The iOS slide to unlock is not a physical counterpart for anything, it's a gesture.
Did you watch the video. She literally says...
The motion fits well with the finger gesture. [...] I think to use a sliding gesture makes the toggle slightly more difficult to use but greatly reduces the chances of error [...]"
And those on-off sliders work **exactly** like Apple's slide to unlock, especially as it was originally implemented... I'm thinking back to my iphone 3GS here.
If businesses that don't want Office 365 are buying multiple Home and Student licenses then it's going to be pretty obvious that it isn't being used for Home and Student purposes
Like BestBuy cares when you walk out with 20 boxes of MS Office Home and Student.
with records being made of it at both purchase time (where it already would be denied)
By whom?
and at tax time
Because the government cares? (They do not.)
so no, businesses would not use it.
LMAO.
Businesses use Home editions all over the place if they can get away with it. One company I work with just bought another company, and the bought out company was Home versions of everything. (A whole chain of retail locations, each with 2-3 point of sale terminals all running Windows Home, and Office Home and Student.
(And why were they able to get away without Outlook I'm sure you'll ask... because in this particular situation, as I already said, they were POS terminals so they used some webmail. Retail sales reps - think like a store in the mall, really have very very little need for email throughout the day, don't have meetings, or appointments, nor company phones that need to be in sync, etc, etc.
For what the retail staff needed Google Apps would have probably been a better fit in terms of functionality.
Although Office Home and Student would have been cheaper. Since the staff outnumbered the computers by quite a bit (probably 2:1 easily), per-machine software bought once would have been cheaper than per-employee-per-month very quickly.
They wouldn't need to because they can use their 365 subscription with it, which you claim they need because they need Outlook and that this cannot just be replaced with a mobile client because an ipad isn't going to cut it.
Nice string of reading comprehension fail. Lets look at it piece by piece:
They wouldn't need to because they can use their 365 subscription with it, which you claim they need
Why would they need a 365 subscription? Very few businesses have one. I've never ever claimed that a business needs office 365.
because they need Outlook
You can get outlook without office 365. You just buy office pro. That's how most small business work, and larger ones buy VLA with or without software assurance... but Office 365? Not so much, at least not yet.
this cannot just be replaced with a mobile client because an ipad isn't going to cut it.
*If* you need a desktop, then an ipad isn't going to cut it. That's almost tautological. Why are you having trouble with that?
I've already agreed multiple times that business users who can use an ipad won't need 'outlook' because the mobile mail clients do exchange well enough on the mobile devices.
So lets now, look at *those* business users. They WOULD just buy the flat fee ipad home and student if it existed, because
a) its much cheaper than office 365 for business would be b) they already have the mail/calendar/sync functionality via the mobile client
So if they allowed for a flat fee home and student ipad edition of office, businesses would just use it.
This has actually boiled down to a very simple argument.
XP -> Vista -- probably need a new computer or at very least a RAM upgrade, but worth it for the complete overhaul of the security model and desktop compistor. No longer run as administrator by default alone is worth upgrading. Most important, if not the most sexy, update ever. Bit of a rocky launch though caused by a lot of 3rd party driver support issues, 3rd party software dragging their feet on supporting not running as administrator, and microsoft allowing it to be installed on under-specced units; all really tarnished the customer perception. The OS itself though was big step forward.
Vista -> 7 -- a no brainer. Nearly everything that was wrong with Vista got fixed. And really the only reason 7 wasn't a vista service pack was due to the Vista brand having no value, due to the rocky launch. If your still on XP, there's no reason not to move to 7 (although your XP hardware might be getting old by now...)
7 -> 8... meh... there's improvments in some areas, but problems in others. MS brings an app store nobody really needs, and a start screen nobody really likes. 7 -> 8.1 not massively compelling, but 8.1 has a lot more incremental improvements; and a lot of the rough edges of 8 are smoothed over now. (8.0 to 8.1 is a no-brainer tho) 7 -> 8.1 "start menu update" -- bringing back the start menu? Plus everything else that has been incrementally upgraded since 7? Yeah, I'm in. Only kicker is the price... $240 to go from 7 pro to 8.1 pro is awfully steep for an incremental upgrade... and I've got 5+ computers in my house.
Hence a standalone Home and Student license for the iPad version would only be an additional unnecessary cost to a business who already has a 365 subscription and can use it for free with that, you obviously don't even know what you're trying to argue anymore.
Actually no. Because there is NO such thing as a "standalone home and student license for the ipad". The software is 'free', but is a viewer only unless its tied to office 365. To "create and edit" files you need an office 365 subscription of some sort.
