you're appropriately downmodded. Dont' lump apple in with google. Apple doesn't do anything good. Even google is not completely good, but they tend to do lots of good things. Substantially more than apple or MS.
uh, OGM is not ogg. So of course you cant' help but not have problems with it. It's a horrible attempt at getting WMV to work in ogg, basically. Try OGG instead of OGM and what do you know! skipping and jumping works wonderfully!
Helps to read the article because then you'd actually know that.
yet, he seems to understand his issues significantly better than well, all the grandstanding politicians we know and hate. Maybe it's because he actually reads things instead of just following the whip.
5? You think a 5 year old even gives a shit about a first person shooter? Hell, kids at 5 don't even have an interest about that. Maybe they have interest in wow, or some mmo, or something fantasy, maybe even a fighting game, but FPS are typically not something that people at 5 are interested *in*. If I found my kid playing mortal kombat at 5 successfully, I'd be damn impressed. Again, that's not a FPS. Nor do they have 50 dollars to spend on a game, unless they stole your credit card and in which case you have another lesson altogether. Nor do they have the attention span to even play such a FPS.
If the kid was 9-16, that's the range you start dealing with these kinds of things. But at 5? No.
some? Outside of sundance it's extremely unlikely that you can find the stuff anywhere. Stores won't carry it, theatres won't show it. The only "not rated" movies that show up are previews.
yes, because punishing children is sure to teach them a lesson. *rolls eyes*.
All that means is, they'll be damn sure to not let you see the next time they do it. Punishments for small crap = lack of trust in both directions (not just you to your kid, but your kid to you).
Or you can teach your child to be responsible, and let them do it in a responsible way and act as a positive influence to your kids. Wow! that might be like parenting or something!
How do people not understand the reverse psychology is how you teach your kids positive lessons?
It's not about competing. They're trying to buy marketshare. If they spent $713M into making a good product (and they know how to do it) by being honest for once, they'd be in the black.
Saying a kid can't have an R game doesn't fit for everyone.
I was involved in R-rated games, movies etc at 12. I was mature enough to handle it. Should I have had to wait another 6 years because of the law?
Please. It's like laws on speeding. they have a general concept but unless you're in extreme violation nobody cares because they aren't even realistic laws in the first place.
Maybe you should go read the warrant, they basically said "you can take anything from his house that is electronic" including mice and including taking any passwords he has on his PC. Mice have evidence?
I'm quite sure that last one there is a first amendment violation. Any lawyers care to comment? I smell a mistrial where he won't get his stuff back for 5 years including all his cellphones which they took(at which point it'll be useless). gotta love the "hold his stuff indefinitely while you copy every hard drive".
Way off. It's the parents responsibility to be parents when the kids obtain the stuff. Smart people realize no law is going to stop what people consider a civil disobedience at best.
the judges also tend to agree with what you just said. This wording of "consider reinstating California's ban" is a crock of bullshit. There is no way to determine how the supreme court is going to rule in advance.
They're not considering reinstating the ban. They're considering making a judgement which could have absolutely nothing to do with the video game ban, if they so choose.
Apple is a master of spin, not unlike MS, but when you try to bring policies like the RIAA (restrictions of what you can do with something you purchase) people are eventually going to adapt and just move on altogether.
well, it's not a clear issue in courts, as yourworstnightmare says. However, accessing a network that has at least an encryption/password is a lot easier to prove as unauthorized/etc than one that is simply open.
There's really no way to enforce anything if the network is open. I don't think anyone's bothered to try to prove that in court, especially not in the states. I think they try to fearmonger the situation in NZ/OZ/UK, if I recall correctly.
Sadly, I could absolutely agree that such a message is very likely.
I love how all of it hides the fact that if this is public information, obviously the government and other groups which people are concerned even more about, know this information as well.
Reality? It affected everyone who has automatic updates on mcafee for enterprise, which roughly translates to a large majority of enterprise customers. Usually from a security perspective it's seen as bad form to not have updates available as soon as possible.
It also shows that mcafee's quality control is nothing short of crap. It's known that viruses do rename as svchost sometimes, but clearly they didn't test the heuristics here.
oh and remind me - on that unlimited connection you have, or 250GB for $60/month - so let's say 25 cents a gigabyte, rounded up...what is that if someone uses 20 to maybe 200 megs of your connection? That would be...between 1/50th and 1/5th of that, which is half a penny to maybe 12 cents in cost. Are you going to go to court and sue for damages for half a penny?
way to show your lack of understanding. Wardriving is not illegal at all, actually. It just gets a bad name. Using someone else's network without their authorization is only illegal if it's encrypted. If it's a public network and you are accessing it from a public location, guess what? Not illegal.
okay, so how is this different than any other wardriver or just anyone using wifi and how is it any more "enforceable"? Your computer keeps track of MAC addresses. There are apps that can be put on your phone to track mac addresses and open/close status while driving along with gps, and it's public information.
60% premium is not a lot - it depends on the total sum. It's absolutely not unheard of for extremely successful companies (such as arm) to ask for 200-400% premium or more.
One reason is very simple: apple just gave an offer, that means they know that's easily the minimum.
Slashdot Mirror
you're appropriately downmodded. Dont' lump apple in with google. Apple doesn't do anything good. Even google is not completely good, but they tend to do lots of good things. Substantially more than apple or MS.
uh, OGM is not ogg. So of course you cant' help but not have problems with it. It's a horrible attempt at getting WMV to work in ogg, basically. Try OGG instead of OGM and what do you know! skipping and jumping works wonderfully!
Helps to read the article because then you'd actually know that.
yet, he seems to understand his issues significantly better than well, all the grandstanding politicians we know and hate. Maybe it's because he actually reads things instead of just following the whip.
