comparison to this: 108,000 - killed from adverse prescription drug reactions.
Clearly the firearms angle is over stated.We should be banning doctors.
It's not exactly a legitimate comparison. What percentage of people shot see improvement of their previous conditions vs. those using prescription drugs? I, for one, would rather try amoxicillin for certain infections first, rather than gunshot.
Mind explaining how "teen pregnancy" has fuck-all to do with health? Keep in mind that 18 and 19 are still part of your teenage years.
I'll field this one. "Infants of adolescent mothers are more likely than infants of older mothers to use a variety of health care services that suggest poorer health. A considerable proportion of this greater use seems to be attributable to specific characteristics of mothers, such as socioeconomic characteristics, rather than to an inability that is common among adolescents to promote infant health or to use health care appropriately."
Emphasis mine.
I really think you could have guessed this if you'd thought about it for just a few seconds.
... purely because we have the same dress size.
Just curious: How do you know your dress size?
I know. In some stores, I'm usually a 10, but others an 8 or even a 12. You've got to take at least three of each to the fitting room. It's ridiculous.
I'm good. I can make as much lube as I need with xanthan gum and water. Chemistry for the win!
I have no idea why more guys don't try that line.
I also understand that MRSA (a very serious, and potentially lethal bacteria, if untreated) has been brought on by over sanitization. That's what makes MRSA so serious. It resists almost all antibiotic treatments. Studies have been coming out showing where hospitals that are not as clean have lower rates of MRSA infection.
MRSA is resistant to antibiotics due to the overuse of . . . antibiotics. I think you're conflating MRSA with theories about the polio epidemic.