but how much time was taken away by the early termination of the petition?
I'm too lazy to dig up wherever I read it, maybe it was a comment on hacker news, but it sounded like it had about another week to go before expiration.
FWIW, I'm inclined to write this off as a glitch. There is nothing to be gained by nefariously disappearing the petition other than to draw attention to the petition. If history is any evidence, petitions that do get enough signatures don't provoke any action anyways, just a condescening pat on the head.
They are not. This is not about replacing X, it's simply about splitting the graphics and input code out of X and moving it over to the kernel and Wayland. You can still run X11 apps under Wayland.
That's great as long as no one ever writes native wayland apps.
Except that X has been tinkered to work for desktop systems for so long that there little of that network oriented code left around, yet W, or Wayland, tries to get rid of that aspect completely.
From the 10,000 ft view it sure looks like wayland is just reinvention for reinvention's sake and is likely to run into a whole host of problems that X figured out 20+ years ago.
Worse than that, by doing this, they're showing, legally, that they CAN do this. Which means the next time some RIAA shitwaffle decides to Google for their latest "Generic Movie Content" blockbuster and finds it, welp, that means it's Google's fault now...
No it doesn't.
I think it is a terrible idea and all that, but you are arguing about something else than what is happening here. All google is doing is including the number of DMCA notices they have received for a specific website to their pagerank algorithm. They aren't identifying anything other than how many times they've received official complaints. They certainly aren't picking and choosing "legitimate" files.
I think the fact that the previous record was set in 1936 pretty much disproves your "fact" that the weather is setting records "year after year". "Year after year" to most people means "every year or two", not "every 7 decades or so".
The kiosks weren't so inconvenient or dis-leisurely: They were abundant and substantially built-out, with comfortable chairs and dividers and (at the time) paper catalogs.
That's not the point. Here's an example of my most recent purchase - bought a memory foam mattress. I spent about 10 days researching everything - comparing product listings on websites, reading reviews of specific mattresses, reading general information on memory foam mattress, etc. If I had to place my order physically at wal-mart, I would never have been able to proceed at that pace and with that amount of depth.
Either way, it's all meh to me:
Everybody's got an opinion, I just think it is not useful to base it on an incomplete understanding.
FFS, at that point I don't even see the merit of the program: It's not far off from the services that JC Penny used to offer, where you'd order at a kiosk, pay for your stuff, and come back another day to pick it up.
It is a thousand times more convenient to order online at your leisure than it is to use a dedicated kiosk at the store.
The next thing Amazon needs to do is leverage these pickup locations into payment locations. At that point they will be able to do what wal-mart started doing earlier this year and accept cash for online purchases.
It would be nice if they did a better job than wal-mart and instead of requiring photo-id to pick-up a cash purchase, they will just give you a receipt that can be exchanged for the product when it comes in, regardless of who holds the receipt.
I think the whole thing falls under the "I have a great idea, but I actually don't have the foggiest idea how infrastructure works now, but hey, I need to a BIG SEXY CONTROVERSIAL headline."
Imagine if even a tenth of the fucking morons out there who pontificate on subjects for which they had no real knowledge at all actually did have that knowledge. My God, we'd probably be terraforming Pluto by now!
The irony is strong in this one.
Anyone pontificating about internet infrastructure who doesn't know Van Jacobson is a fucking moron.
"In March 2009 as part of a larger restructuring. Since then, Time Warner Cable has been an entirely independent company, merely continuing to use the Time Warner and Road Runner brands under license." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Warner_Cable
There are people with YouTube channels who bash Islam. Islamists issue DCMA takedowns flatly lying they own it. The reason is the real ownee's response is to counter-claim, easy enough, but they must submit their legal name and address, which is why the Islamists want it.
Considering how there are tons and tons of such videos all over youtube that haven't been DMCA'd it sounds like you are just repeating typical jihadwatch-style delusional paranoia. But you are welcome to provide a cite to prove me wrong.
A huge line doesn't make people want to go stand in it. Disney puts a lot of work into hiding long lines to make the wait appear to be shorter.
A fundamental difference being that in Disney's case, people have already paid for whatever is at the end of the line. People really, really, really hate that scenario.
Given what crap gets stymied these days, I really don't see the point of getting rid of filibuster. It works as advertised.
If only it were, for some reason the democrats don't seem to be using the same way as the GOP does. Maybe because if they did, basically nothing would ever pass.
Somewhere in the original blog post or follow-up comments the point was made that after learning from their linux work valve went back and bumped the windows version up to ~305 fps, significantly narrowing the divide.
Seriousy, how many billions of dollars would isreal and the US owe AC/DC and I think capitol records for unauthorized distribution and exhibition?
Probably nothing. Iranian copyright law only protects works created in Iran. But it looks like while the US may not stop Iran from getting nukes, it is going to nail them with DMCAs of mass destruction as Iran has recently signaled interest in signing the Berne Convetion (international treaty that "normalizes" copyright law between most nations on the planet).