You can pretend all you like, but you did say exactly that, given you have a serious problem with memory and reading comprehension I will point you at where you said exactly that thing: Beleive it or not some of us do real work, on computers, at desks. And, no, an ipad isn't going to cut it.
Yeah, read that again, as it is you with the defective memory. When I wrote that I was talking about why OUTLOOK was indispensable to DESKTOP users.
If an iPad isn't going to cut it then businesses will have paid for full versions of Office anyway negating the need to purchase further Home and Student licenses of iPad versions of the software and for those people who do not need the full versions of Office (those who aren't businesses for which an iPad will cut it) they can purchase that version.
There is no home and student ipad version, per se, as it is tied to your office 365 subscription.
Linux has a Dramatically better hardware support than XP,Vista,7 or 8 has combined. Only a fool that knows nothing of linux would ask the "expensive to replace peripherals" raging bullshit line not knowing that linux has such better hardware support than Windows, that many times a device actually works BETTER under linux.
Yeah, like the $140,000 3-axis contact lens lathe at the lab at work that uses a pair of ISA interface cards to control it, running XP. I just know some linux hobbyiest teenager in his basement somewhere wrote linux drivers for it... and that you'll want your fathers intra-ocular lens implants manufactured using that kids driver running the control software in wine...
Linux tends to do better for older consumer hardware. Not so much for arbitrary proprietary hardware such as medical instruments and diagnostic equipment.
And the reason for that was to justify the Home and Student model for the iPad version of Office, which you have said isn't going to cut it for businesses so the Home and Student concept is for licensing to non-businesses is completely valid because apparently businesses won't see value in the product anyway.
Don't be an idiot. We can take it as a given that there ARE plenty of business use cases for Office on an iPad. So the question, so far unanswered, remains: what will induce businesses to pay for the more expensive version of office for the ipad?
And the answer comes from the app description
"Read documents for free. A qualifying Office 365 subscription is required to edit and create Word documents. Qualifying plans include: [...]"
Businesses are going to be tied into the business priced subscriptions of office 365 because of the limitations on the home version of office 365 -- such as the very low limit on the number of users within a domain. (5)
If you believe the iPad "isn't going to cut it" for businesses then the issue isn't licensing anyway so again your argument is irrelevant
Hence a jury, but a jury is nothing more than 12 people rendering an opinion.
. If legislators are not happy with the outcome they simply have to attempt to rewrite the law until it matches their spirit or intent but is still equally applied as required by typical constitutions.
Oh, I'm not saying the law -as written- is perfect, or even good. I am merely saying that an 'anti-revenge porn law' is a good idea, and we should have one. And I agree legislators may need to go back and rework and fix things... e.g. just as they closed the 'upskirt photo' loophole in Utah (iirc?) recently.
I vehemently deny those who would apply interpretive legal opinion
Law is implicitly interpreted by the human beings applying it. There is no other way.
and categorically state that it is the antithesis of justice ie interpretive Islamic Sharia law
Because our government deciding that 'men of military age are enemy combatants' or that waterboarding isn't torture is any different from the things you dislike about Islamic Sharia law.
(seriously is that what the hell you want).
Its what we already have. Not the laws themselves of course, ours are categorically better, but we ABSOLUTELY do have the same characteristic of it being subject to interpretation; and the same potential for that to be abused.
Sorry but law equally applied is letter of the law, newsworthy is only an opinion
Welcome to planet earth, where all law is subject to opinion.
More realistically how about just you and yours are protected and everyone else is newsworthy.
You do realize we already have a couple hundred years worth of society grappling with these questions, right? There's a lot of case law too.
No jury in the country would have any difficulty discerning a typical modern revenge porn site from a genuine news article. (For starters because the news article wouldn't need to actually post the pictures. When was the last time you saw hard core porn in any serious journalism or even puff tabloid crap... even when they were reporting on a sex scandal? (Which is all tabloids seem to do.)
And sure something right on the bloody line? That's what the courts are FOR, for rendering those legal opinions.
As it happens, those methods are big on drama and small on results. By way of example: here's Europe, in millions, from the mid 19th century to more or less the present. [..]
Dig up the same chart over medieval europe. Stable (low) populations during the early middle ages, a boomed, then peaked around 1300 and then steep declines.
The black death wasn't a bump in the road like world war ii.
From wikipedia:
"The region of Tuscany had 2 million people in 1300, which it would not reach again until 1850."
