when streaming is more convenient for almost all users?
I guess it never occurred to the writer there are those of us who don't want to watch a movie which stutters, stops or pauses because of network issues. We want a nice, smooth viewing experience.
Contrary to popular opinion, the latest and greatest is not the be all and end all. If anything, that mindset has contributed to decline in usability of nearly everything tech related and only serves to perpetuate the stereotype that those in IT are completely detached from reality and what the average person wants/needs.
Apparently KISS has been abandoned in favor of, "Ohh, shiny!"
Then prove it. Show one piece of holistic/homeopathic medicine which does the equivalent of real medicine.
So far, not one has been shown to do anything because it's all the placebo effect which has been demonstrated in numerous studies.
As is always said in these situations, find at least one scientifically rigorous study showing any alternative medicine works. Not what some charlatan like Kevin Trudeau says, not Montel Williams in an informercial, a true scientific study using standardized methods to show any effectiveness of alternative medicine.
If I produce software, I want to get paid for it. If someone else produces software, I'll steal it.
When I make a product, no one else can make anything like it. When someone else makes a product like someone else, they're free to rip off the design because you can't copyright or trademark that shit.
If you've never used any variety of Linux before, you will need training.
You can be a whiz at writing scripts and batch files to do things on the Windows side, that does not mean you will magically know how to do things on the Linux side.
Just because I am very capable of writing a presentation for the higher ups or giving a speech does not mean I have the capacity to write a book.
No, there is not huge difference. As I said a bit further up, it wasn't his to take. It doesn't matter what it was, it wasn't his. Period.
Call it what you will, the software, in whatever form, was Microsoft's. Not his. He had absolutely no right to it any way, shape or form other than to work on it.
The only ignorance is people like you who think they have a right to something from someone else and do whatever they feel like, just because they can.
How about this. You work on a piece of software, I'll take the code in whatever form I feel and give it to a big company who will make billions off it, leaving you with squat.
It wasn't his information to give. It doesn't matter if it's raw code, a build, a beta or anything else, the underlying and overriding principle is it wasn't his to do anything with.
Stop being pedantic. He took something which wasn't his and gave it to someone who shouldn't have had access to it. It doesn't matter if the terms are interchanged or not, the underlying principle is still the same.
You do realize these behaviors are so prevalent precisely because they were selected for in earlier versions of the Darwin games?
Yet supposedly we're the smartest animal on the planet, able to suppress Evolution's pull and understand right from wrong. If someone can't grasp the simple concept that murdering someone just so you can have their phone is a bad thing, there really is no hope they'll be a functioning member of society.
Why should we waste money on people who obviously have chosen not to abide by the simple rules of society. It's not as if not stealing, murdering or raping are new concepts.
We as a society no longer have the time or resources to continue to coddle criminals. Recidivists should not constantly be leeching off the public dole with free room and board.
Removing these people from society has multiple benefits including not having to worry if they're going to commit another, more violent, crime, not having to house and feed them for years at a time and if we're really lucky, taking them out of the gene pool so they can't reproduce.
Their recent coal ash spill coated 70 MILES of the Dan River, but thanks to them buying off the legislature and a Governor who happened to have worked for Duke Energy, they may escape any liability for the cleanup, leaving it up to the taxpayers to foot the bill.
until the last second to begin real treatment, things might have turned out better.
Instead, Jobs abandoned common sense and reason in favor of hocus pocus, "alternative" crap which did absolutely nothing to help his condition and may in fact have contributed to its severity.
There's a reason real medicines are tested and "alternative medicine" isn't. If they weren't alternative, they would be listed as medicine, used every day and give tangible results.
makes it a lot harder for people to lie about their interaction with a police officer.
I remember a case where a woman claimed she was beaten in the back of a patrol car by the two responding officers. Too bad for her there was an in-car camera pointed to the back seat which clearly showed her yelling and screaming, telling the cops to stop beating her, and she was the only one in the scene the whole time.
