You have to go to the "Find a Location", search for a nearby one, and see if it has online ordering available. Most of them do, and I always order pizza online now. At least this way they can't screw up the order from miscommunication, although I'm sure that doesn't stop them from screwing them up anyway...
From what I understand, in reverb convolution, you can simulate the reverberation space by sending an impulse spike into that space and analyzing the output. Since the characteristics of the impulse are known going in, what comes out can be measured and then modeled for any arbitrary input (sound of a piano, orchestra, etc.). Is this the same thing, but done visually?
If you're a citizen of the US or country X, living in that same environment of citizens dying/being exposed to toxic waste or whatever else, you wouldn't want that in your backyard either. Self preservation. Better them than me. Etc.
Who was your taijutsu teacher and do you know of anyone in the Louisiana area doing that kind of teaching? Please email me if you have some info. Address is in my profile. Thanks.
No they would not. And they probably wouldn't be going out to concerts and shows either because they hadn't heard the band in question.
Sure they would. Most bands are doing shows and concerts long before they ever make an album. That's how you gather up a fanbase. With the internet, it's possible to release your own material for free to get noticed, but getting noticed by the person who's across the country probably still isn't gonna get them into your shows. And since you are giving away your music for free, you aren't generating income to fund those concerts and tours across the country. That's done through sales of CDs and swag at the shows. By the time you've got the money for that concert or tour, you've probably already got a pretty dedicated fanbase who is gonna show up for your shows. And buy your albums.
Not really. Otherwise going around to my friends house and listening to music would also mean a "lost sale".
Not really, since you can't listen to it whenever you want after leaving your friends' house.
It's not nitpicking. It's a very valid argument that you seem to have no actual response to. I myself disagree with piracy. I think that somebody who bothers to create something that I enjoy should be rewarded (in this case with money). I also think that jacking up prices, adding unwanted restrictions and abusing copyright laws (as the **AA have been doing) is just as bad as ripping off the artists.
I'm glad we agree here, but I don't see how two wrongs make a right. The **AA are companies who own the rights to content that they purchase from artists through a contract (that artists put their signatures to, no one is holding a gun to their heads) in exchange for services the artist couldn't otherwise get such as funding for recording, mass distribution, promotion, touring, etc... The corporations are responding to illegal activity that's infringing on their completely legal right to exist as a business. As far as ripping off the artists, they completely give the artist a choice of whether or not to sign that contract; it's opt in. Pirating their music totally denies the artist that choice. I just can't see how piracy is helping out the artist. The ends justify the means?
If the **AA were smart they would stop all of this DRM nonsense and go back to basic business stratergies: giving some value for money. Give the buyers a proper incentive and they'll stop getting the product from elsewhere.
What ever happened to giving money for value? Ya know, as in the music you're enjoying? That's not worth anything to you? I'm all for more value for my buck and I applaud those companies that go the extra bit, but I'm plenty happy to pay for the music I enjoy. Maybe you don't value the music you listen to as much as I do. Without companies investing in an artist, access to those artists would be pretty restricted. Many of those who you enjoy would probably never even see the light of day. If someone was trying to freeload off of my investments, I would be working hard to protect them too.
When society goes back to a patron of the arts model, piracy won't be an issue. We gotta get there first. The problem is that the masses won't want to fund it, they'll want someone else to do it. So we go from one large company investing to... someone else rich investing.
You forget that not only wouldn't they have bought it, but they wouldn't have that giant collection of music/movies/whatever to enjoy either. If someone is selling a product, and you use and enjoy that product without the compensation that the producer is due, that's a lost sale. Stop trying to nitpick to justify illegal and unethical greediness.
And I wonder if that's where it will be heading towards. From now on, instead of purchasing a license to your software, you'll be purchasing a license to use the software, run though a net, accessed from a vendor's server. You never receive an actual copy of the software, only access to it on a secured computer that the vendor controls. I'm sure there are already models set up like this although I can't think of any right off the top of my head. Many services we use today already work this way (web email, creating PDFs directly from Adobe's website, etc...), I only wonder how much longer it will take until the majority of commercial software is run this way.
Actually, I take back what I said. I was under the false impression that hitchhiking was illegal, when it actually isn't, or so says the Hitchhiking FAQ". I take back the joke.
The question that runs through my mind that it seems TFA fails to answer is what kind of proof Yahoo required from her and what she gave them to prove that she was in fact the person who the user accounts were supposedly about. Without a little more detail in this matter, it's difficult to tell where exactly some of the blame can go. On one hand, if she did provide definitive proof to Yahoo with her request then sure, they would be at fault. On the other hand, if she simply sent a request to them, I would imagine some hesitation would be in order on their part. I sure wouldn't like Yahoo to just start indiscriminately shutting down accounts at people's requests without proof that the person requesting is in fact authorized to do so.
I didn't see any mention of this issue in TFA, and maybe it's to be assumed, but not an assumption I would make. Did I miss something?
Slashdot Mirror
And are you thinking about me when you fuuuuuuck her.... Oh wait...