That is pretty representative of all of Europe.
It took over 500 years to recover. That's quite a different chart from the one you pulled out of wolfram over the last 100.
Actually yes. Does it need to be on a revenge porn site though? Or perhaps just article in the news? You don't even need to make the photo widely publicly available... although even if you just show it to even a select few people to prove its real and back your story, odds are it gets leaked and the public will be able to find it.
But that sequence of events and hypothetical really has NOTHING involving revenge porn sites, now does it?
As for the photo itself, I'm pretty sure getting your dick sucked while the girl you are with is fucked by a goat leaves you liable for bestiality and animal cruelty charges as much as it does her. And the noteriety that you get may cost you employment and other opportunities. Might want to think twice about publishing that photo, at least under your own name.
I didn't forget that at all. In fact, I explicitly addressed it.
A hypocritical politician is newsworthy, and an article exposing that isn't revenge porn, its in the public interest; not only because of their relative celebrity, but also because of the interplay with the policy.
You wouldn't be able to post photos of a politicatian to revenge porn sites... but so what? The new your times isn't a revenge porn site, and they could still report on it.
You are attempting to claim the freedom to control others in actions that do not phsyically affect you but purely are the disruption of the false morality of behaving privately in a manner you claim publicly not to participate.
Uh. No. Revenge porn is about publicly humiliating an ex for breaking up with you by showing them naked and/or engaging in sexual activity. Where is the false morality? Its not like the average victim of revenge porn is advertising she's a virgin. Most will admit to having previous partners, or at least tell you its none of your business.
And how can you claim that she isn't directly affected by the fact that an ex completely exposes her and her private sexual activities on the internet for her all to see; including friends, coworkers, parents, and even children. I see harm perpetrated by the person who posted it. And I see consipiratorial activity by the operator of a dedicated revenge porn site who intentially caters to provide that particular 'genre' of content.
I don't really see google being impacted. Worst case, someone uploads 'revenge porn' to youtube, victim says get rid of it, give me the contact information for the account that loaded it up, and google does. Google isn't a revenge porn site operator.
Seriously think about this folks, should a family politician that claims homosexuals be fined and imprisoned or in any other way prejudiced against be allowed protection under law when caught photographically 'in flagrante delicto' with some of the same sex or should that image be legally published and that politician publicly ridiculed [...]
Yeah, because THAT is what revenge porn websites are all about - outing political hypocrisy?? Give me a fucking break.
Besides, you can out the hypocritical politician under the context of it being newsworthy -- you don't need to start a revenge porn site for that, now do you?
If an iPad isn't going to cut it then what the hell are you even arguing about?!
It seems you forgot.
Most recently we were arguing about why businesses needed outlook on the desktop, and this in turn is why they are willing to buy business licenses of Microsoft office instead of just buying the cheaper home and student version.
The whole point was about a Home and Student standalone license for iPad so if an iPad isn't going to cut it for the businesses that have the dependencies you are talking about then Office for iPad is going to be of no interest to them anyway.
Not quite. The whole point was that Microsoft relies on Outlook being indispensible to ensure businesses buy the more expensive version of office that includes it on the desktop.
Business uses that would be able to use office on the ipads would only need office home and student, because the ipad mobile exchange client is adequate.
The question was: how does Microsoft ensure businesses buy a commercial use license of Office for ipads?
On the desktop, they want outlook, and "Office Home and Student isn't adequate". Outlook is the carrot for business users to buy the more expensive version. That led to the tangent about why outlook is required by businesses on the desktop.
What is the carrot on mobile to ensure businesses do not buy the "Home and Student" version? That is the question.
So where do you draw the line? If he were openly Gay, 25 years ago, attacking the family values, etc... everyone at Mozilla should just show up to work because its no business of theirs what their boss does off the clock?
You are comparing someone who is gay, to someone who is attacking the rights of others to be gay. Calling it "attacking family values" is dishonest. He wasn't attacking anything, that's just what the people attacking him said he was doing.
Now, 25 years ago, if he was openly gay... fuck it, suppose it was today and he was openly gay..or people refused to buy from his store, or some of his employees refused to work for him.
You know what? Yeah, I'd side with him, and say his employees and customers were homophic assholes, but I'd ultimately still side with his employees right not to work for him, and his customers right not to do business with him.
(doesn't sound so good when it's the other way around, does it? You can't have it both ways without looking intolerant yourself...
