Yeah, someone beat me to it, but anytime I see Metro I use a keyboard shortcut and I get back to work.
I suppose I actually do use it in a sense though - as that is where windows search has gone. But again I am hardly using that unusable excuse for an interface, it's just win-foobar on the keyboard and go.
I still find it funny that in 2014 Microsoft has now decided to sell an OS that is only usable from the keyboard, but it doesnt slow me down at all.
Supply them with their entire diets? No, not even close, obviously.
It is enough to supply them with a few regular tidbits though. "Luxury veges", as another poster said. A few tomatos, a few berries, stuff that can really spice up the staples, and stuff that people with more money than sense spend a FORTUNE on when you figure in that they are looking for this absurd little 'organic' label and paying accordingly.
Obviously it sounds like they must be importing a lot of their packages from offsite but it probably does produce enough to be profitable. But the main point to it is obviously atmosphere.
The fact that someone actually went through the trouble to to produce this monstrosity is mind-boggling. But I guess it's their time and money so it's their decision.
16GB storage is still more than enough to install and operate a very useful little system though. Somehow I suspect there would be problems trying to get free drivers for some of the hardware, otherwise I might consider grabbing one and slapping slack on it.
"You do realize that insurance only works because there is a pool of healthy people who take out less than they put in. When the day comes that you need insurance you will appreciate how it works."
You realize that the correct word for what you describe here is not 'insurance' right?
It's 'pyramid scheme.'
Real insurance would involve ONLY healthy people, who pay enough as a group to cover the costs of the predictable subgroup that wind up needing catastrophic care later on.
Using a pyramid scheme to pay for routine health care and then calling it 'insurance' as a cover just makes it obvious this system was designed by fraudsters.
"Well, it used to be that Android was basically a linux distro."
No, it really never was. Because when you say a linux distro what you are actually thinking of is a GNU distro, and android never attempted that at all. It's always been it's own wierd little proprietary linux offshoot and I guess it's nice that people are starting to see it that way, but it's silly to pretend it's a change, it was this way from the start.
Pardon what may be a stupid question, but does the FB port need X-Windows at all?
If not just run multiple browser windows using multiple virtual consoles, Alt-F1 Alt-F2 etc switches back and forth. You could have chrome in one terminal, bitchX in the next, editor of choice in the third, and so on.
"But what, a bunch of unarmed anti-gun hippies are going to attack the homes of people they know have guns and are serious enough to get a license to carry one at all times?"
Obviously that is not expected.
What is expected is a horde of hipsters making a spectacle and attempting to cause pain for the gun owner through his/her family and/or work and livelihood. People organizing maliciously to bully your kids and cause you trouble at work can actually be a lot harder to deal with than a physical assault.
"If anything, this seems like a list of "houses not to hit" for potential burglars."
See it's a double-edged sword that way. It's a house you definitely dont hit on a whim - cause you could get shot. But on the other hand, if you are a serious burglar, this marks it as a high value target. They'll watch for a chance and once sure nobody is home, they want to get in to steal those weapons.
You know, I am not a lawyer, and I cannot give you a specific requirement there. There probably isnt one now that I think about it. The practice among the people I know is to keep a record of when it was sold, and a name and signature from the buyer. Both to cover yourself and, frankly, because in those rare cases where LE does have a legitimate reason to come back looking for it we do want to be able to help. Gun owners are generally pretty law and order people, with natural respect for LE. That respect can be and is strained by bad laws and bad LE practices and people resent over-reaches but end of the day we do want the cops catching real criminals and we are not trying to impede that.
Your assumption is that any expression of distaste for a background check is an indication the buyer would not pass one. It's an errant assumption.
No one wants to go through the background check because that creates a paper trail that any future administration could then use as a list of people that need to be rounded up. So quite naturally people are not willing to go through it in a situation where it is not legally required.
You are required to keep a record of the transaction with the serial number. If the weapon you sold were used in a crime later, it will be traced back to you. The original retail sale is on record, that person (if not you) will then produce the name of the person he sold it to, which is either you or will lead to you via reiterating the same process. If you cannot produce the weapon or produce a receipt showing who you sold it to, then you're in trouble. But until and unless there is a criminal investigation to justify the intrusion, that information is no one's business.
"Do you think that the autonomous state of Maine could request that the Canadian military come and restore order in it? That makes as much sense."