And of course, everyone only reads them for the articles anyway. Hey, new idea for /.: include pr0n, people don't read the articles anyway!
The direct link to the order site is http://www.dominos.quikorder.com/
In the name of all that is holy, you are a moron. Please get a brain.
This is also the perfect argument about why we should keep Creationism out of our schools. Thank you sir.
From what I understand, in reverb convolution, you can simulate the reverberation space by sending an impulse spike into that space and analyzing the output. Since the characteristics of the impulse are known going in, what comes out can be measured and then modeled for any arbitrary input (sound of a piano, orchestra, etc.). Is this the same thing, but done visually?
I really wish I could get my Win98 version of Mechwarrior 2 to run under XP. :-\
Thank you, Mr. Heisenberg!
Was that a Linux pamphlet by any chance?
Beautiful. Scale it up to output a new Linux kernel.
More likely, they'd be making their debut performance as a parody band of Styx.
None, they're hackers. Why would they go outside?
That's taking the pet rock concept to a whole new level. You could make a million dollars! Patent it!
Since when does nationality equal race, btw?
You forgot to list how many of those real scientists are named Steve.
Who was your taijutsu teacher and do you know of anyone in the Louisiana area doing that kind of teaching? Please email me if you have some info. Address is in my profile. Thanks.
Sure they would. Most bands are doing shows and concerts long before they ever make an album. That's how you gather up a fanbase. With the internet, it's possible to release your own material for free to get noticed, but getting noticed by the person who's across the country probably still isn't gonna get them into your shows. And since you are giving away your music for free, you aren't generating income to fund those concerts and tours across the country. That's done through sales of CDs and swag at the shows. By the time you've got the money for that concert or tour, you've probably already got a pretty dedicated fanbase who is gonna show up for your shows. And buy your albums.
Not really. Otherwise going around to my friends house and listening to music would also mean a "lost sale".
Not really, since you can't listen to it whenever you want after leaving your friends' house.
It's not nitpicking. It's a very valid argument that you seem to have no actual response to. I myself disagree with piracy. I think that somebody who bothers to create something that I enjoy should be rewarded (in this case with money). I also think that jacking up prices, adding unwanted restrictions and abusing copyright laws (as the **AA have been doing) is just as bad as ripping off the artists.
I'm glad we agree here, but I don't see how two wrongs make a right. The **AA are companies who own the rights to content that they purchase from artists through a contract (that artists put their signatures to, no one is holding a gun to their heads) in exchange for services the artist couldn't otherwise get such as funding for recording, mass distribution, promotion, touring, etc... The corporations are responding to illegal activity that's infringing on their completely legal right to exist as a business. As far as ripping off the artists, they completely give the artist a choice of whether or not to sign that contract; it's opt in. Pirating their music totally denies the artist that choice. I just can't see how piracy is helping out the artist. The ends justify the means?
If the **AA were smart they would stop all of this DRM nonsense and go back to basic business stratergies: giving some value for money. Give the buyers a proper incentive and they'll stop getting the product from elsewhere.
What ever happened to giving money for value? Ya know, as in the music you're enjoying? That's not worth anything to you? I'm all for more value for my buck and I applaud those companies that go the extra bit, but I'm plenty happy to pay for the music I enjoy. Maybe you don't value the music you listen to as much as I do. Without companies investing in an artist, access to those artists would be pretty restricted. Many of those who you enjoy would probably never even see the light of day. If someone was trying to freeload off of my investments, I would be working hard to protect them too.
When society goes back to a patron of the arts model, piracy won't be an issue. We gotta get there first. The problem is that the masses won't want to fund it, they'll want someone else to do it. So we go from one large company investing to... someone else rich investing.
You forget that not only wouldn't they have bought it, but they wouldn't have that giant collection of music/movies/whatever to enjoy either. If someone is selling a product, and you use and enjoy that product without the compensation that the producer is due, that's a lost sale. Stop trying to nitpick to justify illegal and unethical greediness.
And I wonder if that's where it will be heading towards. From now on, instead of purchasing a license to your software, you'll be purchasing a license to use the software, run though a net, accessed from a vendor's server. You never receive an actual copy of the software, only access to it on a secured computer that the vendor controls. I'm sure there are already models set up like this although I can't think of any right off the top of my head. Many services we use today already work this way (web email, creating PDFs directly from Adobe's website, etc...), I only wonder how much longer it will take until the majority of commercial software is run this way.
Actually, I take back what I said. I was under the false impression that hitchhiking was illegal, when it actually isn't, or so says the Hitchhiking FAQ". I take back the joke.
Plastic.... water..... water gun.... joke... ha ha...
I agree. It would have been much more specific had the parent said "give a rat's ass" or something to that effect.
I didn't see any mention of this issue in TFA, and maybe it's to be assumed, but not an assumption I would make. Did I miss something?
Humor
Lighten up...
Maybe he should take a car. Or a bus. Or a train. Or a carpool (redundant?). Hitchhike (where legal, but wouldn't that be a violation of my rights?!).