"intolerance" is not a virtue, but calling out "intolerance of people who are intolerant" as "intolerance" is just silly word game intolerant people play to try to color the other side as just as bad, but they aren't. Don't pretend otherwise.
You can use POP3, IMAP, and SMTP protocols to access your exchange server from any of those email clients,
Not necessarily you can't. I work with multiple clients. They don't even have POP3, IMAP enabled, and SMTP is used only to exchange mail with the outside world, not for mail submission from the domain clients and is firewalled. Mail access is via Exchange's https proxy with client certificates.
And how is thunderbird for active directory support? Group policy?
but the reality is you don't need exchange and outlook, just look here
As I said, I have multiple clients. One of them uses google appls for enterprises actually. And its not bad, but its a LOT more limited than exchange is, and I say that as someone who works with it. (I mentioned I used thunderbird in my previous message, guess what, its with google apps for enterprises.) Its suitable for the clients that are using it - hell I migrated them myself, but I wouldn't even think of recommending it to some of my other clients.
As another touch of irony to that story, they use outlook with google apps sync for outlook after trying a variety of other solutions. (And google really dragged its feet supporting CTR Office 2013 with it too, which was a major PITA for me.)
though I'm sure you will come back and continue pretending that those millions of companies need Outlook and aren't managing without it.
The millions of companies that aren't using it don't need it. Some would benefit from it though, others not. And of the many that ARE using it as more than just a dumb imap client, yes, its pretty indispensable.
[Zimbra] Yeah totally doesn't have one.
"Zimbra Desktop is a full-featured free desktop email client which is still supported in version 7, but has reached End of Life in version 7.2.2 and will be replaced with an HTML5 offline mode in version 9."
You were saying? yeah, lets totally go with a desktop product that is EOL before we've even started to migrate to it. Good plan!
Why do they have to run on a desktop?
Oh i dunno... i like to send and receive email from my computer, when I'm sitting at my computer. It makes it easier to copy and paste things from other documents I'm working on, add attachments, etc. Why on earth would I not want a desktop client.
The mobile clients are perfectly usable and much more useful given that you aren't tied to your desk.
That's why we use them too, and want them in sync. What would we care about sync if we only had one device? And they are only -more- useful when you aren't at your desk.
Beleive it or not some of us do real work, on computers, at desks. And, no, an ipad isn't going to cut it.
Thunderbird - thunderbird doesn't directly support calenders or exchange. You can get plugins for each, its a patchwork mess and there are several issues. Thunderbird itself is great... I even use it myself, but its not a suitable exchange client.
eM... never heard of it. From wikipedia: . Microsoft Exchange server is partially supported. Yeah. Lets do that.
Zimbra... doesn't even have a desktop client. Its webmail that backends onto Zimbra's server. How is that a solution at all? Are you just naming random email products now?
Apple Mail only runs on apple, and is HIGHLY limited as an exchange client -- you can't even copy messages between two accounts/mailboxes with it. Been there, done that.
Postbox? No advertised exchange support at all.
or you know, your entirely capable email client on your Android phone or tablet, your iPhone or your iPad
None of which will run on a desktop and so are completely beside the point.
You can even get Android tablets for less than the cost of standalone Outlook!
I can get coffee makers for less too...or mittens. They also aren't solutions.
Spare me. There was nothing fascist about what I said.
Would you lose your job if your private actions where made public?
beats me.
Do you think people should be forced to publicly declare what they support even thought we submit private ballots?
His donation was a matter of public record. It was never really that private. Unremarkable perhaps, but not private.
Are you willing to let your life be stripped bare in public and take the resulting actions?
I am not even willing to join facebook. However, if something of my private life goes out into the world and goes viral, then what? I can't put the genie back in the bottle. That is the world in which we live, you can't pretend it isn't.
But this isn't even about someone privacy being invaded. This is about someone's low profile but still public activity being revealed.
So why are you trying to holding me to a standard that is even harsher than the one he is held to?
Slashdot Mirror
The iOS slide to unlock is not a physical counterpart for anything, it's a gesture.
Did you watch the video. She literally says...
The motion fits well with the finger gesture. [...] I think to use a sliding gesture makes the toggle slightly more difficult to use but greatly reduces the chances of error [...]"
And those on-off sliders work **exactly** like Apple's slide to unlock, especially as it was originally implemented ... I'm thinking back to my iphone 3GS here.
If businesses that don't want Office 365 are buying multiple Home and Student licenses then it's going to be pretty obvious that it isn't being used for Home and Student purposes
Like BestBuy cares when you walk out with 20 boxes of MS Office Home and Student.
with records being made of it at both purchase time (where it already would be denied)
By whom?
and at tax time
Because the government cares? (They do not.)
so no, businesses would not use it.