If such a thing existed, and the central government fell as has happened in Kiev, yes, it would be far from inconceivable given those circumstances. Particularly if our hypothetical autonomous Maine were actually an autonomous Newfoundland say, which had been part of Canada for 150 years before being shifted into Maine as an administrative move during a period when Canada and the US were both subsumed in a third entity roughly 50 years ago.
Yes, you have to go into fantasy-land pretty far to tweak the circumstances enough to actually make it analogous but once you do it would be sensible and expected.
"I don't think it is really their decision to make unilaterally."
Well that's absurd. It's not unilateral, it's bilateral - Crimea requests and Russia accedes. What third parties do you think should be involved here?
"It's not a "putsch" if the parliament has the power to remove an official and does so."
But it is a putsch when armed hooligans, many of them frankly neo-nazis, many openly supported by foreign governments, take over the streets, cow the police, and run the elected government out of town, leaving a rump of opposition representatives (the ones that LOST free and fair elections recently) to simply invent a new government more to their liking. Quit being coy.
Yanukovych is apparently quite a putz but he is still the legally elected President of the Ukraine, and I believe he is in Russia, requesting assistance.
"I'm not sure where you think the US is displaying greater chutzpah compared to the Russians. After all, it is Russian troops invading and not the US. All the US is doing is talking, and condemning Russian actions like most of the world."
But again, there has been no invasion. Russian action has been remarkably restrained. They havent rolled on Kiev, they havent shot or bombed anyone, they have secured Crimea at the request of the Crimean government. If you are going to denounce their invasion you need to wait until it actually happens, surely!
The US has been doing most of the invading lately, it's the height of hypocrisy for the nation that invaded (really invaded, bombing and shooting and not invited) Iraq looking for WMDs to be pointing fingers at Russia and threatening sanctions and so forth.
"Is there a limit you would support on Russian action? Annex Crimea - OK, annex Ukraine - No? What about just Eastern Ukraine? Maybe a city or two?"
You misunderstand me, I dont support Russian action, I simply understand it well enough to see through the cheap propaganda. The Russian actions are Russian actions, my concern is with our own. What stake do we have in this mess? Why should our prestige, and eventually our blood and treasure, be on the line here?
I support self determination for all peoples. If it's good for the Ukrainians, why not for the Crimeans too? And if borders, modern borders drawn for particular political reasons in the last century, are so sacrosant that they trump this right, then how do we explain Kosovo, hmmm?
"Do you think Serbia would have protected rights in Kosovo for all ethnic groups in a better way than the current Kosovo?"
Or possibly he simply knows someone there. Serbs in Kosovo are routinely abused by the 'authorities' who are in many cases 'former' KLA terrorists.
The point is that you can make noise about the sanctity of the administrative lines the Soviets set 50 years ago, or you can try to justify seizing Kosovo and separating it from Serbia (which it has been part of for centuries) but you cannot logically do both simultaneously. The hypocrisy is undeniable.
"I would say that an invasion, and vote authorizing annexation in the Russian parliament, is chutzpah enough, don't you think?"
Well let's talk about that.
John Kerry, with no apparent sense of irony: "You just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext."
Now does that describe the Russian movement into Crimea? The 'pretext' was actually a request from the legitimate authorities in autonomous Crimea, and the Russian troops moved in peacefully, not violently. Does not sound like what Kerry is talking about at all.
However it fits what the US did a few years ago in Iraq to a T.
Oh, and when was this vote authorizing annexation? Perhaps I missed it but it seems more likely you are talking about the authorization to use force. Not the same thing as annexation at all, and you should know that.
The Crimea, however, seems very likely to request annexation, and when they do the Russians will not be able to refuse. The sentiment in Crimea in favor of returning to Russia is at least as strong as the sentiment in Western Ukraine to pull away from Russia. Remember Crimea is historically Russian, it was shifted to the Ukraine administratively back in the 1950s when it would still be part of the Soviet Union either way so no one cared. When the Soviet Union broke down, the Crimea attempted to secede and join the Russian Federation immediately. The Ukrainian government negotiated them down to autonomy to keep them, and at this point with the elected Ukrainian government having been overthrown in a putsch, it's hardly surprising they are back on it.
I guess you would count me as 'pro-Russian' since I am not afraid to contradict the official lines here. But it's wrong. I am not pro-Russian. I am pro American. The problem here is that once again we are being lied to and con'd into putting American prestige and yes quite possibly blood and treasure on the line, for a bunch of lies.
