If you do not have the technical foresight to have a plan in case I get hit by a bus then you deserve to live with the consequences of me disappearing off the face of the earth, even if it's at your own doing. Especially if it's your doing.
thank god this isn't how the law works. perps don't walk because the victim "deserves to live w/ the consequences".
Do you have some insider information on the scope of Brazilian surveillance operations
no, but we don't have the naive minds of a child either. this is like the guy that holds up a 7-11 condemning a bank robber. they only reason he's not robbing a bank as well is because he doesn't have the means.
This was spying on a few diplomats within Brazil's borders, not massive wire-tapping on a global scale.
right, and i suppose wire tapping is some moral line that brazil refuses to cross?
everyone spies on everyone else to the best of their ability. i really don't think it's up to each nation to evaluate the skills of every other country and ensure they aren't spying more than they are being spied upon.
did you know, there's a point in the lifecycle of all tech companies where they didn't make a profit? no tech company comes into existence with a ready to sell product making a profit.
and yeah, the general level of the economy effects everyone, and that's a reflection of the stock market. why? because when people have money, or think they have money, they spend it. they buy houses. that affects the real estate market. they buy cars. they buy tech. they invest, allowing other companies to hire workers putting more people to work.
i'm not saying that's how it should be, but that's how it is. even if you keep your money under the mattress you are affected by inflation. even if you work for the govt, you are affected by tax income. and so on, in a painstakingly obvious manner.
To spell it out more clearly, Google can't sue Rockstar over patent infringement, because Rockstar doesn't actually do anything that Google would have a patent on (unless Google owns some "Method and Process for Utterly Crippling the Tech Industry Using Patent Lawsuits" business process patent we don't know about).
when did we pass the law that state you can only sue someone if they sue you first? google can sue apple, or whoever they want.
Without retaining your mail, they can't scan it to send you advertising. Since they don't do that in real-time, they need to hang on to it for as long as they can.
by saying "hang on to for as long as they they can", you imply that they don't hang on to it forever. welcome to english.
But still Gmail violates so many standards for email, that unless you buy into the whole Google World View, its hard to swallow some of the stuff it does.
they give you POP / IMAP access asa token gesture. i'm sure they'd rather you not use it, so don't expect too much.
Without retaining your mail, they can't scan it to send you advertising. Since they don't do that in real-time, they need to hang on to it for as long as they can.
what makes you think that when (your view) of an email "goes away", they haven't retained it, or the important bits of it, somewhere else?
What I don't understand is that people say it is dorky. But I find that it pretty much look like a regular "digital/quartz" watch we had 10 years ago. Clearly they don't look like luxury watch, but they do not look dorky at all to me.
What I don't understand is that people say it is dorky. But I find that it pretty much look like a regular bell bottom jeans we had 30 years ago. Clearly they don't look like skinny jeans, but they do not look dorky at all to me.
yeah, i probably didn't find that one on dell.com because IT'S NOT EVEN SHIPPING YET. yes, i admit it, i went to their store site and browsed systems that are actually for sale.
anyway, i agree with most of what you wrote. MBPs are more expensive and i wouldn't dispute that. i was mainly responding to a parent post that quoted $400 for a comparable windows system. personally, i'd pay 20-25% more to get the system that i want... that doesn't run windows, and where i won't have to struggle with linux to get the system working smoothly.
Apple rep? Lol... is that even a thing?
do you seriously want to speak with some idiot to figure out what laptop you can purchase?
Whereas every other manufacturers products either steadily get cheaper over time, or steadily get spec bumps over time while the price stays constant -- Apple's specs and price stay exactly the same until the product is refreshed.
that's not what i've observed. i've been in the market to replace an aging windows laptop for over a year and have been watching prices closely. prices haven't dropped, even on low end windows laptops.
Re:A shot at other OS, computer *and* device maker
on
Apple Announces iPad Air
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Apple laptops are not magic
but they are unix, and unlike linux, everything just works out of the box. for some of us, it's worth paying more to not have to dink around for hours on the weekend to hopefully get things running smoothly.
it's $600 less, but it has 1/2 the memory, worse graphics, a slightly smaller display and lesser res, and a 128GB SSD vs. a next-gen 512GB SSD. also, it runs windows, not a unix-based OS.
