Our Lord and Master on high, The Steve, duly proclaimed, "Thou Shalt Not Useth The Beta On A Phone Upon Which You May Actually Want To Receive The Magic Words Through The Air", and as everyone else is saying, "Buy A Phone To Develop On". iPhone retail cost: $399. 2 x iPhone retail cost: $798. Nowhere near $800 at all, you're right.
iPhone users? You mean iPhone developers, right, the ones installing the iPhone 2.0 SDK, right? The SDK that is only available on Mac, right? Yeah, I could see how that would make them nothing to do with Mac. (The point was correct, though it doesn't necessarily have relevance).
Because, as we all know, a regular customer couldn't possibly be someone who wants to get, let's face it, bent over by AT&T when they have the gall to go overseas and want to use their phone, mmm, global roaming rates, and decides to buy a local SIM card - yeah, I've never heard of anyone except weird hippy hacker types that do that.
Except wait, though, my mother, my aunt, both in their 50s... I guess "as intended" is a synonym for "willing to pay extortionate rates for global roaming because you're forced to use AT&T overseas".
I think google is wrong here, and needs to retract ANY images that homeowners do not want shown of their property. I'll change my tune here when the management of google allows all their property and pictures to be posted on streetview.
Huh, why? Personally, I could care less if Google's management opts in to their scheme, doesn't mean I should feel any more inclined to opt in, too.
That's not my problem - that's yours to deal with as the person potentially committing the infringement. Is that going to be your defense, "Well, hell, Your Honor, after a while, it all looks the same, you can't expect me to notice this kind of stuff, really, can you?"
I appreciate your sentiment, but please, as a person who makes a living as a photographer, ensure you're being accurate when you say these things - leaving out important caveats as I've previously mentioned, is not a good thing.
Also curious, just what private property do you think is exempt from the owner imposing a condition of entry regarding photography? Cause that ain't so. Though you are right, you can be told to leave and must do so, and confiscation of your camera/destruction of imagery without consent could subject them to civil and or criminal sanction.
No, you can't. Photography on private premises is permitted, unless explicitly prohibited, OR implicitly prohibited in violation of a person's reasonable expectation of privacy. If someone puts a 12 foot solid hedge around their property but for the entrance gate, whilst you could take photos at that point, it could be assumed that if you were to enter and take photos from a vantage point not visible from public property (leaving aside the issue of trespass for the moment), that you are violating a reasonable expectation of privacy in your photography on private property.
"If it doesn't clearly and explicitly prohibit" - not quite. On private property, photography is not explicitly prohibited, though it may be. It may also, however, be implicitly prohibited where there is a reasonable expectation to privacy, which could be argued fairly easily by the very virtue of having your home situated sufficiently far from the street.
Yeah, good call, there's been several of these posts... "They had to go all the way up and turn around!" "Why, do Google vans not have a Reverse gear, or rear view mirrors, or side mirrors?"
And yet, there's no procedure for drivers to flag, using that same GPS map data, data that needs to be deleted for any number of reasons (anything from unintentional trespass to look, grisly accident scene)?!?
Utterly irrelevant. This is standard practice. Even if the drivers were violating their employment agreement, that's between them and Google. Don't make this out to be a grab for cash just cause it's Google. If any other situation where an employee of a company infringes on your rights, you'd be suing the company. You could also sue the employee personally, sure, but if you won you'd generally be waiting while they in turn sued their employer. I fail to see the problem here (as in, "suing Google, not van drivers").
How odd, asked for a recommendation for a registrar, you just throw in a recommendation for a hosting service that serves a fairly particular, non-generalized need?
Uhhh, why exactly do you think the stock price climbed from where it was to "near the offer price"?!?
Perhaps because people were able to sell, because they believed it a strong possibility that the offer would be accepted, and so people were willing to buy just for that small increase?
It has nothing to do with any magic rabbit pulled out of a hat by Yahoo. If MS walks away now, expect to see Y drop back down to the original price at offer, if not below.
Ahh, the old "I carry guns in my house and I'll shoot first, ask questions later, so some sicko don't rape my daughter".
Yeah, here's a hint: people break and enter to steal your DVD player or TV, not to tie the females of the household up and torment them sexually.
Spear or sword? What kind of frothing at the mouth idiot are you?
The only thing worse than you is the people who spot someone on their property at the property line, and rather than call law enforcement, decide they're going to actively lay in wait.
You're a clown. Most cities would only have maybe one per 100,000, at most "family terrorized in home by intruders" stories per year.
Results 1 - 10 of about 57 for paytard. (0.05 seconds)
And of those, 10 are you, or your sockpuppets, on Slashdot.
Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you that you spend all day, every day, posting to Slashdot with upwards of four accounts, having conversations with yourself and cheering yourself on as you make such earth-shatteringly profound statements like "Micro$soft Windoze is teh suck"?
Nah, not even that. I just rang Comcast Business and said I wanted a business-class connection for my home office. They just asked "Company Name?" and that was it. So I get 8mbps/1mbps, 5 statics, no port restrictions, no throttling, for $169 $89 for as long as I keep extending the contract.
I'm with AC here. Are Groklaw, etc, really suggesting that several standards bodies in several nations are/all/ corrupt? And not one leak? Not one failed, incorruptible whistleblower? Or is it just that, whatever you may think of the standard, Microsoft, etc, that OOXML just has enough to get past? I know it's an ugly concept, but it seems more plausible. And only natural / human that when your championed standard/objections to something are overlooked/fail, that you look for a culprit, any culprit, that overlooks your own weaknesses and / or failings?
That's more what it seems like to me, despite my personal objections and issues with OOXML.
Precisely. There's plenty of places throughout the US providing 'co-op' ISP services to upwards of thousands of users each, and big hint: most co-ops are counting every penny, they don't have tens or hundreds of millions in supposed infrastructure investment costs.
With Comcast Business I have 8mbps/1mbps, 5 staticss, no throttling/blocking of BT, no port blocks, for $89 a month. (Regular price $170 a month, but I was on some deal, that, nicely, isn't just an 'expires after x months', but a 'as long as you extend contract').
MMORPGs fare better (i.e. it's theoretically playable) than other online games, but it's still painful.
Play EVE. Doesn't seem to have the issue of lag at all (in the traditional sense).
My options in Tacoma were nice enough... plenty of DSL, City-provided cable TV and internet, Comcast.
In Olympia? Hah, where I am, just off the freeway, T-mobile reception is one bar. DSL? No chance. "iDSL" or ISDN proper (haha). Comcast cable, though, but nothing else. Comcast is actually nice here, none of the BT throttling issues (though I am on a business account, so I have no server/port restrictions either, and 5 static IPs. 8mbps/1mbps for $89 a month, not bad), though I am yet to see the practical effects of "PowerBoost" (to 16/2, in theory)/ever/ kick in.
Getting off topic, we decided not to touch Comcast TV with a bargepole though. Talk about nickel and diming.... "basic package", $26 a month for 6 months (then up to $53, ew). Oh, plus $6 a month for HD. Plus $6 a month per STB. Gah. Dish Network, $42 a month, plus $5 a month for local channels, for the 722 HD DVR, cable of acting as a STB for 2 TVs. Much nicer. But I'd never go with satellite internet unless unavoidable.
I feel your pain, though. As recently as a couple of years ago, due to crappy exchange, my best option for internet was 19.2kbps dialup.
Slashdot Mirror
Our Lord and Master on high, The Steve, duly proclaimed, "Thou Shalt Not Useth The Beta On A Phone Upon Which You May Actually Want To Receive The Magic Words Through The Air", and as everyone else is saying, "Buy A Phone To Develop On". iPhone retail cost: $399. 2 x iPhone retail cost: $798. Nowhere near $800 at all, you're right.
iPhone users? You mean iPhone developers, right, the ones installing the iPhone 2.0 SDK, right? The SDK that is only available on Mac, right? Yeah, I could see how that would make them nothing to do with Mac. (The point was correct, though it doesn't necessarily have relevance).
And hacking is different to cracking, but for 99.98% of the populace. Your point?
Except wait, though, my mother, my aunt, both in their 50s... I guess "as intended" is a synonym for "willing to pay extortionate rates for global roaming because you're forced to use AT&T overseas".
Huh, why? Personally, I could care less if Google's management opts in to their scheme, doesn't mean I should feel any more inclined to opt in, too.
That's not my problem - that's yours to deal with as the person potentially committing the infringement. Is that going to be your defense, "Well, hell, Your Honor, after a while, it all looks the same, you can't expect me to notice this kind of stuff, really, can you?"
Also curious, just what private property do you think is exempt from the owner imposing a condition of entry regarding photography? Cause that ain't so. Though you are right, you can be told to leave and must do so, and confiscation of your camera/destruction of imagery without consent could subject them to civil and or criminal sanction.
No, you can't. Photography on private premises is permitted, unless explicitly prohibited, OR implicitly prohibited in violation of a person's reasonable expectation of privacy. If someone puts a 12 foot solid hedge around their property but for the entrance gate, whilst you could take photos at that point, it could be assumed that if you were to enter and take photos from a vantage point not visible from public property (leaving aside the issue of trespass for the moment), that you are violating a reasonable expectation of privacy in your photography on private property.