That does not mean I think the Russians are angels - far from it. But the people of the Ukraine and the Crimea are getting screwed here too, played as pawns by both the US and Russia to some degree, and if I am more focused on the US it's because they are the ones that tax me and claim to act in my name.
The spin that mainstream US sources are putting on this is shameless though. The Russians seem to be more honest about what is going on, if only because they lack the level of Chutzpah the US sources can muster.
"Do you look for a plain jane web 1.0 site under the notion that they are using solid technology without a bunch of zero day exploits -- or do you avoid it under the notion that they obviously aren't keeping up and are incompetent?"
The former is certainly closer to the truth (flash monstrosities posing as websites are a dead give away that behind them lies abject ignorance and incompetence) but really you would have to go beyond appearances anyway when checking out a company, for this or another purpose.
As I understand it, there is really no need to trust any of these exchanges to begin with in order to use BTC (dont use it myself.) If it's not necessary to use them then it sounds like incompetence on both the part of the exchange and the customers.
"Am I correct in reading that this means; should the appeal fail; that another appeal claiming that the actions leading up to the search were not legal should be expected? Seems that such an assumption would mean there is another question which could potentially come into play in another review."
I do not think you are right, though I dont have all the data and could be wrong. But the implication I took was that the appeal neglected to challenge the initial location. Generally speaking, if you dont challenge that issue on your first appeal, you are not allowed to raise it later. YMMV, IANAL and I am not familiar with all the specifics of the case.
No, we dont know, which is why I have to agree with other posters that secret settlements should probably not be allowed/enforceable to begin with. Ultimately if the courts refused to enforce such clauses they would quit being used, to everyones ultimate advantage.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, someone beat me to it, but anytime I see Metro I use a keyboard shortcut and I get back to work.
I suppose I actually do use it in a sense though - as that is where windows search has gone. But again I am hardly using that unusable excuse for an interface, it's just win-foobar on the keyboard and go.
I still find it funny that in 2014 Microsoft has now decided to sell an OS that is only usable from the keyboard, but it doesnt slow me down at all.
Supply them with their entire diets? No, not even close, obviously.
It is enough to supply them with a few regular tidbits though. "Luxury veges", as another poster said. A few tomatos, a few berries, stuff that can really spice up the staples, and stuff that people with more money than sense spend a FORTUNE on when you figure in that they are looking for this absurd little 'organic' label and paying accordingly.
Obviously it sounds like they must be importing a lot of their packages from offsite but it probably does produce enough to be profitable. But the main point to it is obviously atmosphere.
There's simply no reason to use Metro, period.
The fact that someone actually went through the trouble to to produce this monstrosity is mind-boggling. But I guess it's their time and money so it's their decision.
The 100gb Google Drive is obviously useless.
16GB storage is still more than enough to install and operate a very useful little system though. Somehow I suspect there would be problems trying to get free drivers for some of the hardware, otherwise I might consider grabbing one and slapping slack on it.
Leaving malware in place and attempting to sandbox it instead of removing it entirely sounds like a very poor idea to me.
"You do realize that insurance only works because there is a pool of healthy people who take out less than they put in. When the day comes that you need insurance you will appreciate how it works."
You realize that the correct word for what you describe here is not 'insurance' right?
It's 'pyramid scheme.'
Real insurance would involve ONLY healthy people, who pay enough as a group to cover the costs of the predictable subgroup that wind up needing catastrophic care later on.
Using a pyramid scheme to pay for routine health care and then calling it 'insurance' as a cover just makes it obvious this system was designed by fraudsters.
A lot of truth there but not this:
"Well, it used to be that Android was basically a linux distro."
No, it really never was. Because when you say a linux distro what you are actually thinking of is a GNU distro, and android never attempted that at all. It's always been it's own wierd little proprietary linux offshoot and I guess it's nice that people are starting to see it that way, but it's silly to pretend it's a change, it was this way from the start.
Pardon what may be a stupid question, but does the FB port need X-Windows at all?
If not just run multiple browser windows using multiple virtual consoles, Alt-F1 Alt-F2 etc switches back and forth. You could have chrome in one terminal, bitchX in the next, editor of choice in the third, and so on.
"In modern parlance the AR15 is definitely a "battle rifle"."
No, it is not. It's an assault rifle.
Even wikipedia gets this right: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_rifle
"Vishnu, or Xenu. I get those two confused."
Vixenu. Pronounced Vich-eh-noo.