LMAO.
Businesses use Home editions all over the place if they can get away with it. One company I work with just bought another company, and the bought out company was Home versions of everything. (A whole chain of retail locations, each with 2-3 point of sale terminals all running Windows Home, and Office Home and Student.
(And why were they able to get away without Outlook I'm sure you'll ask... because in this particular situation, as I already said, they were POS terminals so they used some webmail. Retail sales reps - think like a store in the mall, really have very very little need for email throughout the day, don't have meetings, or appointments, nor company phones that need to be in sync, etc, etc.
For what the retail staff needed Google Apps would have probably been a better fit in terms of functionality.
Although Office Home and Student would have been cheaper. Since the staff outnumbered the computers by quite a bit (probably 2:1 easily), per-machine software bought once would have been cheaper than per-employee-per-month very quickly.
Paypal is a good idea, it's just a terrible company.
They wouldn't need to because they can use their 365 subscription with it, which you claim they need because they need Outlook and that this cannot just be replaced with a mobile client because an ipad isn't going to cut it.
Nice string of reading comprehension fail. Lets look at it piece by piece:
They wouldn't need to because they can use their 365 subscription with it, which you claim they need
Why would they need a 365 subscription? Very few businesses have one. I've never ever claimed that a business needs office 365.
because they need Outlook
You can get outlook without office 365. You just buy office pro. That's how most small business work, and larger ones buy VLA with or without software assurance... but Office 365? Not so much, at least not yet.
this cannot just be replaced with a mobile client because an ipad isn't going to cut it.
*If* you need a desktop, then an ipad isn't going to cut it. That's almost tautological. Why are you having trouble with that?
I've already agreed multiple times that business users who can use an ipad won't need 'outlook' because the mobile mail clients do exchange well enough on the mobile devices.
So lets now, look at *those* business users. They WOULD just buy the flat fee ipad home and student if it existed, because
a) its much cheaper than office 365 for business would be
b) they already have the mail/calendar/sync functionality via the mobile client
So if they allowed for a flat fee home and student ipad edition of office, businesses would just use it.
This has actually boiled down to a very simple argument.
No shit, but since you're so pathetic at reading comprehension [...]
Stop projecting.
even a flat fee for a perpetual non-commercial Home & Student license would probably work.
No it wouldn't work. Because business users would pay that instead of subscribing to office 365.
(given a tie of infinite length)
Are we given a tie of infinite length? No.
XP -> Vista -- probably need a new computer or at very least a RAM upgrade, but worth it for the complete overhaul of the security model and desktop compistor. No longer run as administrator by default alone is worth upgrading. Most important, if not the most sexy, update ever. Bit of a rocky launch though caused by a lot of 3rd party driver support issues, 3rd party software dragging their feet on supporting not running as administrator, and microsoft allowing it to be installed on under-specced units; all really tarnished the customer perception. The OS itself though was big step forward.
Vista -> 7 -- a no brainer. Nearly everything that was wrong with Vista got fixed. And really the only reason 7 wasn't a vista service pack was due to the Vista brand having no value, due to the rocky launch. If your still on XP, there's no reason not to move to 7 (although your XP hardware might be getting old by now...)
7 -> 8 ... meh... there's improvments in some areas, but problems in others. MS brings an app store nobody really needs, and a start screen nobody really likes. ... $240 to go from 7 pro to 8.1 pro is awfully steep for an incremental upgrade... and I've got 5+ computers in my house.
7 -> 8.1 not massively compelling, but 8.1 has a lot more incremental improvements; and a lot of the rough edges of 8 are smoothed over now. (8.0 to 8.1 is a no-brainer tho)
7 -> 8.1 "start menu update" -- bringing back the start menu? Plus everything else that has been incrementally upgraded since 7? Yeah, I'm in. Only kicker is the price
Hence a standalone Home and Student license for the iPad version would only be an additional unnecessary cost to a business who already has a 365 subscription and can use it for free with that, you obviously don't even know what you're trying to argue anymore.
Actually no. Because there is NO such thing as a "standalone home and student license for the ipad". The software is 'free', but is a viewer only unless its tied to office 365. To "create and edit" files you need an office 365 subscription of some sort.
You can pretend all you like, but you did say exactly that, given you have a serious problem with memory and reading comprehension I will point you at where you said exactly that thing:
Beleive it or not some of us do real work, on computers, at desks. And, no, an ipad isn't going to cut it.
