Ya, I know when I buy a new game for PC, I tend to blame dell if the gameplay sucks.
Not that you sound like a fanboi repeating the same tired excuses or anything. Claiming you think it sucks totally sounds objective though, good thinking!
There's people getting scammed on the internet daily that have ALL of the information on the criminal at hand, and the police, 9 times out of 10, tell you it's a civil matter and that they can't help. I've experienced it first hand.
Except in those cases, the "thief" doesn't actually give you your stuff back... Reality is, if this weren't' a large corporation who clearly influenced the raid, absolutely nothing would have happened from a criminal/law enforcement perspective.
Name me *ONE* case of someone "stealing" $5,000 worth of goods (read: it was left somewhere by its rightful owner), returning it, then being raided by police.
So why are the floor traders at enron and most of wallstreet still walking around in public? They knowingly RUINED the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, not just "many".
The problem is those that do can't necessarily teach. More than once in college I had some CXX level guy come in to be a "professor" who probably couldn't teach his own children to drive a car. I agree that real-world experience can help in a classroom, but just because you are successful in the real world, doesn't mean you can teach others to do the same.
It won't have anywhere near the granularity in configurations, but I will say apple airport extreme's tend to "just work". They support both g and n operating at the same time since they have multiple antenna's, and they also have a sort of sandbox guest environment you can set.
If you want fall-down easy to setup and manage, they'll get the job done. If you want granular control, don't waste your time. I got sick of trying to make dd-wrt work with WAP, wireless-n and g at the same time a year ago, and just bit the bullet on the apple units. I can say it's been one purchase I don't regret.
Do you go into a hole for half the year then? "hundreds of citizens firing up in the air" happens every duck, pheasant and goose hunting season in this country.
Not to mention deer and bear hunting which often results in an angle that is shooting towards the sky, not the ground.
A $500 RC plane can't fly at 30-40,000 feet. It would also struggle to make it to 5,000 feet. They're talking about drones that would be flying at several hundred feet at most if they're carrying any kind of a load... which is the primary concern.
It would seem to me if every citizen knew how to properly shoot a rifle, odds are pretty good one of those things could be knocked out of the sky with a barrett. It would cost all of us a heck of a lot less money too.
In fact... this is exactly the sort of thing the 2nd amendment was written for. "The people" defending themselves from attack.
What we need are SUCCESSFUL entrepreneurs. You failed to mention what the return rate for VC's are on loans given to men vs. women. Successfully run VC's take into account EVERY aspect of the company they're giving money to. My dollar is on them getting consistently higher return rates from men...
Right, it's not open source if you can't redistribute it! FALSE. Firefox can't redistribute flash, but it still supports flash, and it's (firefox) still open source. The argument that h.264 can't be included in firefox because it's not open is patently false. End of discussion. Nothing you've said has changed that fact.
Bullshit, I just built chromium with h.264 support. As for Chrome not being open source, the ENTIRE CODE is released under the chromium project other than the google logo's, the update manager, and RLZ.
Chromium is the name we have given to the open source project and the browser source code that we released and maintain at www.chromium.org. One can compile this source code to get a fully working browser. Google takes this source code, and adds on the Google name and logo, an auto-updater system called GoogleUpdate, and RLZ (described later in this post), and calls this Google Chrome.
a href="http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-discuss/browse_thread/thread/c82bf49672a213f4">http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-discuss/browse_thread/thread/c82bf49672a213f4
I am trying to build Chromium with support for H.264 video support enabled.
AFAICT, it looks like adding ffmpeg_branding=Chrome to the gyp defines
should be all that is necessary
What are you talking about? The only thing preventing firefox from incorporating H.264 is the fact they don't want to pay a license fee to do so. Open source has absolutely nothing to do with it. If that were the case Chrome wouldn't have it included. I know you figured you'd get some more mod points by claiming firefox is somehow defending open source with their decision, but that's not even remotely accurate.
What's with the "uselessly slow" commentary. The guy did it just to prove it could be done, which is pretty cool. I don't think he ever made any assertion that it would be a usable OS alternative for the N900...
