PayPal, being a business, also has the right to refuse any business they want.
Freezing funds gets screwy, though.
They lose a big chunk of that right when they spell out, in a TOS, what they can and cannot do. If they do outside those bounds they, just like users, are in violation of that agreement.
Where do you get this from? I can build a car any time I want and I don't have to have OBDII on board. That requirement applies to manufacturers, not hobbyists. Do you think every hot rod built in the US has an OBDII port on it? And, no, I'm not talking about an old car being redone. They are built from scratch every day and they don't have to have OBDII.
He didn't say "Any modern car", only "anything street legal."
I can go build a complete car right now without putting a single computer on it and it will be street legal and pass all emissions tests. I could even build one to be street legal in California. It's all about tuning. You don't need a computer to do it.
I assume you're talking about the rear end impact that required a still vehicle being hit by one going 80+ mph for the Pinto. Any vehicle would have a problem in that situation.
The Crown Vics were also found to not be deficient in any way. Even so, Ford STILL put extra protection into the cars.
That's how a responsible car company responds to a potential problem, unlike Toyota.
Wait, do you think this is the first issue Toyota has covered up? They've been doing it for years and nobody cared. They have been refusing to issue recalls for years on other models. Hell, two of their execs IN JAPAN went to jail for it.
I remember how the cruise control on the cars I've owned will lower the accelerator when the CC is accelerating.
That's because there was a physical link to the throttle body. If the throttle level moves it pulls the cable with it and the pedal moves, like it's supposed to.
I guarantee that other manufacturers are clenchinging their butts hoping that nobody in the media wonders about all the intermittent "floor mat" problems.
Wrong. No other manufacturer has spent so much time and money covering things up. They spent their time and money making sure there was nothing wrong in the first place.
I use folder extensively on all 3 accounts. I use Thunderbird with IMAP access as my main client at home. I have a Droid with all 3 accounts synced and use the web interface occasionally. I have never had any problems with folders that I didn't, discovered later, cause myself.
Gmail does not implement IMAP standard correctly.... Gmail sends the responses to some queries out of order - this behaviour is formally correct but is not what some IMAP clients expect.
So Gmail is correctly implemented but the clients aren't and you blame Gmail?
Google's IMAP implementation is horrible, to the point of only barely being usable.
Um, no? I have 3 Gmail accounts all accessed through IMAP and they all work perfectly and always have. Making a blanket statement about an entire implementation is completely groundless. YOU may have problems, and I know it would suck, but GMail works perfectly fine for 99% of people.
Don't worry, both Consumer Reports and The Tappet Brothers are idiots most of the time. If your vehicle has regular maintenance it will be just fine warming up while idling.
calling the flyer from wright brothers the first plane when it required a machine to aid it's launch is bad, it's like claiming you build the first car but it worked only on a downhill road.
So I guess all those things that get chucked off of aircraft carriers aren't planes either then?
The Droid is as good, or better, than the iPhone as far as UI goes. There are some quirks and some annoyances but no more than the iPhone. Also, the open nature is more friendly to tinkering, of course. The speed of the phone alone is reason enough to get it over the iPhone IMO.
Android, no question. The Droid has SOME faults but "The Network" is far superior in the US. Contrary to possibly-popular belief, and AT&T's ads, their network is not faster than Verizon's by a long shot. And if you don't want to spend quite as much, the HTC Eris is quite good as well.
From the description:"and either used or attempted to use Comcast service to use the Ares, BitTorrent, eDonkey, FastTrack or Gnutella P2P protocols at any time from April 1, 2006 to December 31, 2008;"
Well, I think their $16 million just blew up. Since bittorrent is a P2P service, I'm sure any one who used bittorrent AT ALL "attempted to use Comcast service" to download something.
Personally, I think they should have to pay $16 to all of us.
Correct. They are not allowed to hit you back. They are allowed to use the minimum force necessary to prevent you from hitting them (and that may include hitting), but "hitting back" is not allowed, ever.