Yeah, read that again, as it is you with the defective memory. When I wrote that I was talking about why OUTLOOK was indispensable to DESKTOP users.
If an iPad isn't going to cut it then businesses will have paid for full versions of Office anyway negating the need to purchase further Home and Student licenses of iPad versions of the software and for those people who do not need the full versions of Office (those who aren't businesses for which an iPad will cut it) they can purchase that version.
There is no home and student ipad version, per se, as it is tied to your office 365 subscription.
Linux has a Dramatically better hardware support than XP,Vista,7 or 8 has combined. Only a fool that knows nothing of linux would ask the "expensive to replace peripherals" raging bullshit line not knowing that linux has such better hardware support than Windows, that many times a device actually works BETTER under linux.
Yeah, like the $140,000 3-axis contact lens lathe at the lab at work that uses a pair of ISA interface cards to control it, running XP. I just know some linux hobbyiest teenager in his basement somewhere wrote linux drivers for it... and that you'll want your fathers intra-ocular lens implants manufactured using that kids driver running the control software in wine...
Linux tends to do better for older consumer hardware. Not so much for arbitrary proprietary hardware such as medical instruments and diagnostic equipment.
And the reason for that was to justify the Home and Student model for the iPad version of Office, which you have said isn't going to cut it for businesses so the Home and Student concept is for licensing to non-businesses is completely valid because apparently businesses won't see value in the product anyway.
Don't be an idiot. We can take it as a given that there ARE plenty of business use cases for Office on an iPad. So the question, so far unanswered, remains: what will induce businesses to pay for the more expensive version of office for the ipad?
And the answer comes from the app description
"Read documents for free. A qualifying Office 365 subscription is required to edit and create Word documents. Qualifying plans include: [...]"
Businesses are going to be tied into the business priced subscriptions of office 365 because of the limitations on the home version of office 365 -- such as the very low limit on the number of users within a domain. (5)
If you believe the iPad "isn't going to cut it" for businesses then the issue isn't licensing anyway so again your argument is irrelevant
But we both know I never said anything like that.
I prefer letter of the law as it is "blindly" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... and equally applied.
Hence a jury, but a jury is nothing more than 12 people rendering an opinion.
. If legislators are not happy with the outcome they simply have to attempt to rewrite the law until it matches their spirit or intent but is still equally applied as required by typical constitutions.
Oh, I'm not saying the law -as written- is perfect, or even good. I am merely saying that an 'anti-revenge porn law' is a good idea, and we should have one. And I agree legislators may need to go back and rework and fix things... e.g. just as they closed the 'upskirt photo' loophole in Utah (iirc?) recently.
I vehemently deny those who would apply interpretive legal opinion
Law is implicitly interpreted by the human beings applying it. There is no other way.
and categorically state that it is the antithesis of justice ie interpretive Islamic Sharia law
Because our government deciding that 'men of military age are enemy combatants' or that waterboarding isn't torture is any different from the things you dislike about Islamic Sharia law.
(seriously is that what the hell you want).
Its what we already have. Not the laws themselves of course, ours are categorically better, but we ABSOLUTELY do have the same characteristic of it being subject to interpretation; and the same potential for that to be abused.
But what other way do you imagine can exist?
Sorry but law equally applied is letter of the law, newsworthy is only an opinion
Welcome to planet earth, where all law is subject to opinion.
More realistically how about just you and yours are protected and everyone else is newsworthy.
You do realize we already have a couple hundred years worth of society grappling with these questions, right? There's a lot of case law too.
No jury in the country would have any difficulty discerning a typical modern revenge porn site from a genuine news article. (For starters because the news article wouldn't need to actually post the pictures. When was the last time you saw hard core porn in any serious journalism or even puff tabloid crap... even when they were reporting on a sex scandal? (Which is all tabloids seem to do.)
And sure something right on the bloody line? That's what the courts are FOR, for rendering those legal opinions.
As it happens, those methods are big on drama and small on results. By way of example: here's Europe, in millions, from the mid 19th century to more or less the present. [..]
Dig up the same chart over medieval europe. Stable (low) populations during the early middle ages, a boomed, then peaked around 1300 and then steep declines.
The black death wasn't a bump in the road like world war ii.
From wikipedia:
"The region of Tuscany had 2 million people in 1300, which it would not reach again until 1850."
That is pretty representative of all of Europe.
It took over 500 years to recover. That's quite a different chart from the one you pulled out of wolfram over the last 100.