The bill needed 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to advance under rules in the chamber, but got only 52.
That is one of those technically true but exceptionally misleading statements.
Senate bills normally only require a majority vote to pass. But what started in the 80s and has increased markedly since the last presidential election is the abuse of the filibuster. Nowadays a bill can pass in the senate with only a majority vote if the minority party - the GOP - supports it. But if the GOP leadership is opposed to it, they filibuster it such that 60 votes are required, which is generally impossible because of the intense partisanship. So despite the senate being slightly majority democrat, they only tend to pass things that are favored by the GOP.
What's worse is that it doesn't take an actual filibuster, only the threat of one. And even when an actual filibuster is invoked, it doesn't require that the senators stand on the floor and engage in ongoing debate or speechifying like the way us non-politicians would expect.
Yes, "saw" and "clicked" have different meanings. Oh wait, they do.
Do they? Really? Do you actually believe that an advertiser would be happy with paying for clicks that do not result in a user seeing what is on the other side of the click? For all intents and purposes there is no difference here.
Failing once is bad enough, failing a second time after being corrected... lolol
David Dunning thinks you can't articulate what makes "saw" and "clicked" different.
These are pay-per-click ads, not pay per view (nobody does per-view anymore, not for years). Nobody cares if a human saw the ad. They care if a human clicked it.
OK, here you go:
The question isn't whether or not a "bot" clicked the ad, the question is if a real person clicked the ad. Your hypothetical scenario doesn't change the answer.
Wow, would you look at that? It means something completely different now. Oh wait, no it doesn't, dumbass.
You know what? YOU can go out and become an internet billionaire, and then do a physics prize right. Imagine how embarrassed he'll be when you do it the right way.
You don't have to be a baker to know when the bread is stale.
Slashdot Mirror
but how much time was taken away by the early termination of the petition?
I'm too lazy to dig up wherever I read it, maybe it was a comment on hacker news, but it sounded like it had about another week to go before expiration.
FWIW, I'm inclined to write this off as a glitch. There is nothing to be gained by nefariously disappearing the petition other than to draw attention to the petition. If history is any evidence, petitions that do get enough signatures don't provoke any action anyways, just a condescening pat on the head.
They are not. This is not about replacing X, it's simply about splitting the graphics and input code out of X and moving it over to the kernel and Wayland. You can still run X11 apps under Wayland.
That's great as long as no one ever writes native wayland apps.
Except that X has been tinkered to work for desktop systems for so long that there little of that network oriented code left around, yet W, or Wayland, tries to get rid of that aspect completely.
From the 10,000 ft view it sure looks like wayland is just reinvention for reinvention's sake and is likely to run into a whole host of problems that X figured out 20+ years ago.
Worse than that, by doing this, they're showing, legally, that they CAN do this. Which means the next time some RIAA shitwaffle decides to Google for their latest "Generic Movie Content" blockbuster and finds it, welp, that means it's Google's fault now...
No it doesn't.
I think it is a terrible idea and all that, but you are arguing about something else than what is happening here. All google is doing is including the number of DMCA notices they have received for a specific website to their pagerank algorithm. They aren't identifying anything other than how many times they've received official complaints. They certainly aren't picking and choosing "legitimate" files.
I think the fact that the previous record was set in 1936 pretty much disproves your "fact" that the weather is setting records "year after year". "Year after year" to most people means "every year or two", not "every 7 decades or so".
Back in 2009 they were saying the it had been the warmest decade ever recorded, and the years between then and now haven't been any less exceptional either.
So yeah, "setting records year after year" is a pretty accurate good description.
The kiosks weren't so inconvenient or dis-leisurely: They were abundant and substantially built-out, with comfortable chairs and dividers and (at the time) paper catalogs.
That's not the point. Here's an example of my most recent purchase - bought a memory foam mattress. I spent about 10 days researching everything - comparing product listings on websites, reading reviews of specific mattresses, reading general information on memory foam mattress, etc. If I had to place my order physically at wal-mart, I would never have been able to proceed at that pace and with that amount of depth.
Either way, it's all meh to me:
Everybody's got an opinion, I just think it is not useful to base it on an incomplete understanding.
FFS, at that point I don't even see the merit of the program: It's not far off from the services that JC Penny used to offer, where you'd order at a kiosk, pay for your stuff, and come back another day to pick it up.
It is a thousand times more convenient to order online at your leisure than it is to use a dedicated kiosk at the store.
You misunderstand - you order online, you pay in the store, they ship to the store, you return to the store and pick up the order.
It adds a day to the delivery time. :-(
No it doesn't. I've done two hold at location packages this year and picked each one up just hours after it arrived at the kinko's store.
The next thing Amazon needs to do is leverage these pickup locations into payment locations. At that point they will be able to do what wal-mart started doing earlier this year and accept cash for online purchases.
It would be nice if they did a better job than wal-mart and instead of requiring photo-id to pick-up a cash purchase, they will just give you a receipt that can be exchanged for the product when it comes in, regardless of who holds the receipt.
