I think the real reason Microsoft Edge is a failure is because it's exclusive to one platform: Windows. People might embrace their products more if they didn't only work on one platform.
Unfortunately, Microsoft has a persistent problem of creating products not for the sake of making a good product, but to promote other products. In this case, Edge exists purely to promote Windows and is therefore an afterthought; if it were otherwise and Microsoft were serious about promoting it as a great browser that should be used by as many people as possible, it would be multi-platform.
At first glance, I'd say this is a bad thing because it reduces competition, but since Microsoft Edge is a Windows 10-only browser, it's probably a good thing; developers eventually won't need to code for a Windows-specific browser unless Microsoft forks the rendering engine.
There are still a number of other sedans listed at https://www.gmfleet.com/overview/cars.html including the Buick Regal/Verano, Cadillact ATS/CTS, Chevrolet Bolt/Impala/Malibu/Sonic/Spark, so "exiting the sedan market" seems to be a bit of an exaggeration unless more model cancellations are planned.
The real story here is the job losses and a man in the White House who sold people on the idea that he alone could wave a wand and magically fix them (which means we also get to credit him with a failure to do so).
I'd expect a "left and right should talk to each other and not shut people out" comment to have no effect, positive or negative, on one's score. It's conciliatory, but at the same time contributes nothing substantive to a discussion.
I believe that Congress has the authority to regulate federal elections, which would likely have the same effect for "state and local" elections since states likely wouldn't want to force voters to use both machines and paper ballots for an election.
You're correct, of course, which is why capitalism *must* be tempered by another system, such as socialism. Otherwise, we have an economic system that's nothing more than a race to the bottom.
If I understand correctly, this guy was selling Microsoft software that he wasn't authorized to distribute and because that made it less likely someone would buy a new Windows license (or machine with Windows installed), Microsoft argued that their monetary loss for each disk amounted to the value of a new Microsoft license: $299.
The judge reduced that value to $25 per disc, though I'm not sure where that number came from. A quickly Google search indicates that one can buy an Windows 10 OEM license (what you'd get with a new computer) for the similar price of $27.99.
Eric Lundgren, the guy charged, argued that the nature of the software illegally distributed should give him immunity from charges of copyright infringement.
All I can say is:
Don't distribute software you don't own without permission.
Don't add logos without permission to items you're distributing.
If you're a user, use Linux.
If you're a refurbisher, use Linux.
Posted from Linux Mint 18.
PS If you have a Windows 10 license key, you can install Linux over Windows 10, download a Window 10 disk image from Microsoft's website for free, and use the key to run Windows 10 via Virtual Box on Linux.
Indeed. Having an extension system in which malicious extensions can hide that they're installed while monitoring everything you do on the Web was a pretty big security hole. That's why I'm glad Mozilla transitioned to the new system despite the loss of functionality.
Where the hell are the social liberals running these companies when they blindly obey orders from the Chinese government? Fucking hypocrites, all of them.
The liberals are here, but we’ve got our hands full dealing with Twitler.
Maybe the leader of American conservatism can send a tweet from Mar-a-Lago bashing Google.
There's a better solution: make receiving a basic income contingent on paying taxes.
Working around your proposed restriction would be trivial: do a job that pays $1 per year on which you owe a few cents in taxes and you can vote.
Yes, I would rather people be campaigning for Universal Basic Employment. That is, a system where everyone would always have access to a job that paid basic living expenses, a job built around each person's particular skill set.
Of course the CEO's of the world would never campaign for THAT, because it might threaten their cheap labor supply (who would then always have an alternative job to go to).
libertarianism is diametrically opposed from authoritarianism
"Libertarianism" is just an American euphemism for "plutocracy" (i.e., rule by the rich) which is, of course, an authoritarian system. Libertarians support a paradoxical system of every-man-for-himself anarchy in which those who control the most wealth will inevitably end up controlling everything.
Before we escalate to all-out cyber and/or nuclear war with Russia, will we be seeing any -actual evidence- of anything other than a very dumb phishing link clicking Podesta, or of "hacking" involving anything requiring more skill than a neighborhood high school computer club, much less a nation-state?
Nuclear war? Exaggerate much? This is the same sort of nonsense as claims that Donald Trump accepting a phone call from the Taiwanese president is going to get us into a war with China.
I'm guessing we'll see as much evidence as we did regarding accusations about an Iranian nuclear program from American presidents of both parties, which is not much.
And the opposition—the Republicans—aren't in a good position to complain about nondisclosure given the hubbub about the potential accidental leaking of government secrets via Hillary Clinton's private email server. State secrets are apparently really, really important to Trump supporters.
Although I'm sure the Democrats would much prefer the accused not be allowed to speak at all, Putin's question is still pertinent--is he responsible for Democrat losses at -every other governmental level-, as well? Were the Wikileaks e-mails manipulated or untrue, which has still not been asserted?
This red herring is becoming as dangerous as it is ludicrous.
These questions are red herrings. The important point is that the Russians apparently meddled and did so in a way that affected the election of the most powerful political office on the planet.