Sure, but even so, being under investigation can be quite uncomfortable. It wastes your time and LEs time. Best to avoid it when you can.
"But what, a bunch of unarmed anti-gun hippies are going to attack the homes of people they know have guns and are serious enough to get a license to carry one at all times?"
Obviously that is not expected.
What is expected is a horde of hipsters making a spectacle and attempting to cause pain for the gun owner through his/her family and/or work and livelihood. People organizing maliciously to bully your kids and cause you trouble at work can actually be a lot harder to deal with than a physical assault.
"If anything, this seems like a list of "houses not to hit" for potential burglars."
See it's a double-edged sword that way. It's a house you definitely dont hit on a whim - cause you could get shot. But on the other hand, if you are a serious burglar, this marks it as a high value target. They'll watch for a chance and once sure nobody is home, they want to get in to steal those weapons.
You know, I am not a lawyer, and I cannot give you a specific requirement there. There probably isnt one now that I think about it. The practice among the people I know is to keep a record of when it was sold, and a name and signature from the buyer. Both to cover yourself and, frankly, because in those rare cases where LE does have a legitimate reason to come back looking for it we do want to be able to help. Gun owners are generally pretty law and order people, with natural respect for LE. That respect can be and is strained by bad laws and bad LE practices and people resent over-reaches but end of the day we do want the cops catching real criminals and we are not trying to impede that.
Your assumption is that any expression of distaste for a background check is an indication the buyer would not pass one. It's an errant assumption.
No one wants to go through the background check because that creates a paper trail that any future administration could then use as a list of people that need to be rounded up. So quite naturally people are not willing to go through it in a situation where it is not legally required.
You are required to keep a record of the transaction with the serial number. If the weapon you sold were used in a crime later, it will be traced back to you. The original retail sale is on record, that person (if not you) will then produce the name of the person he sold it to, which is either you or will lead to you via reiterating the same process. If you cannot produce the weapon or produce a receipt showing who you sold it to, then you're in trouble. But until and unless there is a criminal investigation to justify the intrusion, that information is no one's business.
No, it's not supposed to be a clandestine business, why would it be?
"The moment he stopped letting them in (and he did stop)"
Not true, and even fox news reported otherwise (though that report went in the memory hole and did not inform subsequent reporting from them.)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2...
Context and timeline:
http://www.historycommons.org/...
Facts. So inconvenient for your comfortable fiction.
"Do you think that the autonomous state of Maine could request that the Canadian military come and restore order in it? That makes as much sense."
If such a thing existed, and the central government fell as has happened in Kiev, yes, it would be far from inconceivable given those circumstances. Particularly if our hypothetical autonomous Maine were actually an autonomous Newfoundland say, which had been part of Canada for 150 years before being shifted into Maine as an administrative move during a period when Canada and the US were both subsumed in a third entity roughly 50 years ago.
Yes, you have to go into fantasy-land pretty far to tweak the circumstances enough to actually make it analogous but once you do it would be sensible and expected.
"I don't think it is really their decision to make unilaterally."
Well that's absurd. It's not unilateral, it's bilateral - Crimea requests and Russia accedes. What third parties do you think should be involved here?
"It's not a "putsch" if the parliament has the power to remove an official and does so."
But it is a putsch when armed hooligans, many of them frankly neo-nazis, many openly supported by foreign governments, take over the streets, cow the police, and run the elected government out of town, leaving a rump of opposition representatives (the ones that LOST free and fair elections recently) to simply invent a new government more to their liking. Quit being coy.
Yanukovych is apparently quite a putz but he is still the legally elected President of the Ukraine, and I believe he is in Russia, requesting assistance.
"I'm not sure where you think the US is displaying greater chutzpah compared to the Russians. After all, it is Russian troops invading and not the US. All the US is doing is talking, and condemning Russian actions like most of the world."
But again, there has been no invasion. Russian action has been remarkably restrained. They havent rolled on Kiev, they havent shot or bombed anyone, they have secured Crimea at the request of the Crimean government. If you are going to denounce their invasion you need to wait until it actually happens, surely!
The US has been doing most of the invading lately, it's the height of hypocrisy for the nation that invaded (really invaded, bombing and shooting and not invited) Iraq looking for WMDs to be pointing fingers at Russia and threatening sanctions and so forth.
"Is there a limit you would support on Russian action? Annex Crimea - OK, annex Ukraine - No? What about just Eastern Ukraine? Maybe a city or two?"
