so what would happen if you gave them a clean, freshly installed hard-drive that's just been used to view these particular spam mails in your webmail?
I imagine they'd moan that it had been formatted to the judge, but then you get another forum to state that the emails are not stored on the hard-drive they are stored on the hard-drives of the webmail provider and that the other defense counsel is simply hand-waving.
how annoyed would the judge be at that sort of tactic?
Loads of people in the marketing department probably brainstormed a lot of names passing them to a higher level of management who evaluated them and through a process of elimation came to one that was probably the best compromise between everyones internal image of what it should be. I see the same thing happen every day at my job. I really don't think anyone is intentionally trying to redefine anything here though it is human nature to superimpose intention onto almost everything.
so basically what i'm reading into this is that they've probably given up on all the frivolous lawsuits and want to make out like they're not running away with their tail between their legs but rather that their here job is done.
I haven't used tables for something that wasn't a table of information at all for about 5 years now and haven't had any problems translating anything the designers throw at me perfectly into css'd xhtml.
"Only a bad workman blames his tools."
who are these idiots in charge of our entertainment?
want to combat falling box office figures? reduce the time before it comes out on dvd!
I can only speak for myself but I know when I see film in the cinema listings I just think "It'll be out on DVD in a month, I'll wait till then". Everyone I know says they think exactly the same thing.
I think someones scraping the bottom of the barrel, desperate to find a solution to the falling sales problem that isn't an admission that they need to change their thinking about content, business-models and the fact the consumers cash is being overstretched by all sorts of new and different goods.
Off topic a bit now:
I used to go to the cinema a lot but not anymore. I don't download movies, I've got better things to do with my computers than fill them full of resource-sapping p2p software and gigs of downloaded stuff i'll probably not use. I guess I've just started to associate going to the cinema with dissappointment, that's the symptom I think they need to combat, actually increasing the quality of their product, rather than chase the phantom problem of pirates. Anyway, It's all be said before ad-nauseum.
well, i took the fact that all the articles reported that he "won" and that he'd defaced the web page running on the box as indication he actually did it. I haven't read anything to the contrary even from the owner of the mac.
So no, i don't believe *anything* an anonymous person tells me automatically but this seemed to be a generally accepted story from multiple sources including the runner of the competition. maybe i was mistaken...
The second security non-incident to hit the Mac platform in as many weeks has been debunked.
If you're talking about the hacking os x in 30 minutes thing...
I don't think it was debunked, someone managed to escalate priveledges and that's a fact no matter what, it was just shown to not be less of an issue. debunked is, probably, a slightly biased explanation:)
an anti-trust action for bundling outlook in a suite of office programs???
what next, an anti-trust action against adobe for bundling photoshop in its creative suite package?
disclaimer: i haven't read the article in question:S
Paypal really does need some competition - it's charges are horrendously over the top and it's customer service has been, in my experience, non-existent and as much as google scares me some good competition against Paypal can only be a good thing
With regards to holes. There's lots of articles written by detractors of evolutionary theory that talk about all sorts of holes and having read them, the holes *THEY* talk about are merely holes due to their own ignorance having not read up on the subject they're critisizing. I've read so many articles citing topics on which evolutionary theory has not given answers then picked up several books in my shelves and found answers to those topics. The main flaw seems to be in thinking natural selection IS evolutionary theory, but it's not. Sexual selection is a prime example of an area the detractors seem to have no knowledge of (i say this based on their arguments i've read on the web and in books). I've seen these same ignorances wildly quoted as holes again and again. Promoting the idea of Intelligent Design by playing on peoples ignorances just doesn't seem very christian to me.
Anyway, since when is a hole in one theory any proof of another. Most Intelligent Design arguments are based on this most simple of logical fallacy. A hole in evolutionary theory does not in any way make creationism any more likely!
And to compare evolutionary THEORY to Intelligent Design being a THEORY is equivocation and another obvious logical fallacy.