"If it doesn't clearly and explicitly prohibit" - not quite. On private property, photography is not explicitly prohibited, though it may be. It may also, however, be implicitly prohibited where there is a reasonable expectation to privacy, which could be argued fairly easily by the very virtue of having your home situated sufficiently far from the street.
Yeah, good call, there's been several of these posts... "They had to go all the way up and turn around!" "Why, do Google vans not have a Reverse gear, or rear view mirrors, or side mirrors?"
And yet, there's no procedure for drivers to flag, using that same GPS map data, data that needs to be deleted for any number of reasons (anything from unintentional trespass to look, grisly accident scene)?!?
"What are we doing tonight, honey?"
"Having dinner with the Borings"
"Sounds like fun!"
Mind you, I used to know someone whose family name was Crapper, and another whose family name was Hoare.
Utterly irrelevant. This is standard practice. Even if the drivers were violating their employment agreement, that's between them and Google. Don't make this out to be a grab for cash just cause it's Google. If any other situation where an employee of a company infringes on your rights, you'd be suing the company. You could also sue the employee personally, sure, but if you won you'd generally be waiting while they in turn sued their employer. I fail to see the problem here (as in, "suing Google, not van drivers").
How odd, asked for a recommendation for a registrar, you just throw in a recommendation for a hosting service that serves a fairly particular, non-generalized need?
del.icio.us has very little following outside the geek world, I hate to say, too.
Perhaps because people were able to sell, because they believed it a strong possibility that the offer would be accepted, and so people were willing to buy just for that small increase?
It has nothing to do with any magic rabbit pulled out of a hat by Yahoo. If MS walks away now, expect to see Y drop back down to the original price at offer, if not below.
Basic cause and effect.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt. Show me a University Network Usage Agreement that forbids the use of IE.
Thankfully, though, the very vast majority of the rest of the "first world" affords far more protections to an employee than California.
Yeah, here's a hint: people break and enter to steal your DVD player or TV, not to tie the females of the household up and torment them sexually.
Spear or sword? What kind of frothing at the mouth idiot are you?
The only thing worse than you is the people who spot someone on their property at the property line, and rather than call law enforcement, decide they're going to actively lay in wait.
You're a clown. Most cities would only have maybe one per 100,000, at most "family terrorized in home by intruders" stories per year.
Really? Google would politely beg to differ:
And of those, 10 are you, or your sockpuppets, on Slashdot.
Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you that you spend all day, every day, posting to Slashdot with upwards of four accounts, having conversations with yourself and cheering yourself on as you make such earth-shatteringly profound statements like "Micro$soft Windoze is teh suck"?
Nah, not even that. I just rang Comcast Business and said I wanted a business-class connection for my home office. They just asked "Company Name?" and that was it. So I get 8mbps/1mbps, 5 statics, no port restrictions, no throttling, for $169 $89 for as long as I keep extending the contract.
Not anyone who drank the apple-flavored kool aid, apparently.
That's more what it seems like to me, despite my personal objections and issues with OOXML.
Precisely. There's plenty of places throughout the US providing 'co-op' ISP services to upwards of thousands of users each, and big hint: most co-ops are counting every penny, they don't have tens or hundreds of millions in supposed infrastructure investment costs.
With Comcast Business I have 8mbps/1mbps, 5 staticss, no throttling/blocking of BT, no port blocks, for $89 a month. (Regular price $170 a month, but I was on some deal, that, nicely, isn't just an 'expires after x months', but a 'as long as you extend contract').
Play EVE. Doesn't seem to have the issue of lag at all (in the traditional sense).
My options in Tacoma were nice enough... plenty of DSL, City-provided cable TV and internet, Comcast.
In Olympia? Hah, where I am, just off the freeway, T-mobile reception is one bar. DSL? No chance. "iDSL" or ISDN proper (haha). Comcast cable, though, but nothing else. Comcast is actually nice here, none of the BT throttling issues (though I am on a business account, so I have no server/port restrictions either, and 5 static IPs. 8mbps/1mbps for $89 a month, not bad), though I am yet to see the practical effects of "PowerBoost" (to 16/2, in theory) /ever/ kick in.
Getting off topic, we decided not to touch Comcast TV with a bargepole though. Talk about nickel and diming.... "basic package", $26 a month for 6 months (then up to $53, ew). Oh, plus $6 a month for HD. Plus $6 a month per STB. Gah. Dish Network, $42 a month, plus $5 a month for local channels, for the 722 HD DVR, cable of acting as a STB for 2 TVs. Much nicer. But I'd never go with satellite internet unless unavoidable.
I feel your pain, though. As recently as a couple of years ago, due to crappy exchange, my best option for internet was 19.2kbps dialup.