Here's England from 1250 to 1700
http://www.sarahwoodbury.com/w....
That dip is a little harder to miss than WW I or WW II.
does the public have a right to know ?
Actually yes. Does it need to be on a revenge porn site though? Or perhaps just article in the news? You don't even need to make the photo widely publicly available... although even if you just show it to even a select few people to prove its real and back your story, odds are it gets leaked and the public will be able to find it.
But that sequence of events and hypothetical really has NOTHING involving revenge porn sites, now does it?
As for the photo itself, I'm pretty sure getting your dick sucked while the girl you are with is fucked by a goat leaves you liable for bestiality and animal cruelty charges as much as it does her. And the noteriety that you get may cost you employment and other opportunities. Might want to think twice about publishing that photo, at least under your own name.
Your forget that the law is equally applied,
I didn't forget that at all. In fact, I explicitly addressed it.
A hypocritical politician is newsworthy, and an article exposing that isn't revenge porn, its in the public interest; not only because of their relative celebrity, but also because of the interplay with the policy.
You wouldn't be able to post photos of a politicatian to revenge porn sites... but so what? The new your times isn't a revenge porn site, and they could still report on it.
America, when it flew into Pakistan to pick up Bin Laden, managed to skirt Pakistani radar.
Not in a Boeing 777.
You are attempting to claim the freedom to control others in actions that do not phsyically affect you but purely are the disruption of the false morality of behaving privately in a manner you claim publicly not to participate.
Uh. No. Revenge porn is about publicly humiliating an ex for breaking up with you by showing them naked and/or engaging in sexual activity. Where is the false morality? Its not like the average victim of revenge porn is advertising she's a virgin. Most will admit to having previous partners, or at least tell you its none of your business.
And how can you claim that she isn't directly affected by the fact that an ex completely exposes her and her private sexual activities on the internet for her all to see; including friends, coworkers, parents, and even children. I see harm perpetrated by the person who posted it. And I see consipiratorial activity by the operator of a dedicated revenge porn site who intentially caters to provide that particular 'genre' of content.
I don't really see google being impacted. Worst case, someone uploads 'revenge porn' to youtube, victim says get rid of it, give me the contact information for the account that loaded it up, and google does. Google isn't a revenge porn site operator.
Seriously think about this folks, should a family politician that claims homosexuals be fined and imprisoned or in any other way prejudiced against be allowed protection under law when caught photographically 'in flagrante delicto' with some of the same sex or should that image be legally published and that politician publicly ridiculed [...]
Yeah, because THAT is what revenge porn websites are all about - outing political hypocrisy?? Give me a fucking break.
Besides, you can out the hypocritical politician under the context of it being newsworthy -- you don't need to start a revenge porn site for that, now do you?
People have every right to advocate treating others as second-class citizens through quirks of birth.
He clearly meant we each have a right not to be treated as second class citizens by the law.
Why would the fire have to evade the detectors?
Because otherwise
a) we'd have known it was on fire before it disappeared.
b) the planes occupants would have put it out
If an iPad isn't going to cut it then what the hell are you even arguing about?!
It seems you forgot.
Most recently we were arguing about why businesses needed outlook on the desktop, and this in turn is why they are willing to buy business licenses of Microsoft office instead of just buying the cheaper home and student version.
The whole point was about a Home and Student standalone license for iPad so if an iPad isn't going to cut it for the businesses that have the dependencies you are talking about then Office for iPad is going to be of no interest to them anyway.
Not quite. The whole point was that Microsoft relies on Outlook being indispensible to ensure businesses buy the more expensive version of office that includes it on the desktop.
Business uses that would be able to use office on the ipads would only need office home and student, because the ipad mobile exchange client is adequate.
The question was: how does Microsoft ensure businesses buy a commercial use license of Office for ipads?
On the desktop, they want outlook, and "Office Home and Student isn't adequate". Outlook is the carrot for business users to buy the more expensive version. That led to the tangent about why outlook is required by businesses on the desktop.
What is the carrot on mobile to ensure businesses do not buy the "Home and Student" version? That is the question.
So where do you draw the line? If he were openly Gay, 25 years ago, attacking the family values, etc... everyone at Mozilla should just show up to work because its no business of theirs what their boss does off the clock?
You are comparing someone who is gay, to someone who is attacking the rights of others to be gay. Calling it "attacking family values" is dishonest. He wasn't attacking anything, that's just what the people attacking him said he was doing.
