Yeah, this kind of dumb recursive logic doesn't stop where it suits you to stop.
The economy is being raped, and you're worried about some anonymous slashdot commentary about some fifteen year old writing reviews that no one is probably going to ever read, that no one is probably going to ever read.
Sweet Jesus, why don't they just get in a voodoo doctor to throw a few bones and cast a truth-spell?
Is no-one at all concerned that the world's supposed technological leader has a military who believe in such bullshit? And everyone was amazed when other countries were found purchasing bogus explosive detectors. This is equally money spent on a fraud that does not do what it claims to do.
You forgot the get-out-of-jail phrase. Works every time.
"It was just a prank, bro."
This always makes everything alright. The judge will smile and and laughter will ripple through the court. The police will smile ruefully and slap their foreheads, embarrassed by their failure to see the funny side. You will be freed and carried from the court shoulder high.
Someone minding their own business, walking down a street, is not consenting to be part of someone else's idea of comedy.
They have a total right to be as touchy, uncomfortable and easily offended as they choose to be. They're not imposing that on anyone else.
The idiots conducting a "prank", on the other hand, have decided to impose their "humour" on others, without consent. This is quite different from putting on a comedy show, or stand-up, or TV, or radio, where the audience is, to some degree, consenting to being involved.
"Su talks to the workers and finds out many are migrants from mainland China, who are residing in Hong Kong without the official documents required for them to legally be there, she says."
Any way of configuring things so that it never does this?
Sometimes this switch to minimized is really jarring and intrudes on stuff that the film producer wants people to see. I also like to know who I've been watching, who made it, what the music was, etc. I shouldn't have to leap for my remote in order to not have that interrupted.
This is just another in a long line of lies, hysteria, propaganda and misinformation on all subjects. Anything that scares its readers into confirming their prejudices and knowing their place as consumer drones.
It exists only because transferring files between windows computers seems "difficult". But file transfer is not hard for those who know how - so Dropbox seems like a solution to a non-existing problem to us.
Dropbox is not just a file-transfer tool. It's value is that it does all the syncing work seamlessly, without the user having to do a thing and saving them time. Perhaps your time has less value, so you don't care about that.
Also, Microsoft could bundle ssh/scp in their next release - or make their own similar third-party service. Dropbox would be gone in a year.
What do you think Microsoft OneDrive is? Introduced 8 years ago.
file transfers for the stupids
I really hope you aren't actually employed anywhere in the IT industry. If so, those "stupids" are the ones ultimately paying your wage, allowing you to maintain that obnoxious superior attitude.
Some will attempt to justify it with official-sounding reasons for reversing
If you actually read the "official-sounding reasons", you'll probably find that they're following policy, whereas you're not.
There are a lot of "casual edits" that get reverted because they're crap submitted by someone who doesn't understand the need for Wikipedia being verifiable, or even what an encyclopaedia should be about.
It really is a difficult battle to win. On one side you get people mocking factual inaccuracies in Wikipedia, and on the other you get people complaining that their unsupported fact (with included personal observation) gets removed. We can't have it both ways.
Because if things go to hell on Earth on the other side of the planet, that results in wars (essentially over scarce resources, but this can be dressed up in no end of other noble causes, religions, disputes, politics).
Wars tend to get messy and involve others. Before long your country boy (or girl) from Iowa is either expected to go "bring democracy/protect interests" on the other side of the planet, or is dealing with terrorist action at their local mall.
That's why we expect them to care. We're all on this planet together and it's only getting smaller.
It's good to treat work-issued devices as spy hardware and not put personal things on them when she grows up as well.
That's a lesson worth learning for other reasons. Often your work wants to blur the line between what's their device and what's your device. Why? Because if your personal life is entwined on the same device as your work life, then suddenly you're never not at work.
Keep these things separate. Do not install your work life onto your device, any more than you'd install your personal life onto theirs.