To address them anyway though:
(1) Yes, the emails were manipulated into propaganda by packaging them with inaccurate interpretations such as those at http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/. One of the more egregious examples uses an email received from an unknown person to assert that Hillary Clinton is racist. They link to the leaked emails, but I imagine most people would read the bad interpretations and never get around to reading the source text.
(2) Given that some of these races were very close—such as those involving Representative Darrell Issa and Senator Pat Toomey—they could have been easily affected by the release of the emails.
I tried playing this. It's more of a graphical showcase of the first world than a game; most of the original gameplay elements are missing. The most amusing thing about it is a lone goomba inexplicably running on air at the top of the mountain.
Your conclusion is nonsensical; WebM has nothing to do with search or personal data.
Adobe Flash is a well-adopted de facto standard that they can't just drop (particularly given that one of their properties relies heavily on it). Native h.264 isn't widely adopted yet and, thus, doesn't have that problem.
GIF and JPEG are also well-adopted standards that would have the same problems. The patents on GIF have already expired though, so there's no openness issue there. I'm not well-informed enough to speak on the patent status of JPEG.
The claim about their browser is also absurd. If everyone supported WebM, their browser would have no advantage in the marketplace. People generally don't adopt a browser simply because its native codec support either.
If you want to make the conclusion that Google is doing this for financial reasons, you really need to look no further than YouTube. It wouldn't be at all surprising if they want to avoid shelling out to MPEG LA should they decide to collect patent royalties from Google in the future.
A more reasonable interpretation of "I won't have to worry about..." is that that's a figure of speech and not literal. The idea seems to be that Obama would increase people's standards of living by fixing the economy, rampant corporate greed, overpriced health care, etc. that contribute to keeping the poor poor.
(She's probably a little too optimistic though, considering her statements in retrospect and two years into the Obama administration.)
According to Wikipedia, the ACLU-related person on the Supreme Court is Ruth Bader Ginsburg: "General Counsel, American Civil Liberties Union (1973-1980)" [1]; thought I'd mention this since a search for "ACLU solicitor general" turns up nothing.
This page explains how to get hold of them 'legally':
From the PowerPoint Viewer 2007 download page:
The following section on Font Components amends the license terms for the PowerPoint Viewer and must accompany any permitted redistribution of the PowerPoint Viewer:
Font Components You may use the fonts that accompany the PowerPoint Viewer only to display and print content from a device running a Microsoft Windows operating system. Additionally, you may do the following:
* Embed fonts in content as permitted by the embedding restrictions in the fonts
* When printing content, temporarily download the fonts to a printer or other output device
You may not copy, install or use the fonts on other devices.
According to that, using these fonts on a nonWindows operating system wouldn't appear to be legal.
That being said, I do believe that CSS still has fundamental problems that not even CSS3 seems to be solving, such as taking into consideration the growing use of HTML as an application framework rather than a document framework. The most notable issue of this would be the inability to center an object vertically in a viewport without Javascript to determine its size, which is a klutzy hack at best.
Actually, you can do this with CSS:
display: table-cell; vertical-align: middle
In that regard, the problem is Internet Explorer's lack of support for CSS2/2.1 rather than CSS itself. If you know the dimensions of the object to be centered, you can also use absolute/fixed positioning (except in IE6) or absolute/fixed positioning combined with negative margins.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the real reason Microsoft Edge is a failure is because it's exclusive to one platform: Windows. People might embrace their products more if they didn't only work on one platform.
Unfortunately, Microsoft has a persistent problem of creating products not for the sake of making a good product, but to promote other products. In this case, Edge exists purely to promote Windows and is therefore an afterthought; if it were otherwise and Microsoft were serious about promoting it as a great browser that should be used by as many people as possible, it would be multi-platform.
At first glance, I'd say this is a bad thing because it reduces competition, but since Microsoft Edge is a Windows 10-only browser, it's probably a good thing; developers eventually won't need to code for a Windows-specific browser unless Microsoft forks the rendering engine.
According to https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-gm-plant-closing-restructuring-20181126-story.html, six models were scrapped at GM: the Buick LaCrosse, the Cadillac CT6/XTS, and the Chevrolet Cruze/Volt (but not the similarly-named all-electric Chevrolet Bolt).
There are still a number of other sedans listed at https://www.gmfleet.com/overview/cars.html including the Buick Regal/Verano, Cadillact ATS/CTS, Chevrolet Bolt/Impala/Malibu/Sonic/Spark, so "exiting the sedan market" seems to be a bit of an exaggeration unless more model cancellations are planned.
The real story here is the job losses and a man in the White House who sold people on the idea that he alone could wave a wand and magically fix them (which means we also get to credit him with a failure to do so).
Tax cuts for the rich will solve this problem.
Signed:
The Republican Party
I'd expect a "left and right should talk to each other and not shut people out" comment to have no effect, positive or negative, on one's score. It's conciliatory, but at the same time contributes nothing substantive to a discussion.
Your "optional preferential voting" is called "ranked choice voting" ("RCV") in the United States.
It'd be nice if we could get federal legislators—or, at least, federal Democrats—behind a movement for that.