Wait, so you're drawing a distinction between "hitting" and "hitting back?" They are either allowed to hit you, or they're not. Hitting back doesn't mean they're punishing you, it just means you hit them first, requiring them to do the same.
They are allowed to hit you if necessary to get you under control, which you said yourself. There is no difference between "hitting" and "hitting back." You have to remember the cop doesn't have the option of losing the fight because they have to assume, since you're fighting with the police in the first place, that you are willing to do whatever it takes to get away. Ultimately, that means they're dead and you get away. They are allowed to use enough force to end the confrontation "NOW" not just end it.
Sorry, absolutely nothing justifies a beating. The only two options are either A. Arrest the man or B. Let him go. "Beat him" is not acceptable under any circumstances whatsoever.
Excuse me? So if I run up to a cop and start hitting THEM, they aren't allowed to hit me back? That's awesome; see you next week for the party.
I hate to break it to you but I don't have a bubble to burst. Using Australia as an example for ANY firearm law is ludicrous. Their current laws were put into place in an over the top reaction to a psycho who shot some people.
This may be true for many parts of the U. S. A. In much of civilized world,
Don't pull that "civilized world" shit. Your government telling you that you can't own them is quite uncivilized. I suppose you think the police are there to protect "you" as an individual, too.
Which, in my opion, is a good thing, but that's a different matter altogether.
No they wouldn't. There is nothing saying you have to keep a gun in a safe. That is an unreasonable request for most people that only own a gun or two. Buying a $300 safe isn't a good buy to lock up a $100 gun.
In my case, safes are necessary but in most they are not.
Slashdot Mirror
PayPal, being a business, also has the right to refuse any business they want.
Freezing funds gets screwy, though.
They lose a big chunk of that right when they spell out, in a TOS, what they can and cannot do. If they do outside those bounds they, just like users, are in violation of that agreement.
Yes, thank you. I don't understand what he doesn't get.
Believe it or not, the restriction was right there in their service terms that I didn't bother reading.
That doesn't matter as it violates ICANN policy. A registrar cannot limit your ability to transfer a domain at any time.
Where do you get this from? I can build a car any time I want and I don't have to have OBDII on board. That requirement applies to manufacturers, not hobbyists. Do you think every hot rod built in the US has an OBDII port on it? And, no, I'm not talking about an old car being redone. They are built from scratch every day and they don't have to have OBDII.
He didn't say "Any modern car", only "anything street legal."
I can go build a complete car right now without putting a single computer on it and it will be street legal and pass all emissions tests. I could even build one to be street legal in California. It's all about tuning. You don't need a computer to do it.
I assume you're talking about the rear end impact that required a still vehicle being hit by one going 80+ mph for the Pinto. Any vehicle would have a problem in that situation. The Crown Vics were also found to not be deficient in any way. Even so, Ford STILL put extra protection into the cars. That's how a responsible car company responds to a potential problem, unlike Toyota.
Wait, do you think this is the first issue Toyota has covered up? They've been doing it for years and nobody cared. They have been refusing to issue recalls for years on other models. Hell, two of their execs IN JAPAN went to jail for it.
Anything street legal without a needing a special waiver for emissions.
That isn't even close to true.
I remember how the cruise control on the cars I've owned will lower the accelerator when the CC is accelerating.
That's because there was a physical link to the throttle body. If the throttle level moves it pulls the cable with it and the pedal moves, like it's supposed to.
I guarantee that other manufacturers are clenchinging their butts hoping that nobody in the media wonders about all the intermittent "floor mat" problems.
Wrong. No other manufacturer has spent so much time and money covering things up. They spent their time and money making sure there was nothing wrong in the first place.
I use folder extensively on all 3 accounts. I use Thunderbird with IMAP access as my main client at home. I have a Droid with all 3 accounts synced and use the web interface occasionally. I have never had any problems with folders that I didn't, discovered later, cause myself.
Gmail does not implement IMAP standard correctly. ... Gmail sends the responses to some queries out of order - this behaviour is formally correct but is not what some IMAP clients expect.
So Gmail is correctly implemented but the clients aren't and you blame Gmail?