Unless you are your own boss, of course. Then you can please yourself.
It's a big problem for Facebook because the more impersonal the posts become, the less people are going to bother visiting to read them. There goes their advertising revenue.
It's a definite trend. The majority of stuff I now see on my time line now is re-shares of crappy viral content. Fewer and fewer friends put anything about themselves or their day, the kind of stuff I might actually care or be interested in. And I understand that. 99% of what little I put is trivial or generic observations. Almost never anything personal.
And why didn't that take off? Because it was too complicated. You had to set up the circles and maintain them. Every time you posted you needed to spend time thinking about which circle got to see it, and making sure you didn't make an embarrassing error by sharing with the wrong people. No one could be bothered with that.
People needed it to be as easy as chatting in the staff room, or at a social gathering, by just glancing around the room to see who is in earshot. It wasn't.
You don't remember Sinclair? If, instead of making the BBC Micro, the BBC had backed a Sinclair it would have given Sinclair more money.
Well there's the answer to your own point. Sinclair was a commercial company. Why should it get the backing, endorsement and publicity from the BBC over all other competing computer manufacturers?
Promoting Marxism with Object Oriented Programming
I took that class; "Inheritance perpetuates the ruling oligopoly. All resources should be return to the global heap for reallocation on a needs-only basis, by the people for the people.
It went well with my "Organic Chemistry and Smashing the Capitalist System" class.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, this kind of dumb recursive logic doesn't stop where it suits you to stop.
The economy is being raped, and you're worried about some anonymous slashdot commentary about some fifteen year old writing reviews that no one is probably going to ever read, that no one is probably going to ever read.
Where's your perspective?
So basically it's the go-to site for cheap-ass employers and their con-artist in training daughters?
Nice. There's a recommendation any website would envy.
Sweet Jesus, why don't they just get in a voodoo doctor to throw a few bones and cast a truth-spell?
Is no-one at all concerned that the world's supposed technological leader has a military who believe in such bullshit? And everyone was amazed when other countries were found purchasing bogus explosive detectors. This is equally money spent on a fraud that does not do what it claims to do.
You forgot the get-out-of-jail phrase. Works every time.
"It was just a prank, bro."
This always makes everything alright. The judge will smile and and laughter will ripple through the court. The police will smile ruefully and slap their foreheads, embarrassed by their failure to see the funny side. You will be freed and carried from the court shoulder high.
Someone minding their own business, walking down a street, is not consenting to be part of someone else's idea of comedy.
They have a total right to be as touchy, uncomfortable and easily offended as they choose to be. They're not imposing that on anyone else.
The idiots conducting a "prank", on the other hand, have decided to impose their "humour" on others, without consent. This is quite different from putting on a comedy show, or stand-up, or TV, or radio, where the audience is, to some degree, consenting to being involved.
to be not compatible with Windoze 10
I think the problem may lie with your hilarious mispronunciation of the the OS system. Compatibility might be higher with Windows 10.
Ah. You got me. I was think more of examples like;
Wife shoots husband, self.
That's a wild over-reaction to a simple observation.
"Su talks to the workers and finds out many are migrants from mainland China, who are residing in Hong Kong without the official documents required for them to legally be there, she says."
You're confusing tabloid headline-speak with English.
Same way American papers use commas in headlines instead of 'and'. That's weird.
Any way of configuring things so that it never does this?
Sometimes this switch to minimized is really jarring and intrudes on stuff that the film producer wants people to see. I also like to know who I've been watching, who made it, what the music was, etc. I shouldn't have to leap for my remote in order to not have that interrupted.
Utter shit.
This is just another in a long line of lies, hysteria, propaganda and misinformation on all subjects. Anything that scares its readers into confirming their prejudices and knowing their place as consumer drones.
To me, dropbox has no value.
How very special for you. Don't use it then.
It exists only because transferring files between windows computers seems "difficult". But file transfer is not hard for those who know how - so Dropbox seems like a solution to a non-existing problem to us.