$300 less, but has last-gen graphics, last-gen core processor, and a last-gen SSD that's 1/2 the size. it does have a touchscreen where the MPB does not.
p.s., there's nothing stopping you from living out your beliefs. please, start today. sell everything you own, and send everything you make to 3rd world countries... that is, everything except the 3 handfuls of rice a day it will cost to sustain you. it's only fair.
maybe you'll make the argument that you are more a benefit to society if you can produce, and you need resources to produce. well, i'd ask you to speak with the starving people in africa, or the homeless fellow down the street, if they'd rather have you with greater resources to produce, or that $5000 balance in your bank account. i think they'll choose the later. it's only fair to respect them in that.
of course, you haven't done that. i know because you are sitting in front of a computer, and you haven't sold that yet and sent the money to a 3rd world country. i know because you have electricity to run the computer. you have a broadband connection. even if you are borrowing all that, that's resources that should be shared evenly with those that have less than you... resources that will essentially be zero by the time you are done sharing.
Also, worth noting that the ONLY other logically consistent position is to deport everyone who isn't a member of one of the native tribes.
so get to it man. figure out where you relatives are from. go there. but before you leave, drop off your belongings, and the contents of your bank account to the nearest reservation.
Indeed. But the solution is not to participate in enforcing tyrannical laws anyways. Would you have returned escaped slaves to bondage? It was the law after all. Would you have helped send Jews to the camps? It was the law after all.
requiring people to go through a process to enter the country is not the same as sending people to concentration camps or condemning them to a life of brutal slavery. good plan though, invoke those images and maybe make people feel guilty about a perfectly sane law.
but just for fun, why not take that to it's logical conclusion? let's send oil tanker to ever region in the world that's poorer than the US is becoming. we will fill them up, and take them all back and unload them in the US. hundreds of millions of people. we will bring them all. including criminals, because heck, what are we going to do research each person? no time for that. we will do this until the standard of living is reduced to the point where they don't *want* to come any longer. it's only fair.
see any problem with this?
we all want to help others, but be honest about what you are willing to give up. your home? education for your children? healthcare? infrastructure like clean water and sanitation? the US isn't a magical fairy land. the systems here are already on the brink of collapse. many of our governments are already bankrupt.
so basically, since any immigrant could theoretically be "undocumented", we can't legally stop anyone from coming into this country, right? once they are over the border by whatever means, they are in huh? show up in a boat off the coast? i was fishing sir, had a bout of amnesia, and forgot my name and address. i also lost my wallet and ID overboard. heck, even if you catch me at the border, maybe i just got drunk and wandered into mexico and now i want back in (also with amnesia and also i was so drunk i lost my ID and forgot where i live).
that, in concept, embodies much of what's screwed about the US legal system. overload it with some silly argument that while is technically correct, actually flies in the face of common sense.
we're talking about *illegal* immigrants. legal immigrants are allowed to enter *because* they can show the ability to support themselves. so yeah, duh, thanks for the comment.
But that doesn't make illegal immigration wrong, or evil or bad. Most people break the law everyday. How fast did you drive on the way to work this morning? Unlike restrictions on immigration, laws against speeding actually have a rational justification.
laws against unmitigated immigration have many, many justifications. here are a few,
1. no background check... murders, rapists, violent offenders may be entering and you have no idea one way or the other
2. illegals are actually targeted for abuse in the work force and other places, since they can't go to the authorities with problems. obviously they've still decided that situation is better than where they came from however.
3. illegals are paid under the table... because they can't legally be paid. that means we collect no taxes from them, which means they aren't contributing to support the society they live in.
4. the US does not have some infinite well of resources. if you let people immigrate arbitrarily, they'll do it to a point where the standard of living is equivalent to where they came from, and only then they'll stop. that means you are letting every other shit hole unmanaged country in the world drag the US down to their level.
this is why you generally need to show some means of supporting yourself if you want to enter legally.
5. it's not fair to the people that went through the immigration process legally.
6. it's not fair to citizens that have to compete with illegals for the same work, as the illegals will necessarily work for less $ and less benefits
Slashdot Mirror
If you do not have the technical foresight to have a plan in case I get hit by a bus then you deserve to live with the consequences of me disappearing off the face of the earth, even if it's at your own doing. Especially if it's your doing.
thank god this isn't how the law works. perps don't walk because the victim "deserves to live w/ the consequences".
Do you have some insider information on the scope of Brazilian surveillance operations
no, but we don't have the naive minds of a child either. this is like the guy that holds up a 7-11 condemning a bank robber. they only reason he's not robbing a bank as well is because he doesn't have the means.
