This is a lie. I used an iphone years ago. I remember the employee of the apple store opened it because she dropped it as she was opening it and I made her go get another one.
You see this type of thing a lot in healthcare actually (not usually so egregious). IT has a requirement to follow policy and legal regulations, (HIPAA, SOX, HITECH, etc). Due to this, some of the shinies that individuals may want are not allowed. Instead of recognizing the reasons, people do what the submitter did and try to do an end run around the whole process ignoring the fact that what IT is doing by not allowing these things is protecting the company in a legally mandated way.
Occasionally with extra resources, the request could be handled in a way compliant with the regulations, but that still doesn't mean it is feasible for your organization as it would require extra employees that just are not in the budget.
Neither scenario is an excuse to try circumvent the policies, no matter how much you want your iToy.
I'll buy the "especially if they are essential" line partially. I say partially because if these species are nearly extinct and their ecosystem hasn't been destroyed then we really should question how essential they are.
Otherwise, I must ask you one thing. Why exactly should we put forth an effort? Because it feels good? Are we unnatural? I've seen a lot of claims like yours, but they never say why other than appeals to what feels right to an individual.
It happens on any type of "user rated" environment where the players are so small that no one cares. I had an iphone long ago, and I learned very quickly not to trust the ratings system at all. Too many times I'd read the reviews and half of them would be 1 star ratings that say "App X is superior to this". Something tells me that those people weren't independent users. Especially when half the reviews were made up of the same exact message.
All of the comments I see here take a cynical view. Here is the alternative.
Person X is insured by company Y
Person X has made claims r, s, t, etc.
Company Y sees the claims, realizes that based on statistics, person X may be progressing to condition Z.
Condition Z is preventable, managable if treated early. If early treatment/prevention does not occur, person X is in for an expensive, unpleasant future, and company Y has to foot the bill.
With prevention, company Y saves money, person X saves money (out of pocket costs for extensive medical treatment) and suffering. Company Y continues collecting its insurance premium.
How is this a bad scenario exactly?
You can complain about the use, but a tool (in this case a predictive model) is just a tool.
a "modern computer" will only throttle due to thermal issues if it is broken. They are made to run at a 100% duty cycle. If it has to down clock due to heat, it has faulty cooling, is drawing power beyond spec, etc. All of these are situations of something is broken.
So no. Not in the slightest. Computers are not built to dissipate less heat than they generate.
If yours do, please take it out of the cabinet, uncover the vents, clean the dust out of the heatsinks, return it as defective etc.
Show an example of something properly configured that it doesn't work on please. If you do it properly, IE will have no clue you're serving sites based on host-headers.
Except it isn't a full OS. If you use the web browser, it just frames the pages with your browser. It isn't running its own. A "full OS" would run entirely within silverlight and not rely on your native browser. To test, right click anywhere within the "OS." Now open a web page. Now right click within the web page. Magically, you get your browser's context menu and can open new tabs outside the "OS".
10 GbE runs over multimode fiber just fine. 8Gb FC runs over multimode fiber just fine. I don't see why the much shorter distances here would require single mode.
This is just an assumption on your part. There is technically little reason for it to be so. In fact, encrypting gaming traffic until it reaches a known good network can have *positive* effects due to overly aggressive "network management".
If this has been Windows story, there would be much frothing at the mouth and blame on Microsoft. Since it is Linux, the blame magically lies with the implementation.
Well, keep in mind that it is about the least effective racial slur ever invented. I don't know of anyone who when called a cracker wouldn't just laugh.
Go back and look through the history of the page for crucifixion and see how long it had a rather large anime section. It took a rather large, concerted effort to get that removed. It is useful for light information, but that is about it. It is also very, very, very bad for certain types of information, or if the article you are interested in has caught the attention of someone with no perspective who has decided to turn it in to a pet project. Sadly, wikipedia seems to attract that type of individual.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a lie. I used an iphone years ago. I remember the employee of the apple store opened it because she dropped it as she was opening it and I made her go get another one.
Your lack of understanding of what the word lien means is showing.
You see this type of thing a lot in healthcare actually (not usually so egregious). IT has a requirement to follow policy and legal regulations, (HIPAA, SOX, HITECH, etc). Due to this, some of the shinies that individuals may want are not allowed. Instead of recognizing the reasons, people do what the submitter did and try to do an end run around the whole process ignoring the fact that what IT is doing by not allowing these things is protecting the company in a legally mandated way.