Dropbox is not just a file-transfer tool. It's value is that it does all the syncing work seamlessly, without the user having to do a thing and saving them time. Perhaps your time has less value, so you don't care about that.
Also, Microsoft could bundle ssh/scp in their next release - or make their own similar third-party service. Dropbox would be gone in a year.
What do you think Microsoft OneDrive is? Introduced 8 years ago.
file transfers for the stupids
I really hope you aren't actually employed anywhere in the IT industry. If so, those "stupids" are the ones ultimately paying your wage, allowing you to maintain that obnoxious superior attitude.
Some will attempt to justify it with official-sounding reasons for reversing
If you actually read the "official-sounding reasons", you'll probably find that they're following policy, whereas you're not.
There are a lot of "casual edits" that get reverted because they're crap submitted by someone who doesn't understand the need for Wikipedia being verifiable, or even what an encyclopaedia should be about.
It really is a difficult battle to win. On one side you get people mocking factual inaccuracies in Wikipedia, and on the other you get people complaining that their unsupported fact (with included personal observation) gets removed. We can't have it both ways.
Because if things go to hell on Earth on the other side of the planet, that results in wars (essentially over scarce resources, but this can be dressed up in no end of other noble causes, religions, disputes, politics).
Wars tend to get messy and involve others. Before long your country boy (or girl) from Iowa is either expected to go "bring democracy/protect interests" on the other side of the planet, or is dealing with terrorist action at their local mall.
That's why we expect them to care. We're all on this planet together and it's only getting smaller.
It's good to treat work-issued devices as spy hardware and not put personal things on them when she grows up as well.
That's a lesson worth learning for other reasons. Often your work wants to blur the line between what's their device and what's your device. Why? Because if your personal life is entwined on the same device as your work life, then suddenly you're never not at work.
Keep these things separate. Do not install your work life onto your device, any more than you'd install your personal life onto theirs.
Unless you are your own boss, of course. Then you can please yourself.
1/ Sorry
2/ Apologise
Yeah. Look at the millions that Napster fed back to the artists who performed the music.
Wait... they didn't do that, did they? They took the music and gave back precisely nothing.
It's the perfect business model. Let someone else bear the production costs. Visionary indeed.
"They acknowledged there have been reports of security breaches abroad, but assured us that all U.S. cellphone networks were secure."
Oh, so that's alright then.
It's a big problem for Facebook because the more impersonal the posts become, the less people are going to bother visiting to read them. There goes their advertising revenue.
It's a definite trend. The majority of stuff I now see on my time line now is re-shares of crappy viral content. Fewer and fewer friends put anything about themselves or their day, the kind of stuff I might actually care or be interested in. And I understand that. 99% of what little I put is trivial or generic observations. Almost never anything personal.
And why didn't that take off? Because it was too complicated. You had to set up the circles and maintain them. Every time you posted you needed to spend time thinking about which circle got to see it, and making sure you didn't make an embarrassing error by sharing with the wrong people. No one could be bothered with that.
People needed it to be as easy as chatting in the staff room, or at a social gathering, by just glancing around the room to see who is in earshot. It wasn't.
Really sharp readers would have noticed that the summary is talking about Scotland, not Ireland.
You don't remember Sinclair? If, instead of making the BBC Micro, the BBC had backed a Sinclair it would have given Sinclair more money.
Well there's the answer to your own point. Sinclair was a commercial company. Why should it get the backing, endorsement and publicity from the BBC over all other competing computer manufacturers?
Promoting Marxism with Object Oriented Programming
I took that class; "Inheritance perpetuates the ruling oligopoly. All resources should be return to the global heap for reallocation on a needs-only basis, by the people for the people.
It went well with my "Organic Chemistry and Smashing the Capitalist System" class.
So your solution to defeating terrorism is to become terrorists?
You want to live in a terrorist state?