This was spying on a few diplomats within Brazil's borders, not massive wire-tapping on a global scale.
right, and i suppose wire tapping is some moral line that brazil refuses to cross?
everyone spies on everyone else to the best of their ability. i really don't think it's up to each nation to evaluate the skills of every other country and ensure they aren't spying more than they are being spied upon.
did you know, there's a point in the lifecycle of all tech companies where they didn't make a profit? no tech company comes into existence with a ready to sell product making a profit.
and yeah, the general level of the economy effects everyone, and that's a reflection of the stock market. why? because when people have money, or think they have money, they spend it. they buy houses. that affects the real estate market. they buy cars. they buy tech. they invest, allowing other companies to hire workers putting more people to work.
i'm not saying that's how it should be, but that's how it is. even if you keep your money under the mattress you are affected by inflation. even if you work for the govt, you are affected by tax income. and so on, in a painstakingly obvious manner.
the economy isn't interconnected at all right? it might even reduce your commute to staying your house.
wait for it ... "but i work in the ___ field, so i'm not affected ..." in 3 ... 2 ... 1.
To spell it out more clearly, Google can't sue Rockstar over patent infringement, because Rockstar doesn't actually do anything that Google would have a patent on (unless Google owns some "Method and Process for Utterly Crippling the Tech Industry Using Patent Lawsuits" business process patent we don't know about).
when did we pass the law that state you can only sue someone if they sue you first? google can sue apple, or whoever they want.
The Motorola patents are worthless. Either SEPs that can't be used in litigation or outdated pager patents.
wow. if google only had you on their legal team before they spent $12.4b.
also, it's a good idea to apply some common sense before voicing your delusions.
I don't remember saying that.
you said this,
Without retaining your mail, they can't scan it to send you advertising. Since they don't do that in real-time, they need to hang on to it for as long as they can.
by saying "hang on to for as long as they they can", you imply that they don't hang on to it forever. welcome to english.
Then iGoogle. Is so expensive for Google to run iGoogle servers? Really?
i'm almost certain it's greater than zero. google isn't a charity.
But still Gmail violates so many standards for email, that unless you buy into the whole Google World View, its hard to swallow some of the stuff it does.
they give you POP / IMAP access asa token gesture. i'm sure they'd rather you not use it, so don't expect too much.
Without retaining your mail, they can't scan it to send you advertising. Since they don't do that in real-time, they need to hang on to it for as long as they can.
what makes you think that when (your view) of an email "goes away", they haven't retained it, or the important bits of it, somewhere else?
Write Once, it should work for ever, or until significant portions of the html spec are deprecated.
time to get back to your job at the pet store.
star of such quality entertainment as That '70s Show
that is actually a quality series, as far as sitcoms go. dude, where's my car was pretty darn funny as well.
What I don't understand is that people say it is dorky. But I find that it pretty much look like a regular "digital/quartz" watch we had 10 years ago. Clearly they don't look like luxury watch, but they do not look dorky at all to me.
What I don't understand is that people say it is dorky. But I find that it pretty much look like a regular bell bottom jeans we had 30 years ago. Clearly they don't look like skinny jeans, but they do not look dorky at all to me.
Talk about limiting your market.
it's called a phased rollout.
at best, that's a matter of opinion,
http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001000
yeah, i probably didn't find that one on dell.com because IT'S NOT EVEN SHIPPING YET. yes, i admit it, i went to their store site and browsed systems that are actually for sale.
price? $1950 vs ... $2600... $650 difference... ouch...
anyway, i agree with most of what you wrote. MBPs are more expensive and i wouldn't dispute that. i was mainly responding to a parent post that quoted $400 for a comparable windows system. personally, i'd pay 20-25% more to get the system that i want ... that doesn't run windows, and where i won't have to struggle with linux to get the system working smoothly.
Apple rep? Lol... is that even a thing?
do you seriously want to speak with some idiot to figure out what laptop you can purchase?
Whereas every other manufacturers products either steadily get cheaper over time, or steadily get spec bumps over time while the price stays constant -- Apple's specs and price stay exactly the same until the product is refreshed.
that's not what i've observed. i've been in the market to replace an aging windows laptop for over a year and have been watching prices closely. prices haven't dropped, even on low end windows laptops.