The constructive contribution I have is to make everyone who uses medical services pay for them. Stop this nonsense of people going to the emergency room with the sniffles and saying, "I'm sick."
"No shit you're sick, so are 5% of the people in the city. It's flu season. That' will be $50."
The second part is to force the smokers, the obese, the alcoholics and drug users to change their ways. All of the above are lifestyle choices they have made. They want to smoke? No problem. It's their choice. But I shouldn't have my money confiscated to pay for their bad choices.
But neither will be done, will it? Because that would involve personal responsibility and we can't have that, can we? It's easier to make people pay, and pay, and pay some more rather than taking a hard look at the driving issues of rising health costs.
The uACA has nothing to do with health insurance and everything to do with giving free money to insurers.
A failed web site launch, failure to meet their initial sign-up goal, failure to meet their predicted sign-up goal, continual fudging of implementation dates for random portions of the ACA.
It's just like having Bush all over again.
Hopefully people have finally gotten the message and aren't handing over their money to private companies just because the government says you have to.
By that logic, stop using your computer. Between the mining of elements used in its construction, the huge amount of water needed to produce the parts, and everything else that goes into making a computer, it's harming society.
Oh wait, it makes you happy using a computer? Well then, carry on, society be damned.
Because when you "share" music you've purchased, the person to whom you've "shared" returns the music to you, and doesn't keep a copy for themselves, right?
but people who are intent to steal their images are going to do it anyway.
Except it's not stealing, is it? Nothing is being taken. The people are just using the image for their own purpose with the idea being the image is still attributed to Getty, the distributor, and the photographer, who doesn't get paid for the use of their work.
Obviously at some point the person would return the image since they're just borrowing it, not stealing it. That's what happens when someone "shares" their music with someone else, right? They let the other person borrow the music and when done, the person returns the music back to the person who bought the cd/album/mp3/whatever, not keeping a copy for themselves.
he company appears to have no insight into why its customers continue to use the OS.
When something works, why change? And don't give me the crap about security and this and that. Cars from the 60s don't have anywhere near the safety features modern cars do yet have no problem operating safely.
For the average person who does some web surfing and checks their email, there is no legitimate reason to upgrade ESPECIALLY when you take into consideration the costs involved.
This will be one of the few times you'll hear this, but Microsoft did too good a job creating XP.
she'd spent something on the order of $400 playing Candy Crush. That amount floored me... I couldn't believe anyone would do that!
But it's okay if someone spends the same amount of money on a video card, camera lens, monitor or anything else they want to spend the money on, right?
Just because you wouldn't spend that much money on a game doesn't mean others won't. How much money did you spend (if you're old enough to have done so) on video games growing up? I would be willing to bet you easily spent that much enjoying yourself playing games.
flaunting that they had an extra $1,500 just lying around.
Point of order. I just spent significantly more than that on a camera yesterday. I agonized over the purchase for the last several months in the process.
Did I have the money lying around? Technically, yes. I had no problem with the monetary aspect. Does that mean I'll be flaunting to everyone else who doesn't have said camera that I am a have rather than a have not?
While Glass is an annoyance, just because someone buys something somewhat expensive does not mean they are flaunting their wealth. Maybe, like me, they want to have it because it will allow them to expand their horizons.
P.S. If you're going to reply I'm just as annoying as they people are because of my purchase, I'll be sure to remind you the next time you purchase your $200 headphones, $500 video card or something similar which other people would categorize as flaunting your wealth.
Slashdot Mirror
by those who were using this quack remedy?
I can almost hear the screams of terror when the news was announced:
"WHAT?! There's REAL medicine in this? Holy shit, that stuff will kill me!"
when streaming is more convenient for almost all users?
I guess it never occurred to the writer there are those of us who don't want to watch a movie which stutters, stops or pauses because of network issues. We want a nice, smooth viewing experience.
Contrary to popular opinion, the latest and greatest is not the be all and end all. If anything, that mindset has contributed to decline in usability of nearly everything tech related and only serves to perpetuate the stereotype that those in IT are completely detached from reality and what the average person wants/needs.