How is that so different from the US today? Replace "legionary soldiers" with "graduate college students", and I'd say you've hit the nail on the head.
It is however fact. If you follow the Sun mailing lists for opensolaris, you'll have seen extremely talented and valuable engineers leaving the company in droves, and not of their own volition.
Are you sure you even used windows2000? You aren't limited to 26 filesystems, that's nothing but the number of drive letters you can have. You can mount filesystems as folders inside a drive letter, just like you can on unix. And you can name them pretty much anything you want. FUD apparently is alive and well.
Ya, I'd FAR prefer the President make a statement prior to having some solid factual evidence. Jumping to conclusions makes things better for EVERYONE!
Is that supposed to be near-synchronous? What the hell is "near-asynchrynous"? I don't even see how "near-asynchronous" would be possible. If you aren't synchronous, you're asynchronous, and it's just a matter of how far away from synchronous you are. That's like saying "he's traveling at near-not-the-speed-of-light".
And I said explain why it hasn't happened with ANYTHING today. Celebrities and others get stuff for FREE to do exactly what this patent describes. You can ignore reality and deny that this works all you want, it won't change anything.
Interesting. It seems to me celebrities still get all sorts of things for free, and it hasn't lowered the price the least bit for us "common folk". The internet does absolutely NOTHING to force companies to sell a product for the same price to everyone. If you think that you've either never gotten a deal, or you're living in a hole.
Slashdot Mirror
Ya, I know when I buy a new game for PC, I tend to blame dell if the gameplay sucks.
Not that you sound like a fanboi repeating the same tired excuses or anything. Claiming you think it sucks totally sounds objective though, good thinking!
Add MN, WI, SD, ND, PA, IA and FL to that list. Assuming you meant Verizon > AT&T.
There's people getting scammed on the internet daily that have ALL of the information on the criminal at hand, and the police, 9 times out of 10, tell you it's a civil matter and that they can't help. I've experienced it first hand.
Except in those cases, the "thief" doesn't actually give you your stuff back... Reality is, if this weren't' a large corporation who clearly influenced the raid, absolutely nothing would have happened from a criminal/law enforcement perspective.
Name me *ONE* case of someone "stealing" $5,000 worth of goods (read: it was left somewhere by its rightful owner), returning it, then being raided by police.
So why are the floor traders at enron and most of wallstreet still walking around in public? They knowingly RUINED the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, not just "many".
The problem is those that do can't necessarily teach. More than once in college I had some CXX level guy come in to be a "professor" who probably couldn't teach his own children to drive a car. I agree that real-world experience can help in a classroom, but just because you are successful in the real world, doesn't mean you can teach others to do the same.
It won't have anywhere near the granularity in configurations, but I will say apple airport extreme's tend to "just work". They support both g and n operating at the same time since they have multiple antenna's, and they also have a sort of sandbox guest environment you can set.
If you want fall-down easy to setup and manage, they'll get the job done. If you want granular control, don't waste your time. I got sick of trying to make dd-wrt work with WAP, wireless-n and g at the same time a year ago, and just bit the bullet on the apple units. I can say it's been one purchase I don't regret.
"In the city"? They goose hunt in a field I can see from my house, and I'm in the middle of a city.
I don't' see how it's at all a silly analogy.
Do you go into a hole for half the year then? "hundreds of citizens firing up in the air" happens every duck, pheasant and goose hunting season in this country. Not to mention deer and bear hunting which often results in an angle that is shooting towards the sky, not the ground.
A $500 RC plane can't fly at 30-40,000 feet. It would also struggle to make it to 5,000 feet. They're talking about drones that would be flying at several hundred feet at most if they're carrying any kind of a load... which is the primary concern.
It would seem to me if every citizen knew how to properly shoot a rifle, odds are pretty good one of those things could be knocked out of the sky with a barrett. It would cost all of us a heck of a lot less money too.
In fact... this is exactly the sort of thing the 2nd amendment was written for. "The people" defending themselves from attack.
