but I've had fraudulent charges made three times on my credit cards in the last 10 years on different cards each time You obviously missed what the hell I was talking about. You are a CUSTOMER I'm talking about the MERCHANTS that have to pay $15 to $30 just because some asshole used your card. Please don't respond unless you know what you're saying.
Not only are these scum ripping off the card holders, they are costing charities time and money. I'm sorry but I have a bigger problem with the credit card companies that charge $15 to $30 for each fraudulent charge. Consider the fact that the chargeback fees are several times more than the actual charge. If a donation turns out to be fake it's not a big deal because you are back to where you started, nothing right? Except that's not true, thanks to the fees you get slammed with. Most of the time the merchant loses, sometimes the customer loses but the credit card companies always win and they are the real scum.
A rough calculation puts the cost of even one hundred such devices at $100,000,000.
Please tell me you're joking. If not, please play it off like you are.
The iMac became the biggest selling computer model of all time.
You're kidding right? The Dell Dimension most likely holds that record simply from having been around ~15 years. Show your math.
but in an ideal world, communism would work
In an ideal world we wouldn't need communism, because it would be ideal. If you're going to dream, dream big.
If you can't continue the project, maybe you could turn it over to someone else? I think that would be keeping with the spirit of open source. (off-topic: read this)
Anyone willing to pay $500+ for a phone will certainly pay $400 or less for some entry-level iMac device.
Anyone willing to pay $500+ for a phone will not be satisfied with an entry-level iMac device.
moore is a sensationalist idiot
many people who are sick and dieing cling to unproven treatments which aren't covered by the funds for very good reasons Just watch the movie before being prejudicial. You have no clue what you are talking about. It's not just about the "Rainmaker" cases where they kill someone that needed a bone marrow transplant (not experimental at all) which they do show one case of. It's also not about the millions of Americans that have absolutely no health insurance even though that should be enough to upset anyone. No, what's really wrong with the system is how every single step of the way, the medical companies are fighting with you. From the ambulance ride to the IV drugs to the overpriced prescriptions, they are looking for some way to stick it to you. The fact alone that they make more money by giving less medical care is completely flawed and ultimately a case of "letting the wolves guard the chicken coop".
Everybody who want's a CD will get one. It's a national paper, and he's giving them away at the concerts too.
Did you know that there are other countries besides yours?
there's no reasonable way you can use a plain text, easily changed header as evidence for any prosecution
Who said prosecutors are reasonable? It seems you are a little too idealistic. The attitude "justice will prevail" is a good one to have but fairly stupid to rely solely on that without protecting yourself.
According to your logic, we should just let the system take it's course. Eventually after we get sued for distributing copyrighted music, spend money on lawyers and miss work to fight a legal battle, justice will prevail.
Hey at least you can run Windows on a Mac. Try to run OSX on anything else but Apple hardware and see if you don't get really popular with some male prisoners FAST.
I love how Apple turns around and uses this as a feature point "Only a Mac can run Windows, Linux and OSX! It is truly a miracle!"....
I think your community needs to relearn its own definition. Open means, exposed, visible, not obfuscated. Every possible use from whenever until now points to the word open meaning "you can look". When you go to an open park, does that mean you can start digging holes and build your own swing set or does it mean you can simply walk in and look around with no cost?
The word your looking for is "free" as in freedom. FLOSS, F/OSS or whatever you want to call it is not the same as "open source". It seems to me that you suddenly don't like the burden of adding the "Free" part and want to monopolize a phrase that has classically always been used in another way. Nobody is confused about open source, it's open, you can view it, there is nothing misleading about that. There's also other licenses that do exactly the same thing that an OSI license will do but it's simply not approved so it's not "open source". Yet, it is...
I don't have time to wait for your response that "doesn't really remove IE" so I'll just pretend you fell for my trap and tell you the real answer.
Yes you can remove IE completely but MS apps that require IE to render HTML internally won't work if you do it.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/318378
This will tell you about the "IsInstalled" setting. In other words, there is nothing artificial about how IE is tied in. So many things use IE such as Active Desktop, shell integration etc that it's really pointless to bother with it. If you just want to disable IE except for local uses then you can set the IE proxy setting to a non-existent domain, get a firewall, change program access, there's a ton of ways to cripple IE but trying to remove the OS's HTML renderer is akin to asking Apple to remove WebKit. Nobody forces you to IE just like nobody forces you to use WebKit, but it is there because it is used by the system. So what's the problem?