Apparently KISS has been abandoned in favor of, "Ohh, shiny!"
Then prove it. Show one piece of holistic/homeopathic medicine which does the equivalent of real medicine.
So far, not one has been shown to do anything because it's all the placebo effect which has been demonstrated in numerous studies.
As is always said in these situations, find at least one scientifically rigorous study showing any alternative medicine works. Not what some charlatan like Kevin Trudeau says, not Montel Williams in an informercial, a true scientific study using standardized methods to show any effectiveness of alternative medicine.
You, on the other hand, will burn in the Pit.
At least I'll be warm compared to the frozen wasteland your God has created on Earth.
The slashdot community is hilarious sometimes.
Here's the way it works around here:
If I produce software, I want to get paid for it. If someone else produces software, I'll steal it.
When I make a product, no one else can make anything like it. When someone else makes a product like someone else, they're free to rip off the design because you can't copyright or trademark that shit.
If you've never used any variety of Linux before, you will need training.
You can be a whiz at writing scripts and batch files to do things on the Windows side, that does not mean you will magically know how to do things on the Linux side.
Just because I am very capable of writing a presentation for the higher ups or giving a speech does not mean I have the capacity to write a book.
with additional new filming to restore the creative vision as it would have been unhampered by financial or time pressures?
So like George Lucas did with Star Wars?
No, there is not huge difference. As I said a bit further up, it wasn't his to take. It doesn't matter what it was, it wasn't his. Period.
Call it what you will, the software, in whatever form, was Microsoft's. Not his. He had absolutely no right to it any way, shape or form other than to work on it.
The only ignorance is people like you who think they have a right to something from someone else and do whatever they feel like, just because they can.
How about this. You work on a piece of software, I'll take the code in whatever form I feel and give it to a big company who will make billions off it, leaving you with squat.
That would be fine with you, right?
It wasn't his information to give. It doesn't matter if it's raw code, a build, a beta or anything else, the underlying and overriding principle is it wasn't his to do anything with.
Period.
Stop being pedantic. He took something which wasn't his and gave it to someone who shouldn't have had access to it. It doesn't matter if the terms are interchanged or not, the underlying principle is still the same.
How would you remove them from society?
Execution. Simple, fast, effective.
You do realize these behaviors are so prevalent precisely because they were selected for in earlier versions of the Darwin games?
Yet supposedly we're the smartest animal on the planet, able to suppress Evolution's pull and understand right from wrong. If someone can't grasp the simple concept that murdering someone just so you can have their phone is a bad thing, there really is no hope they'll be a functioning member of society.
Why should we waste money on people who obviously have chosen not to abide by the simple rules of society. It's not as if not stealing, murdering or raping are new concepts.
We as a society no longer have the time or resources to continue to coddle criminals. Recidivists should not constantly be leeching off the public dole with free room and board.
Removing these people from society has multiple benefits including not having to worry if they're going to commit another, more violent, crime, not having to house and feed them for years at a time and if we're really lucky, taking them out of the gene pool so they can't reproduce.
CNN is NOT known for their deep thoughts or complete, or even accurate, coverage.
But the Fox tabloid is, right?
Their recent coal ash spill coated 70 MILES of the Dan River, but thanks to them buying off the legislature and a Governor who happened to have worked for Duke Energy, they may escape any liability for the cleanup, leaving it up to the taxpayers to foot the bill.
until the last second to begin real treatment, things might have turned out better.
Instead, Jobs abandoned common sense and reason in favor of hocus pocus, "alternative" crap which did absolutely nothing to help his condition and may in fact have contributed to its severity.
There's a reason real medicines are tested and "alternative medicine" isn't. If they weren't alternative, they would be listed as medicine, used every day and give tangible results.
makes it a lot harder for people to lie about their interaction with a police officer.