Google's IMAP implementation is horrible, to the point of only barely being usable.
Um, no? I have 3 Gmail accounts all accessed through IMAP and they all work perfectly and always have. Making a blanket statement about an entire implementation is completely groundless. YOU may have problems, and I know it would suck, but GMail works perfectly fine for 99% of people.
Don't worry, both Consumer Reports and The Tappet Brothers are idiots most of the time. If your vehicle has regular maintenance it will be just fine warming up while idling.
Meh, the whole article is irrelevant. Once it gets to the Supreme Court, they'll just say we're restricting spammers' freedom of speech.
No. Your freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to harass other people. You can use use your rights so far as they don't violate anybody else's.
calling the flyer from wright brothers the first plane when it required a machine to aid it's launch is bad, it's like claiming you build the first car but it worked only on a downhill road.
So I guess all those things that get chucked off of aircraft carriers aren't planes either then?
The Droid is as good, or better, than the iPhone as far as UI goes. There are some quirks and some annoyances but no more than the iPhone. Also, the open nature is more friendly to tinkering, of course. The speed of the phone alone is reason enough to get it over the iPhone IMO.
Agreed, I had the public beta on my Macbook Pro and now have Enterprise 64 bit running without any problems whatsoever.
What are you talking about?
FTD: "where drivers weren't sure whether to stop or go"
If you aren't sure, FUCKING STOP!
If you don't know this basic driving principle, you shouldn't be driving.
ARE YOU LISTENING PHOENIX?
Android, no question. The Droid has SOME faults but "The Network" is far superior in the US. Contrary to possibly-popular belief, and AT&T's ads, their network is not faster than Verizon's by a long shot. And if you don't want to spend quite as much, the HTC Eris is quite good as well.
In Europe the Milestone is the same phone.
From the description :"and either used or attempted to use Comcast service to use the Ares, BitTorrent, eDonkey, FastTrack or Gnutella P2P protocols at any time from April 1, 2006 to December 31, 2008;"
Well, I think their $16 million just blew up. Since bittorrent is a P2P service, I'm sure any one who used bittorrent AT ALL "attempted to use Comcast service" to download something.
Personally, I think they should have to pay $16 to all of us.
Correct. They are not allowed to hit you back. They are allowed to use the minimum force necessary to prevent you from hitting them (and that may include hitting), but "hitting back" is not allowed, ever.
Wait, so you're drawing a distinction between "hitting" and "hitting back?" They are either allowed to hit you, or they're not. Hitting back doesn't mean they're punishing you, it just means you hit them first, requiring them to do the same.
They are allowed to hit you if necessary to get you under control, which you said yourself. There is no difference between "hitting" and "hitting back." You have to remember the cop doesn't have the option of losing the fight because they have to assume, since you're fighting with the police in the first place, that you are willing to do whatever it takes to get away. Ultimately, that means they're dead and you get away. They are allowed to use enough force to end the confrontation "NOW" not just end it.
Sorry, absolutely nothing justifies a beating. The only two options are either A. Arrest the man or B. Let him go. "Beat him" is not acceptable under any circumstances whatsoever.
Excuse me? So if I run up to a cop and start hitting THEM, they aren't allowed to hit me back? That's awesome; see you next week for the party.
I agree with Sir Lewk's comment.
I hate to break it to you but I don't have a bubble to burst. Using Australia as an example for ANY firearm law is ludicrous. Their current laws were put into place in an over the top reaction to a psycho who shot some people.
An armed society is a polite society.
This may be true for many parts of the U. S. A. In much of civilized world,
Don't pull that "civilized world" shit. Your government telling you that you can't own them is quite uncivilized. I suppose you think the police are there to protect "you" as an individual, too.
Which, in my opion, is a good thing, but that's a different matter altogether.
Well, you're wrong. See above.
No they wouldn't. There is nothing saying you have to keep a gun in a safe. That is an unreasonable request for most people that only own a gun or two. Buying a $300 safe isn't a good buy to lock up a $100 gun.
In my case, safes are necessary but in most they are not.