Now, 25 years ago, if he was openly gay... fuck it, suppose it was today and he was openly gay ..or people refused to buy from his store, or some of his employees refused to work for him.
You know what? Yeah, I'd side with him, and say his employees and customers were homophic assholes, but I'd ultimately still side with his employees right not to work for him, and his customers right not to do business with him.
(doesn't sound so good when it's the other way around, does it? You can't have it both ways without looking intolerant yourself...
"intolerance" is not a virtue, but calling out "intolerance of people who are intolerant" as "intolerance" is just silly word game intolerant people play to try to color the other side as just as bad, but they aren't. Don't pretend otherwise.
You can use POP3, IMAP, and SMTP protocols to access your exchange server from any of those email clients,
Not necessarily you can't. I work with multiple clients. They don't even have POP3, IMAP enabled, and SMTP is used only to exchange mail with the outside world, not for mail submission from the domain clients and is firewalled. Mail access is via Exchange's https proxy with client certificates.
And how is thunderbird for active directory support? Group policy?
but the reality is you don't need exchange and outlook, just look here
As I said, I have multiple clients. One of them uses google appls for enterprises actually. And its not bad, but its a LOT more limited than exchange is, and I say that as someone who works with it. (I mentioned I used thunderbird in my previous message, guess what, its with google apps for enterprises.) Its suitable for the clients that are using it - hell I migrated them myself, but I wouldn't even think of recommending it to some of my other clients.
As another touch of irony to that story, they use outlook with google apps sync for outlook after trying a variety of other solutions. (And google really dragged its feet supporting CTR Office 2013 with it too, which was a major PITA for me.)
though I'm sure you will come back and continue pretending that those millions of companies need Outlook and aren't managing without it.
The millions of companies that aren't using it don't need it. Some would benefit from it though, others not. And of the many that ARE using it as more than just a dumb imap client, yes, its pretty indispensable.
[Zimbra] Yeah totally doesn't have one.
"Zimbra Desktop is a full-featured free desktop email client which is still supported in version 7, but has reached End of Life in version 7.2.2 and will be replaced with an HTML5 offline mode in version 9."
You were saying? yeah, lets totally go with a desktop product that is EOL before we've even started to migrate to it. Good plan!
Why do they have to run on a desktop?
Oh i dunno... i like to send and receive email from my computer, when I'm sitting at my computer. It makes it easier to copy and paste things from other documents I'm working on, add attachments, etc. Why on earth would I not want a desktop client.
The mobile clients are perfectly usable and much more useful given that you aren't tied to your desk.
That's why we use them too, and want them in sync. What would we care about sync if we only had one device? And they are only -more- useful when you aren't at your desk.
Beleive it or not some of us do real work, on computers, at desks. And, no, an ipad isn't going to cut it.
Thunderbird - thunderbird doesn't directly support calenders or exchange. You can get plugins for each, its a patchwork mess and there are several issues. Thunderbird itself is great... I even use it myself, but its not a suitable exchange client.
eM ... never heard of it. From wikipedia: . Microsoft Exchange server is partially supported. Yeah. Lets do that.
Zimbra ... doesn't even have a desktop client. Its webmail that backends onto Zimbra's server. How is that a solution at all? Are you just naming random email products now?
Apple Mail only runs on apple, and is HIGHLY limited as an exchange client -- you can't even copy messages between two accounts/mailboxes with it. Been there, done that.
Postbox? No advertised exchange support at all.
or you know, your entirely capable email client on your Android phone or tablet, your iPhone or your iPad
None of which will run on a desktop and so are completely beside the point.
You can even get Android tablets for less than the cost of standalone Outlook!
I can get coffee makers for less too...or mittens. They also aren't solutions.
The one espousing the view often can't
Spare me. There was nothing fascist about what I said.
Would you lose your job if your private actions where made public?
beats me.
Do you think people should be forced to publicly declare what they support even thought we submit private ballots?
His donation was a matter of public record. It was never really that private. Unremarkable perhaps, but not private.
Are you willing to let your life be stripped bare in public and take the resulting actions?
I am not even willing to join facebook. However, if something of my private life goes out into the world and goes viral, then what? I can't put the genie back in the bottle. That is the world in which we live, you can't pretend it isn't.
But this isn't even about someone privacy being invaded. This is about someone's low profile but still public activity being revealed.
So why are you trying to holding me to a standard that is even harsher than the one he is held to?
You're espousing fascist views.
Fascism as in 'radical authoritarian nationalism'? Or something else... because I can't see how anything I've said qualifies as fascist.