What we need are SUCCESSFUL entrepreneurs. You failed to mention what the return rate for VC's are on loans given to men vs. women. Successfully run VC's take into account EVERY aspect of the company they're giving money to. My dollar is on them getting consistently higher return rates from men...
Right, it's not open source if you can't redistribute it! FALSE. Firefox can't redistribute flash, but it still supports flash, and it's (firefox) still open source. The argument that h.264 can't be included in firefox because it's not open is patently false. End of discussion. Nothing you've said has changed that fact.
Right, just like firefox is closed by adopting the flash plugin.
Chromium DOES support h.264. Maybe next time before you make a statement of fact, figure out if it's true or not...
http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-discuss/browse_thread/thread/c82bf49672a213f4
Bullshit, I just built chromium with h.264 support. As for Chrome not being open source, the ENTIRE CODE is released under the chromium project other than the google logo's, the update manager, and RLZ.
http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-discuss/browse_thread/thread/c82bf49672a213f4
Chromium is the name we have given to the open source project and the browser source code that we released and maintain at www.chromium.org. One can compile this source code to get a fully working browser. Google takes this source code, and adds on the Google name and logo, an auto-updater system called GoogleUpdate, and RLZ (described later in this post), and calls this Google Chrome.
http://blog.chromium.org/2008/10/google-chrome-chromium-and-google.html
a href="http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-discuss/browse_thread/thread/c82bf49672a213f4">http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-discuss/browse_thread/thread/c82bf49672a213f4
I am trying to build Chromium with support for H.264 video support enabled. AFAICT, it looks like adding ffmpeg_branding=Chrome to the gyp defines should be all that is necessary
What are you talking about? The only thing preventing firefox from incorporating H.264 is the fact they don't want to pay a license fee to do so. Open source has absolutely nothing to do with it. If that were the case Chrome wouldn't have it included. I know you figured you'd get some more mod points by claiming firefox is somehow defending open source with their decision, but that's not even remotely accurate.
What's with the "uselessly slow" commentary. The guy did it just to prove it could be done, which is pretty cool. I don't think he ever made any assertion that it would be a usable OS alternative for the N900...
How is that so different from the US today? Replace "legionary soldiers" with "graduate college students", and I'd say you've hit the nail on the head.
It is however fact. If you follow the Sun mailing lists for opensolaris, you'll have seen extremely talented and valuable engineers leaving the company in droves, and not of their own volition.
Are you sure you even used windows2000? You aren't limited to 26 filesystems, that's nothing but the number of drive letters you can have. You can mount filesystems as folders inside a drive letter, just like you can on unix. And you can name them pretty much anything you want. FUD apparently is alive and well.
http://www.windowsreference.com/windows-xp/how-to-mount-an-external-drive-partititon-as-directory-in-xp/
Ya, I'd FAR prefer the President make a statement prior to having some solid factual evidence. Jumping to conclusions makes things better for EVERYONE!
Is that supposed to be near-synchronous? What the hell is "near-asynchrynous"? I don't even see how "near-asynchronous" would be possible. If you aren't synchronous, you're asynchronous, and it's just a matter of how far away from synchronous you are. That's like saying "he's traveling at near-not-the-speed-of-light".
And I said explain why it hasn't happened with ANYTHING today. Celebrities and others get stuff for FREE to do exactly what this patent describes. You can ignore reality and deny that this works all you want, it won't change anything.
Because it can be replicated for free.
The patent says nothing about being limited to software based products. Let me know your solution to "free laptops".
Interesting. It seems to me celebrities still get all sorts of things for free, and it hasn't lowered the price the least bit for us "common folk". The internet does absolutely NOTHING to force companies to sell a product for the same price to everyone. If you think that you've either never gotten a deal, or you're living in a hole.
You keep saying that, but you're basing it on what? I've seen absolutely nothing that says Nokia is asking for anything of the sort.
Is there some factual documentation to back this up, or is it yet another "apple can do no wrong" assumption?