5? You think a 5 year old even gives a shit about a first person shooter? Hell, kids at 5 don't even have an interest about that. Maybe they have interest in wow, or some mmo, or something fantasy, maybe even a fighting game, but FPS are typically not something that people at 5 are interested *in*. If I found my kid playing mortal kombat at 5 successfully, I'd be damn impressed. Again, that's not a FPS. Nor do they have 50 dollars to spend on a game, unless they stole your credit card and in which case you have another lesson altogether. Nor do they have the attention span to even play such a FPS.
If the kid was 9-16, that's the range you start dealing with these kinds of things. But at 5? No.
some? Outside of sundance it's extremely unlikely that you can find the stuff anywhere. Stores won't carry it, theatres won't show it. The only "not rated" movies that show up are previews.
they're not considering reinstatement or not. They're agreeing to go back and review the law.
The former statement implies approval, the latter is what they're doing.
yes, because punishing children is sure to teach them a lesson. *rolls eyes*.
All that means is, they'll be damn sure to not let you see the next time they do it. Punishments for small crap = lack of trust in both directions (not just you to your kid, but your kid to you).
Or you can teach your child to be responsible, and let them do it in a responsible way and act as a positive influence to your kids. Wow! that might be like parenting or something!
How do people not understand the reverse psychology is how you teach your kids positive lessons?
Voluntary? yes. Can you release anything in the theatres without it? No.
Therefore, it's compulsory.
It's not about competing. They're trying to buy marketshare. If they spent $713M into making a good product (and they know how to do it) by being honest for once, they'd be in the black.
why on passwords? Because in any ordinary situation your 5th amendment right is not trumped - you cannot be compelled to provide passwords.
why? Because not everyone fits a blanket.
Saying a kid can't have an R game doesn't fit for everyone.
I was involved in R-rated games, movies etc at 12. I was mature enough to handle it. Should I have had to wait another 6 years because of the law?
Please. It's like laws on speeding. they have a general concept but unless you're in extreme violation nobody cares because they aren't even realistic laws in the first place.
Really?
Maybe you should go read the warrant, they basically said "you can take anything from his house that is electronic" including mice and including taking any passwords he has on his PC. Mice have evidence?
I'm quite sure that last one there is a first amendment violation. Any lawyers care to comment? I smell a mistrial where he won't get his stuff back for 5 years including all his cellphones which they took(at which point it'll be useless). gotta love the "hold his stuff indefinitely while you copy every hard drive".
Way off. It's the parents responsibility to be parents when the kids obtain the stuff. Smart people realize no law is going to stop what people consider a civil disobedience at best.
the judges also tend to agree with what you just said. This wording of "consider reinstating California's ban" is a crock of bullshit. There is no way to determine how the supreme court is going to rule in advance.
They're not considering reinstating the ban. They're considering making a judgement which could have absolutely nothing to do with the video game ban, if they so choose.
bingo. Android marketshare is going way up, and all apple has is hype. Now that they've locked down the codebase, they're slowly bringing the DRM to the masses. Patent infringement lawsuits are a sure sign that apple knows they're fucked real soon.
Apple is a master of spin, not unlike MS, but when you try to bring policies like the RIAA (restrictions of what you can do with something you purchase) people are eventually going to adapt and just move on altogether.
well, it's not a clear issue in courts, as yourworstnightmare says. However, accessing a network that has at least an encryption/password is a lot easier to prove as unauthorized/etc than one that is simply open.
There's really no way to enforce anything if the network is open. I don't think anyone's bothered to try to prove that in court, especially not in the states. I think they try to fearmonger the situation in NZ/OZ/UK, if I recall correctly.
Sadly, I could absolutely agree that such a message is very likely.
I love how all of it hides the fact that if this is public information, obviously the government and other groups which people are concerned even more about, know this information as well.
yeah, the media spin is strong with mcafee.
Reality? It affected everyone who has automatic updates on mcafee for enterprise, which roughly translates to a large majority of enterprise customers. Usually from a security perspective it's seen as bad form to not have updates available as soon as possible.
It also shows that mcafee's quality control is nothing short of crap. It's known that viruses do rename as svchost sometimes, but clearly they didn't test the heuristics here.
oh and remind me - on that unlimited connection you have, or 250GB for $60/month - so let's say 25 cents a gigabyte, rounded up...what is that if someone uses 20 to maybe 200 megs of your connection? That would be...between 1/50th and 1/5th of that, which is half a penny to maybe 12 cents in cost. Are you going to go to court and sue for damages for half a penny?
get real.
nah, you're right. this is basically a lot of hype about a lot of nothing.
way to show your lack of understanding. Wardriving is not illegal at all, actually. It just gets a bad name. Using someone else's network without their authorization is only illegal if it's encrypted. If it's a public network and you are accessing it from a public location, guess what? Not illegal.
okay, so how is this different than any other wardriver or just anyone using wifi and how is it any more "enforceable"? Your computer keeps track of MAC addresses. There are apps that can be put on your phone to track mac addresses and open/close status while driving along with gps, and it's public information.
google deleted them all on purpose. No accident there.
You can still do the same things and a video will succeed 100%. You need to do about 7.5% pitch and you'll pass a video every single time.
Read Khyber's reply, dumbass.
Wikipedia doesn't cite every single example. It's a lazy example to a well known/established scenario.
60% premium is not a lot - it depends on the total sum. It's absolutely not unheard of for extremely successful companies (such as arm) to ask for 200-400% premium or more.
One reason is very simple: apple just gave an offer, that means they know that's easily the minimum.