I think the whole thing falls under the "I have a great idea, but I actually don't have the foggiest idea how infrastructure works now, but hey, I need to a BIG SEXY CONTROVERSIAL headline."
Imagine if even a tenth of the fucking morons out there who pontificate on subjects for which they had no real knowledge at all actually did have that knowledge. My God, we'd probably be terraforming Pluto by now!
The irony is strong in this one.
Anyone pontificating about internet infrastructure who doesn't know Van Jacobson is a fucking moron.
Time Warner cable is also owned by Time Warner.
What part of false do you fail to understand?
"In March 2009 as part of a larger restructuring. Since then, Time Warner Cable has been an entirely independent company, merely continuing to use the Time Warner and Road Runner brands under license."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Warner_Cable
There are people with YouTube channels who bash Islam. Islamists issue DCMA takedowns flatly lying they own it. The reason is the real ownee's response is to counter-claim, easy enough, but they must submit their legal name and address, which is why the Islamists want it.
Considering how there are tons and tons of such videos all over youtube that haven't been DMCA'd it sounds like you are just repeating typical jihadwatch-style delusional paranoia. But you are welcome to provide a cite to prove me wrong.
A huge line doesn't make people want to go stand in it. Disney puts a lot of work into hiding long lines to make the wait appear to be shorter.
A fundamental difference being that in Disney's case, people have already paid for whatever is at the end of the line. People really, really, really hate that scenario.
And that's the end of the story because the Washington Post won't let me read the rest.
Yet, a privacy freak like my self can read the entire article (all four "pages") without a problem.
I use firefox with these add-ons:
RefControl - normally set to spoof, for wapo I set it to always block the referrer.
NoScript
CS Lite - set to block all cookies
There are more, but I think those three are sufficient to get past the wapo paywall.
HBO is owned by Time Warner cable.
Stop right there. Your fundamental premise is false.
Huh, doesn't look like abuse to me. Looks like good strategy to prevent remarkably bad law.
By that logic, prior to the 80s, hardly any bad laws were ever considered.
The filibuster is far older than that and it used to be even harder to overturn than it is now.
I typoed out the URL to one of the hundreds of charts illustrating when abuse of the filibuster started.
Given what crap gets stymied these days, I really don't see the point of getting rid of filibuster. It works as advertised.
If only it were, for some reason the democrats don't seem to be using the same way as the GOP does. Maybe because if they did, basically nothing would ever pass.
Somewhere in the original blog post or follow-up comments the point was made that after learning from their linux work valve went back and bumped the windows version up to ~305 fps, significantly narrowing the divide.
Seriousy, how many billions of dollars would isreal and the US owe AC/DC and I think capitol records for unauthorized distribution and exhibition?
Probably nothing. Iranian copyright law only protects works created in Iran. But it looks like while the US may not stop Iran from getting nukes, it is going to nail them with DMCAs of mass destruction as Iran has recently signaled interest in signing the Berne Convetion (international treaty that "normalizes" copyright law between most nations on the planet).
The bill needed 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to advance under rules in the chamber, but got only 52.
That is one of those technically true but exceptionally misleading statements.
Senate bills normally only require a majority vote to pass. But what started in the 80s and has increased markedly since the last presidential election is the abuse of the filibuster. Nowadays a bill can pass in the senate with only a majority vote if the minority party - the GOP - supports it. But if the GOP leadership is opposed to it, they filibuster it such that 60 votes are required, which is generally impossible because of the intense partisanship. So despite the senate being slightly majority democrat, they only tend to pass things that are favored by the GOP.
What's worse is that it doesn't take an actual filibuster, only the threat of one. And even when an actual filibuster is invoked, it doesn't require that the senators stand on the floor and engage in ongoing debate or speechifying like the way us non-politicians would expect.
You must be tense-challenged. No, in fact I didn't articulate what makes these words different.
That's right, you didn't because you can't.
But keep up that public stroking of your pedant, it is so attractive.
Yes, "saw" and "clicked" have different meanings. Oh wait, they do.
Do they? Really? Do you actually believe that an advertiser would be happy with paying for clicks that do not result in a user seeing what is on the other side of the click? For all intents and purposes there is no difference here.
Failing once is bad enough, failing a second time after being corrected... lolol
David Dunning thinks you can't articulate what makes "saw" and "clicked" different.
These are pay-per-click ads, not pay per view (nobody does per-view anymore, not for years). Nobody cares if a human saw the ad. They care if a human clicked it.
OK, here you go:
The question isn't whether or not a "bot" clicked the ad, the question is if a real person clicked the ad. Your hypothetical scenario doesn't change the answer.
Wow, would you look at that? It means something completely different now.
Oh wait, no it doesn't, dumbass.
You know what? YOU can go out and become an internet billionaire, and then do a physics prize right. Imagine how embarrassed he'll be when you do it the right way.
You don't have to be a baker to know when the bread is stale.