You misunderstand me, I dont support Russian action, I simply understand it well enough to see through the cheap propaganda. The Russian actions are Russian actions, my concern is with our own. What stake do we have in this mess? Why should our prestige, and eventually our blood and treasure, be on the line here?
I support self determination for all peoples. If it's good for the Ukrainians, why not for the Crimeans too? And if borders, modern borders drawn for particular political reasons in the last century, are so sacrosant that they trump this right, then how do we explain Kosovo, hmmm?
"Do you think Serbia would have protected rights in Kosovo for all ethnic groups in a better way than the current Kosovo?"
Or possibly he simply knows someone there. Serbs in Kosovo are routinely abused by the 'authorities' who are in many cases 'former' KLA terrorists.
The point is that you can make noise about the sanctity of the administrative lines the Soviets set 50 years ago, or you can try to justify seizing Kosovo and separating it from Serbia (which it has been part of for centuries) but you cannot logically do both simultaneously. The hypocrisy is undeniable.
"I would say that an invasion, and vote authorizing annexation in the Russian parliament, is chutzpah enough, don't you think?"
Well let's talk about that.
John Kerry, with no apparent sense of irony: "You just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext."
Now does that describe the Russian movement into Crimea? The 'pretext' was actually a request from the legitimate authorities in autonomous Crimea, and the Russian troops moved in peacefully, not violently. Does not sound like what Kerry is talking about at all.
However it fits what the US did a few years ago in Iraq to a T.
Oh, and when was this vote authorizing annexation? Perhaps I missed it but it seems more likely you are talking about the authorization to use force. Not the same thing as annexation at all, and you should know that.
The Crimea, however, seems very likely to request annexation, and when they do the Russians will not be able to refuse. The sentiment in Crimea in favor of returning to Russia is at least as strong as the sentiment in Western Ukraine to pull away from Russia. Remember Crimea is historically Russian, it was shifted to the Ukraine administratively back in the 1950s when it would still be part of the Soviet Union either way so no one cared. When the Soviet Union broke down, the Crimea attempted to secede and join the Russian Federation immediately. The Ukrainian government negotiated them down to autonomy to keep them, and at this point with the elected Ukrainian government having been overthrown in a putsch, it's hardly surprising they are back on it.
I guess you would count me as 'pro-Russian' since I am not afraid to contradict the official lines here. But it's wrong. I am not pro-Russian. I am pro American. The problem here is that once again we are being lied to and con'd into putting American prestige and yes quite possibly blood and treasure on the line, for a bunch of lies.
That does not mean I think the Russians are angels - far from it. But the people of the Ukraine and the Crimea are getting screwed here too, played as pawns by both the US and Russia to some degree, and if I am more focused on the US it's because they are the ones that tax me and claim to act in my name.
The spin that mainstream US sources are putting on this is shameless though. The Russians seem to be more honest about what is going on, if only because they lack the level of Chutzpah the US sources can muster.
"Do you look for a plain jane web 1.0 site under the notion that they are using solid technology without a bunch of zero day exploits -- or do you avoid it under the notion that they obviously aren't keeping up and are incompetent?"
The former is certainly closer to the truth (flash monstrosities posing as websites are a dead give away that behind them lies abject ignorance and incompetence) but really you would have to go beyond appearances anyway when checking out a company, for this or another purpose.
As I understand it, there is really no need to trust any of these exchanges to begin with in order to use BTC (dont use it myself.) If it's not necessary to use them then it sounds like incompetence on both the part of the exchange and the customers.
Citation needed.
Article and Section numbers please.
"Am I correct in reading that this means; should the appeal fail; that another appeal claiming that the actions leading up to the search were not legal should be expected? Seems that such an assumption would mean there is another question which could potentially come into play in another review."
I do not think you are right, though I dont have all the data and could be wrong. But the implication I took was that the appeal neglected to challenge the initial location. Generally speaking, if you dont challenge that issue on your first appeal, you are not allowed to raise it later. YMMV, IANAL and I am not familiar with all the specifics of the case.
No, we dont know, which is why I have to agree with other posters that secret settlements should probably not be allowed/enforceable to begin with. Ultimately if the courts refused to enforce such clauses they would quit being used, to everyones ultimate advantage.
He did not invent the microprocessor.
He filed a fanciful patent application describing the possibility, waited until someone else figured out how to make it reality, then sued them.
He might be the patent troll patient zero.