I believe that Congress has the authority to regulate federal elections, which would likely have the same effect for "state and local" elections since states likely wouldn't want to force voters to use both machines and paper ballots for an election.
You're correct, of course, which is why capitalism *must* be tempered by another system, such as socialism. Otherwise, we have an economic system that's nothing more than a race to the bottom.
Mickey Mouse is still used in the Kingdom Hearts game franchise and Disney's theme parks.
If I understand correctly, this guy was selling Microsoft software that he wasn't authorized to distribute and because that made it less likely someone would buy a new Windows license (or machine with Windows installed), Microsoft argued that their monetary loss for each disk amounted to the value of a new Microsoft license: $299.
The judge reduced that value to $25 per disc, though I'm not sure where that number came from. A quickly Google search indicates that one can buy an Windows 10 OEM license (what you'd get with a new computer) for the similar price of $27.99.
Eric Lundgren, the guy charged, argued that the nature of the software illegally distributed should give him immunity from charges of copyright infringement.
All I can say is:
Posted from Linux Mint 18.
PS If you have a Windows 10 license key, you can install Linux over Windows 10, download a Window 10 disk image from Microsoft's website for free, and use the key to run Windows 10 via Virtual Box on Linux.
—Donald Trump (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBqB_3j4Qts)
Next someone'll tell me that Mexico is paying for a wall.
Indeed. Having an extension system in which malicious extensions can hide that they're installed while monitoring everything you do on the Web was a pretty big security hole. That's why I'm glad Mozilla transitioned to the new system despite the loss of functionality.
Where the hell are the social liberals running these companies when they blindly obey orders from the Chinese government? Fucking hypocrites, all of them.
The liberals are here, but we’ve got our hands full dealing with Twitler. Maybe the leader of American conservatism can send a tweet from Mar-a-Lago bashing Google.
Where's Maggie Simpson when we need her?
There's a better solution: make receiving a basic income contingent on paying taxes. Working around your proposed restriction would be trivial: do a job that pays $1 per year on which you owe a few cents in taxes and you can vote.
We already have this; it's called "minimum wage".
"Libertarianism" is just an American euphemism for "plutocracy" (i.e., rule by the rich) which is, of course, an authoritarian system. Libertarians support a paradoxical system of every-man-for-himself anarchy in which those who control the most wealth will inevitably end up controlling everything.
Nuclear war? Exaggerate much? This is the same sort of nonsense as claims that Donald Trump accepting a phone call from the Taiwanese president is going to get us into a war with China.
I'm guessing we'll see as much evidence as we did regarding accusations about an Iranian nuclear program from American presidents of both parties, which is not much.
And the opposition—the Republicans—aren't in a good position to complain about nondisclosure given the hubbub about the potential accidental leaking of government secrets via Hillary Clinton's private email server. State secrets are apparently really, really important to Trump supporters.
These questions are red herrings. The important point is that the Russians apparently meddled and did so in a way that affected the election of the most powerful political office on the planet.
To address them anyway though:
(1) Yes, the emails were manipulated into propaganda by packaging them with inaccurate interpretations such as those at http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/. One of the more egregious examples uses an email received from an unknown person to assert that Hillary Clinton is racist. They link to the leaked emails, but I imagine most people would read the bad interpretations and never get around to reading the source text.
(2) Given that some of these races were very close—such as those involving Representative Darrell Issa and Senator Pat Toomey—they could have been easily affected by the release of the emails.
Apparently this isn't true; LGBT people have been charged: http://www.economist.com/blogs....
Never mind the repressive effects of such laws even if they aren't strictly enforced. A law is a law.
I tried playing this. It's more of a graphical showcase of the first world than a game; most of the original gameplay elements are missing. The most amusing thing about it is a lone goomba inexplicably running on air at the top of the mountain.
Your conclusion is nonsensical; WebM has nothing to do with search or personal data.
Adobe Flash is a well-adopted de facto standard that they can't just drop (particularly given that one of their properties relies heavily on it). Native h.264 isn't widely adopted yet and, thus, doesn't have that problem.
GIF and JPEG are also well-adopted standards that would have the same problems. The patents on GIF have already expired though, so there's no openness issue there. I'm not well-informed enough to speak on the patent status of JPEG.
The claim about their browser is also absurd. If everyone supported WebM, their browser would have no advantage in the marketplace. People generally don't adopt a browser simply because its native codec support either.
If you want to make the conclusion that Google is doing this for financial reasons, you really need to look no further than YouTube. It wouldn't be at all surprising if they want to avoid shelling out to MPEG LA should they decide to collect patent royalties from Google in the future.
A more reasonable interpretation of "I won't have to worry about..." is that that's a figure of speech and not literal. The idea seems to be that Obama would increase people's standards of living by fixing the economy, rampant corporate greed, overpriced health care, etc. that contribute to keeping the poor poor. (She's probably a little too optimistic though, considering her statements in retrospect and two years into the Obama administration.)
According to Wikipedia, the ACLU-related person on the Supreme Court is Ruth Bader Ginsburg: "General Counsel, American Civil Liberties Union (1973-1980)" [1]; thought I'd mention this since a search for "ACLU solicitor general" turns up nothing.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States#Current_membership