I remember a case where a woman claimed she was beaten in the back of a patrol car by the two responding officers. Too bad for her there was an in-car camera pointed to the back seat which clearly showed her yelling and screaming, telling the cops to stop beating her, and she was the only one in the scene the whole time.
The constructive contribution I have is to make everyone who uses medical services pay for them. Stop this nonsense of people going to the emergency room with the sniffles and saying, "I'm sick."
"No shit you're sick, so are 5% of the people in the city. It's flu season. That' will be $50."
The second part is to force the smokers, the obese, the alcoholics and drug users to change their ways. All of the above are lifestyle choices they have made. They want to smoke? No problem. It's their choice. But I shouldn't have my money confiscated to pay for their bad choices.
But neither will be done, will it? Because that would involve personal responsibility and we can't have that, can we? It's easier to make people pay, and pay, and pay some more rather than taking a hard look at the driving issues of rising health costs.
The uACA has nothing to do with health insurance and everything to do with giving free money to insurers.
A failed web site launch, failure to meet their initial sign-up goal, failure to meet their predicted sign-up goal, continual fudging of implementation dates for random portions of the ACA.
It's just like having Bush all over again.
Hopefully people have finally gotten the message and aren't handing over their money to private companies just because the government says you have to.
I hear complaints from every field these days about not enough jobs for graduates, even in the medical fields.
Not according to companies. If you listen to them, there isn't anyone who's qualified for their positions which is why they have a worker shortage.
Witness this article which claims employers are whining they can't find enough people to fill these ten positions which include the medical field.
if it harms the overall society in the end.
By that logic, stop using your computer. Between the mining of elements used in its construction, the huge amount of water needed to produce the parts, and everything else that goes into making a computer, it's harming society.
Oh wait, it makes you happy using a computer? Well then, carry on, society be damned.
And thank you for missing the sarcasm in my post.
Because when you "share" music you've purchased, the person to whom you've "shared" returns the music to you, and doesn't keep a copy for themselves, right?
but people who are intent to steal their images are going to do it anyway.
Except it's not stealing, is it? Nothing is being taken. The people are just using the image for their own purpose with the idea being the image is still attributed to Getty, the distributor, and the photographer, who doesn't get paid for the use of their work.
Obviously at some point the person would return the image since they're just borrowing it, not stealing it. That's what happens when someone "shares" their music with someone else, right? They let the other person borrow the music and when done, the person returns the music back to the person who bought the cd/album/mp3/whatever, not keeping a copy for themselves.
he company appears to have no insight into why its customers continue to use the OS.
When something works, why change? And don't give me the crap about security and this and that. Cars from the 60s don't have anywhere near the safety features modern cars do yet have no problem operating safely.
For the average person who does some web surfing and checks their email, there is no legitimate reason to upgrade ESPECIALLY when you take into consideration the costs involved.
This will be one of the few times you'll hear this, but Microsoft did too good a job creating XP.
she'd spent something on the order of $400 playing Candy Crush. That amount floored me... I couldn't believe anyone would do that!
But it's okay if someone spends the same amount of money on a video card, camera lens, monitor or anything else they want to spend the money on, right?
Just because you wouldn't spend that much money on a game doesn't mean others won't. How much money did you spend (if you're old enough to have done so) on video games growing up? I would be willing to bet you easily spent that much enjoying yourself playing games.
flaunting that they had an extra $1,500 just lying around.
Point of order. I just spent significantly more than that on a camera yesterday. I agonized over the purchase for the last several months in the process.
Did I have the money lying around? Technically, yes. I had no problem with the monetary aspect. Does that mean I'll be flaunting to everyone else who doesn't have said camera that I am a have rather than a have not?
While Glass is an annoyance, just because someone buys something somewhat expensive does not mean they are flaunting their wealth. Maybe, like me, they want to have it because it will allow them to expand their horizons.
P.S. If you're going to reply I'm just as annoying as they people are because of my purchase, I'll be sure to remind you the next time you purchase your $200 headphones, $500 video card or something similar which other people would categorize as flaunting your wealth.