Occasionally with extra resources, the request could be handled in a way compliant with the regulations, but that still doesn't mean it is feasible for your organization as it would require extra employees that just are not in the budget.
Neither scenario is an excuse to try circumvent the policies, no matter how much you want your iToy.
I think the real question should be should IT shut down any network port they see your rogue equipment connected to.
Hint: the answer is yes
I'll buy the "especially if they are essential" line partially. I say partially because if these species are nearly extinct and their ecosystem hasn't been destroyed then we really should question how essential they are.
Otherwise, I must ask you one thing. Why exactly should we put forth an effort? Because it feels good? Are we unnatural? I've seen a lot of claims like yours, but they never say why other than appeals to what feels right to an individual.
Where is the story on the apple version of this?
It happens on any type of "user rated" environment where the players are so small that no one cares. I had an iphone long ago, and I learned very quickly not to trust the ratings system at all. Too many times I'd read the reviews and half of them would be 1 star ratings that say "App X is superior to this". Something tells me that those people weren't independent users. Especially when half the reviews were made up of the same exact message.
You recognize that it is much more likely some rabid anti-ms obsessive making comments like this to try to make you hate ms.
In fact, I would not be surprised if it were twitter, and you are falling for it.
All of the comments I see here take a cynical view. Here is the alternative.
Person X is insured by company Y
Person X has made claims r, s, t, etc.
Company Y sees the claims, realizes that based on statistics, person X may be progressing to condition Z.
Condition Z is preventable, managable if treated early. If early treatment/prevention does not occur, person X is in for an expensive, unpleasant future, and company Y has to foot the bill.
With prevention, company Y saves money, person X saves money (out of pocket costs for extensive medical treatment) and suffering. Company Y continues collecting its insurance premium.
How is this a bad scenario exactly?
You can complain about the use, but a tool (in this case a predictive model) is just a tool.
Actually, I think the earthquake itself had more to do with it than the refusal to anticipate it.
*whoosh*
a "modern computer" will only throttle due to thermal issues if it is broken. They are made to run at a 100% duty cycle. If it has to down clock due to heat, it has faulty cooling, is drawing power beyond spec, etc. All of these are situations of something is broken.
So no. Not in the slightest. Computers are not built to dissipate less heat than they generate.
If yours do, please take it out of the cabinet, uncover the vents, clean the dust out of the heatsinks, return it as defective etc.
So, which distributions of Linux released in 2001 support it?
Microsoft has fixed it, just not in EOL and extended support (security updates only) phase products.
Show an example of something properly configured that it doesn't work on please. If you do it properly, IE will have no clue you're serving sites based on host-headers.
We need a mod -1: Not Wikipedia
Except it isn't a full OS. If you use the web browser, it just frames the pages with your browser. It isn't running its own. A "full OS" would run entirely within silverlight and not rely on your native browser. To test, right click anywhere within the "OS." Now open a web page. Now right click within the web page. Magically, you get your browser's context menu and can open new tabs outside the "OS".
10 GbE runs over multimode fiber just fine.
8Gb FC runs over multimode fiber just fine. I don't see why the much shorter distances here would require single mode.
This is just an assumption on your part. There is technically little reason for it to be so. In fact, encrypting gaming traffic until it reaches a known good network can have *positive* effects due to overly aggressive "network management".
If this has been Windows story, there would be much frothing at the mouth and blame on Microsoft. Since it is Linux, the blame magically lies with the implementation.
Hyporcrite much, Slashdot?
I don't know about your last point. You can put arbitrary files on your Kindle by default.
Why is it robbery? Well, if Dell or HP were pulling the same thing with their computers, what would you say?
This is mostly correct. But encrypted data *is* safe if the keys are not stored on the system in question as long encryption was implimented sanely.
Well, keep in mind that it is about the least effective racial slur ever invented. I don't know of anyone who when called a cracker wouldn't just laugh.
Go back and look through the history of the page for crucifixion and see how long it had a rather large anime section. It took a rather large, concerted effort to get that removed. It is useful for light information, but that is about it. It is also very, very, very bad for certain types of information, or if the article you are interested in has caught the attention of someone with no perspective who has decided to turn it in to a pet project. Sadly, wikipedia seems to attract that type of individual.
That same term when searched on wikipedia returns the correct result with the same spelling. This argument is specious.
What, you mean the term that if I type in to wikipedia, I get to the page that has the correct spelling? That is "proof"? Weird world you live in.