I'm not sure where the fault for that lies, normally I eventually get a dialogue asking if I want Firefox to stop running scripts on a particular page. Other times it never gets that far before I give up and kill the process.
They're not illegal, they likely infringe upon the HDMI trademark and the owner of the trademark is legally obligated to defend it's mark. In this case it's only marginally silly as a lot of people are probably not aware that the cables are not to HDMI spec.
I'm guessing that Belkin will balk and relabel the cables to make that clear at which point it should be resolved.
It works both ways. Phillips refuses to allow the use of the CD logo on DRMed CDs because it violates the standard and isn't necessarily compatible with all CD players out there. In this case, I'm not sure what the solution is, but considering that it's purpose is to convert between the two types of ports, I'm not sure how much can be done about the problem.
You do realize that they only stopped production of the i386 in 2007, right? Four years is kind of sudden to pull support on the basis of it being old.
Indeed in a normal year the GOP would have jumped at that deal, which is because it's a rather extreme deal. I'm not familiar enough to comment on it too much, but the tax increases are pretty minimal and are mostly the result of closing loopholes.
That's not really insightful, anybody knowledgeable enough about economics to be head of the IMF would have come to the same conclusion. In fact I came to that conclusion and I've had very little training in economics. It's one of those the sky is blue observations.
The rates that investors typically demand for their money is related to the perceived risk. Right now that risk is low because investors believe that the US will do whatever it needs to do to keep paying those bonds off. But, if the debt ceiling isn't lifted and or we stop paying our bills that would undoubtedly trigger investors to demand more for their risk.
It takes a certain level of delusion to believe that there is something special about the US which would prevent that from happening if we start defaulting on our debts. And unfortunately, right now US Savings bonds and the like are still the best bonds to invest in, if the GOP has its way, they're likely to not be worth the paper they were printed on.
I'm sorry, but that's still a default on our debt. Whether we default on it all at once or over several months, the effect would largely be the same. Defaulting on any of it would result in higher interest rates demanded to lend the US government money, which would in turn make it harder to pay our debts and the very real potential for a downward spiral and collapse of the bond market. The bonds that the US government issues are the safest in the world, which is why the rates are still so low, but that isn't set in stone and whenever the GOP talks about this sort of default it makes it that much more likely that we will be downgraded.
Because you'd still be paying taxes, you'd just be paying them in terms of loss of buying power. And consequently the rich would still skate by without paying their fair share, they'd just have an even easier way of doing it as they wouldn't keep USD as their currency, they would just keep a small amount on hand to pay bills converting from whatever currency they're using at the appropriate time.
It's not a scare mongering its true. The reason why we pay such low interest on our date is because its backed by the US government and the money will be paid. Now if we don't increase the debt limit, investors are going to balk because somebody is not going to be paid. As long as the US government is making the promised payments and is capable of continuing them there isn't a problem.
But, should investors in US bonds start to worry about the security of their bonds, we definitely would see something really ugly. Right now we're benefiting from the fact that investors trust our bonds more than any other set of bonds. A failure to lift the debt ceiling would represent a very clear sign that the deal has been changed. More risk, higher rates demanded for debt, and a very likely scenario where we ultimately have to default because we can't cut our debt fast enough to satisfy our debts.
Considering how in bed the GOP is with Wall Street, I'm surprised that they're even willing to contemplate not paying our bills.
You do realize that the shit was just hitting the fan as Bush was leaving office, right? And that when the President took office the economy was more or less in free fall. In that context only a great fool would suggest that it wasn't Bush's fault. The President deserves a great deal of credit for being able to keep the unemployment rate that low considering where he started.
Tax cuts were a significant portion of the problem, they weren't the only problem, but they were a significant portion of the problem. It's doubtful that we'd still be in the mess we're in had Bush not left us with nearly $10tn worth of debt, we could have gotten another round or two of stimulus with that money. But the biggest issue is that Bush left us with two very expensive wars which were providing us with very little bang for the buck.
On top of that under Bush the DoJ effectively stopped investigating antitrust violations and he was very much opposed to the sorts of regulation which would have prevented the sort of catastrophic down turn that later showed up as he was leaving.
Which explains why Firefox 5.0 didn't have either? It didn't have any large changes or a long period in development.
I wouldn't see anything wrong with a 5.0 release following by a matter of months a 4.0 release, but to do so without making any large changes is just plain silly. What they should be doing is smaller point releases every few months and when a feature is ready which justifies a major release, release it and bump the major version number. What they're doing here is just plain confusing. I don't want to recommend my parents upgrade to the next version if I don't know if it's a minor or a major revision.
Bullshit, this isn't something that you can assign a few bean counters to and end up with a meaningful number. What about the various engineers that got fired up about creating the shuttle? Or the many children that grew up wanting to pilot the shuttle that grew up to be scientists?
This isn't something that you can readily tally up and deem to be unprofitable. There's areas like battery technology which received a huge boost because of research that NASA was doing, not to mention air and water filtration technology.
The issue is that we have a tendency to hand out money without strings attached because we don't want to piss off the dictator. Aid should come with strings attached in terms of promoting a stable democracy and should be closely eyed.
It was a really stupid idea on our part to hand weapons over to Pakistan knowing full well that most of those weapons weren't being used for their intended purpose.