Look asshole. I'm not going to sit here and watch you change your argument.
You said "tied to one OS" implying that IE should be ported to another OS. You said nothing about uninstalling it. If you want to come back with a different topic then we can talk about that now.
not artificially tied to one OS
There's nothing artificial about it. Arguing that MS should be forced to develop applications for other operating systems where it will not make a profit is stupid. Please go run your own business into the ground before asking for legislature to ruin someone else's.
you could also add, since the default home page of safari is to apple.com, and since this move got lots of free Apple advertising...
Let me go out on a limb here and say that anyone that has Safari already knows about Apple.com. How else would they get the fucking browser?
There's nothing stopping a company from using bulk mail rates too. It's not the same. Which was my point with the analogies. They usually don't fit and only confuse the argument.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you really backup all that porn?
Please tell me you're joking. If not, please play it off like you are.
You're kidding right? The Dell Dimension most likely holds that record simply from having been around ~15 years. Show your math.
In an ideal world we wouldn't need communism, because it would be ideal. If you're going to dream, dream big.
If you can't continue the project, maybe you could turn it over to someone else? I think that would be keeping with the spirit of open source. (off-topic: read this)
Anyone willing to pay $500+ for a phone will not be satisfied with an entry-level iMac device.
Did you know that there are other countries besides yours?
Irony called. He wants to see you in his office IMMEDIATELY.
Who said prosecutors are reasonable? It seems you are a little too idealistic. The attitude "justice will prevail" is a good one to have but fairly stupid to rely solely on that without protecting yourself.
According to your logic, we should just let the system take it's course. Eventually after we get sued for distributing copyrighted music, spend money on lawyers and miss work to fight a legal battle, justice will prevail.
Now who's being unreasonable?
Hey at least you can run Windows on a Mac. Try to run OSX on anything else but Apple hardware and see if you don't get really popular with some male prisoners FAST.
I love how Apple turns around and uses this as a feature point "Only a Mac can run Windows, Linux and OSX! It is truly a miracle!"....
Solve for D's nuts.
I think your community needs to relearn its own definition. Open means, exposed, visible, not obfuscated. Every possible use from whenever until now points to the word open meaning "you can look". When you go to an open park, does that mean you can start digging holes and build your own swing set or does it mean you can simply walk in and look around with no cost?
The word your looking for is "free" as in freedom. FLOSS, F/OSS or whatever you want to call it is not the same as "open source". It seems to me that you suddenly don't like the burden of adding the "Free" part and want to monopolize a phrase that has classically always been used in another way. Nobody is confused about open source, it's open, you can view it, there is nothing misleading about that. There's also other licenses that do exactly the same thing that an OSI license will do but it's simply not approved so it's not "open source". Yet, it is...
Was it one of these?
Congratulations, you just proved that interstellar travel isn't currently possible.
I don't have time to wait for your response that "doesn't really remove IE" so I'll just pretend you fell for my trap and tell you the real answer. Yes you can remove IE completely but MS apps that require IE to render HTML internally won't work if you do it. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/318378 This will tell you about the "IsInstalled" setting. In other words, there is nothing artificial about how IE is tied in. So many things use IE such as Active Desktop, shell integration etc that it's really pointless to bother with it. If you just want to disable IE except for local uses then you can set the IE proxy setting to a non-existent domain, get a firewall, change program access, there's a ton of ways to cripple IE but trying to remove the OS's HTML renderer is akin to asking Apple to remove WebKit. Nobody forces you to IE just like nobody forces you to use WebKit, but it is there because it is used by the system. So what's the problem?
Look asshole. I'm not going to sit here and watch you change your argument.
You said "tied to one OS" implying that IE should be ported to another OS. You said nothing about uninstalling it. If you want to come back with a different topic then we can talk about that now.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/927177
There's your answer.
There's nothing artificial about it. Arguing that MS should be forced to develop applications for other operating systems where it will not make a profit is stupid. Please go run your own business into the ground before asking for legislature to ruin someone else's.
Let me go out on a limb here and say that anyone that has Safari already knows about Apple.com. How else would they get the fucking browser?
What's wrong? Did Steve piss in the kool-aid again?
Tell us what you really think.
There's nothing stopping a company from using bulk mail rates too. It's not the same. Which was my point with the analogies. They usually don't fit and only confuse the argument.
Imagine if the USPS charged more to deliver legitimate mail than it did to deliver spam. I believe that's the "big deal" he was referring to.
/. home of the bad analogies.
Welcome to