Apple laptops are not magic
but they are unix, and unlike linux, everything just works out of the box. for some of us, it's worth paying more to not have to dink around for hours on the weekend to hopefully get things running smoothly.
macs are overpriced, but not as much as some folks say. consider this MBP,
http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro
it's $1800 with no upgrades.
the most comparable thing i can find at dell.com is this,
http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-12-9q33/pd?oc=dncwi16b&model_id=xps-12-9q33
it's $600 less, but it has 1/2 the memory, worse graphics, a slightly smaller display and lesser res, and a 128GB SSD vs. a next-gen 512GB SSD. also, it runs windows, not a unix-based OS.
how about toshiba?
http://www.toshiba.com/us/computers/laptops/kira/kirabook13/KIRAbook13-i5-touch
$300 less, but has last-gen graphics, last-gen core processor, and a last-gen SSD that's 1/2 the size. it does have a touchscreen where the MPB does not.
link please.
p.s., there's nothing stopping you from living out your beliefs. please, start today. sell everything you own, and send everything you make to 3rd world countries ... that is, everything except the 3 handfuls of rice a day it will cost to sustain you. it's only fair.
maybe you'll make the argument that you are more a benefit to society if you can produce, and you need resources to produce. well, i'd ask you to speak with the starving people in africa, or the homeless fellow down the street, if they'd rather have you with greater resources to produce, or that $5000 balance in your bank account. i think they'll choose the later. it's only fair to respect them in that.
of course, you haven't done that. i know because you are sitting in front of a computer, and you haven't sold that yet and sent the money to a 3rd world country. i know because you have electricity to run the computer. you have a broadband connection. even if you are borrowing all that, that's resources that should be shared evenly with those that have less than you ... resources that will essentially be zero by the time you are done sharing.
Also, worth noting that the ONLY other logically consistent position is to deport everyone who isn't a member of one of the native tribes.
so get to it man. figure out where you relatives are from. go there. but before you leave, drop off your belongings, and the contents of your bank account to the nearest reservation.
Indeed. But the solution is not to participate in enforcing tyrannical laws anyways. Would you have returned escaped slaves to bondage? It was the law after all. Would you have helped send Jews to the camps? It was the law after all.
requiring people to go through a process to enter the country is not the same as sending people to concentration camps or condemning them to a life of brutal slavery. good plan though, invoke those images and maybe make people feel guilty about a perfectly sane law.
but just for fun, why not take that to it's logical conclusion? let's send oil tanker to ever region in the world that's poorer than the US is becoming. we will fill them up, and take them all back and unload them in the US. hundreds of millions of people. we will bring them all. including criminals, because heck, what are we going to do research each person? no time for that. we will do this until the standard of living is reduced to the point where they don't *want* to come any longer. it's only fair.
see any problem with this?
we all want to help others, but be honest about what you are willing to give up. your home? education for your children? healthcare? infrastructure like clean water and sanitation? the US isn't a magical fairy land. the systems here are already on the brink of collapse. many of our governments are already bankrupt.
I see absolutely no problem with that strategy.
i'm shocked.
sure, let's treat our immigrants as the khans would have. that would mean torturing the men to death and raping their women.
so basically, since any immigrant could theoretically be "undocumented", we can't legally stop anyone from coming into this country, right? once they are over the border by whatever means, they are in huh? show up in a boat off the coast? i was fishing sir, had a bout of amnesia, and forgot my name and address. i also lost my wallet and ID overboard. heck, even if you catch me at the border, maybe i just got drunk and wandered into mexico and now i want back in (also with amnesia and also i was so drunk i lost my ID and forgot where i live).
that, in concept, embodies much of what's screwed about the US legal system. overload it with some silly argument that while is technically correct, actually flies in the face of common sense.
You must not know a lot of immigrants
we're talking about *illegal* immigrants. legal immigrants are allowed to enter *because* they can show the ability to support themselves. so yeah, duh, thanks for the comment.
But that doesn't make illegal immigration wrong, or evil or bad. Most people break the law everyday. How fast did you drive on the way to work this morning? Unlike restrictions on immigration, laws against speeding actually have a rational justification.
laws against unmitigated immigration have many, many justifications. here are a few,
1. no background check ... murders, rapists, violent offenders may be entering and you have no idea one way or the other
2. illegals are actually targeted for abuse in the work force and other places, since they can't go to the authorities with problems. obviously they've still decided that situation is better than where they came from however.
3. illegals are paid under the table ... because they can't legally be paid. that means we collect no taxes from them, which means they aren't contributing to support the society they live in.
4. the US does not have some infinite well of resources. if you let people immigrate arbitrarily, they'll do it to a point where the standard of living is equivalent to where they came from, and only then they'll stop. that means you are letting every other shit hole unmanaged country in the world drag the US down to their level.
this is why you generally need to show some means of supporting yourself if you want to enter legally.
5. it's not fair to the people that went through the immigration process legally.
6. it's not fair to citizens that have to compete with illegals for the same work, as the illegals will necessarily work for less $ and less benefits
and so on.