Slashdot Mirror
so what would happen if you gave them a clean, freshly installed hard-drive that's just been used to view these particular spam mails in your webmail? I imagine they'd moan that it had been formatted to the judge, but then you get another forum to state that the emails are not stored on the hard-drive they are stored on the hard-drives of the webmail provider and that the other defense counsel is simply hand-waving. how annoyed would the judge be at that sort of tactic?
Loads of people in the marketing department probably brainstormed a lot of names passing them to a higher level of management who evaluated them and through a process of elimation came to one that was probably the best compromise between everyones internal image of what it should be. I see the same thing happen every day at my job. I really don't think anyone is intentionally trying to redefine anything here though it is human nature to superimpose intention onto almost everything.
so basically what i'm reading into this is that they've probably given up on all the frivolous lawsuits and want to make out like they're not running away with their tail between their legs but rather that their here job is done.
maybe china just wants to regain some credibility in science / technology matters by having their standard adopted. http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2006/05/scientifi c_copy_cats.php
I haven't used tables for something that wasn't a table of information at all for about 5 years now and haven't had any problems translating anything the designers throw at me perfectly into css'd xhtml. "Only a bad workman blames his tools."
i've seen it as a proper official packaged 12" release
i've seen it in the shops here(UK) as a 12" vinyl!!!!!!!!!!!!
who are these idiots in charge of our entertainment? want to combat falling box office figures? reduce the time before it comes out on dvd! I can only speak for myself but I know when I see film in the cinema listings I just think "It'll be out on DVD in a month, I'll wait till then". Everyone I know says they think exactly the same thing. I think someones scraping the bottom of the barrel, desperate to find a solution to the falling sales problem that isn't an admission that they need to change their thinking about content, business-models and the fact the consumers cash is being overstretched by all sorts of new and different goods. Off topic a bit now: I used to go to the cinema a lot but not anymore. I don't download movies, I've got better things to do with my computers than fill them full of resource-sapping p2p software and gigs of downloaded stuff i'll probably not use. I guess I've just started to associate going to the cinema with dissappointment, that's the symptom I think they need to combat, actually increasing the quality of their product, rather than chase the phantom problem of pirates. Anyway, It's all be said before ad-nauseum.
well, i took the fact that all the articles reported that he "won" and that he'd defaced the web page running on the box as indication he actually did it. I haven't read anything to the contrary even from the owner of the mac. So no, i don't believe *anything* an anonymous person tells me automatically but this seemed to be a generally accepted story from multiple sources including the runner of the competition. maybe i was mistaken...
an anti-trust action for bundling outlook in a suite of office programs??? what next, an anti-trust action against adobe for bundling photoshop in its creative suite package? disclaimer: i haven't read the article in question :S
Paypal really does need some competition - it's charges are horrendously over the top and it's customer service has been, in my experience, non-existent and as much as google scares me some good competition against Paypal can only be a good thing
With regards to holes. There's lots of articles written by detractors of evolutionary theory that talk about all sorts of holes and having read them, the holes *THEY* talk about are merely holes due to their own ignorance having not read up on the subject they're critisizing. I've read so many articles citing topics on which evolutionary theory has not given answers then picked up several books in my shelves and found answers to those topics. The main flaw seems to be in thinking natural selection IS evolutionary theory, but it's not. Sexual selection is a prime example of an area the detractors seem to have no knowledge of (i say this based on their arguments i've read on the web and in books). I've seen these same ignorances wildly quoted as holes again and again. Promoting the idea of Intelligent Design by playing on peoples ignorances just doesn't seem very christian to me.
Anyway, since when is a hole in one theory any proof of another. Most Intelligent Design arguments are based on this most simple of logical fallacy. A hole in evolutionary theory does not in any way make creationism any more likely!
And to compare evolutionary THEORY to Intelligent Design being a THEORY is equivocation and another obvious logical fallacy.