While I do agree that they shouldn't be pushing their luck, compared to its peers, Google is far less evil than the competition. That being said, they have benefited from an illegal monopoly and should be broken, just like any other monopoly that gets that way by violating antitrust laws.
Not really, antitrust lawsuits are about keeping the market competitive. Unfortunately for much of the last decade the DoJ has been looking the other way when companies like Google have behaved in anticompetitive ways, but it is still a serious issue to anybody that wants quality service.
Mergers rarely if ever benefit the consumer, most of the time they're more about eliminating pesky competition and sleeping in a bed stuffed with hundreds.
I'm just astonished that it took them that long to come under scrutiny given the crap they've been pulling like buying out doubleclick that alone should have triggered an investigation.
His best course of action was to consult with an actual attorney before doing this. Afterward his best course of action was to keep his mouth shut unless he's got an attorney present.
Consulting with the EFF is pretty low on the list of things to do in a situation like this.
I take it you haven't been following the European reaction to Google's WAP fiasco, because I doubt very much that he'd be getting better treatment over there. I get the feeling that doing it over there would result in some crazy huge fine for violating privacy rights.
I suspect that they'll go the wiretap route as it appears that he isn't even bother to deny that he wiretapped those computers. The computer charges are probably just what got the Secret Service involved rather than the local police or FBI.
I'm sorry, but this wasn't legal, I'm not aware of any part of the country where it's legal to wiretap computers without a warrant. I get the feeling that was the case and if so whatever security officer he claims granted permission would also have some explaining to do.
That's not true, it would be true if politicians hadn't figured out that they could borrow from it so that they wouldn't have to raise taxes or cut spending during their terms, then skip off to retirement with their Federal pensions while everybody else gets benefits cut.
At this point the Feds owe quite a bit of money to Social Security, but with the GOP refusing to allow for tax hikes or to cut the large sources of spending, it's unlikely to get fixed before things collapse.
But, OTOH it's not likely that people will get nothing, they'll just git a fraction of what was promised.
I'm guessing the phone, mainly because as people age the technological knowledge tends to increase. There's still a deficit, but my grandmother can do far more with a computer than your average person could 20 years ago.
You can also do that with a CC, the upside being that the CC company has a lot more pull than you do if there's a problem on the account. If they fail to deliver the money as promised or refund it you can report them to the CC company for fraud and have the CC company issue a charge back. Which under the circumstances would be the right thing to do considering that most people don't give PayPal money just to keep. And nobody in their right minds keeps money in a PayPal account.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure where the fault for that lies, normally I eventually get a dialogue asking if I want Firefox to stop running scripts on a particular page. Other times it never gets that far before I give up and kill the process.
They're not illegal, they likely infringe upon the HDMI trademark and the owner of the trademark is legally obligated to defend it's mark. In this case it's only marginally silly as a lot of people are probably not aware that the cables are not to HDMI spec.
I'm guessing that Belkin will balk and relabel the cables to make that clear at which point it should be resolved.
It works both ways. Phillips refuses to allow the use of the CD logo on DRMed CDs because it violates the standard and isn't necessarily compatible with all CD players out there. In this case, I'm not sure what the solution is, but considering that it's purpose is to convert between the two types of ports, I'm not sure how much can be done about the problem.
You do realize that they only stopped production of the i386 in 2007, right? Four years is kind of sudden to pull support on the basis of it being old.
Indeed in a normal year the GOP would have jumped at that deal, which is because it's a rather extreme deal. I'm not familiar enough to comment on it too much, but the tax increases are pretty minimal and are mostly the result of closing loopholes.
That's not really insightful, anybody knowledgeable enough about economics to be head of the IMF would have come to the same conclusion. In fact I came to that conclusion and I've had very little training in economics. It's one of those the sky is blue observations.
The rates that investors typically demand for their money is related to the perceived risk. Right now that risk is low because investors believe that the US will do whatever it needs to do to keep paying those bonds off. But, if the debt ceiling isn't lifted and or we stop paying our bills that would undoubtedly trigger investors to demand more for their risk.
It takes a certain level of delusion to believe that there is something special about the US which would prevent that from happening if we start defaulting on our debts. And unfortunately, right now US Savings bonds and the like are still the best bonds to invest in, if the GOP has its way, they're likely to not be worth the paper they were printed on.
I'm sorry, but that's still a default on our debt. Whether we default on it all at once or over several months, the effect would largely be the same. Defaulting on any of it would result in higher interest rates demanded to lend the US government money, which would in turn make it harder to pay our debts and the very real potential for a downward spiral and collapse of the bond market. The bonds that the US government issues are the safest in the world, which is why the rates are still so low, but that isn't set in stone and whenever the GOP talks about this sort of default it makes it that much more likely that we will be downgraded.
Because you'd still be paying taxes, you'd just be paying them in terms of loss of buying power. And consequently the rich would still skate by without paying their fair share, they'd just have an even easier way of doing it as they wouldn't keep USD as their currency, they would just keep a small amount on hand to pay bills converting from whatever currency they're using at the appropriate time.
It's not a scare mongering its true. The reason why we pay such low interest on our date is because its backed by the US government and the money will be paid. Now if we don't increase the debt limit, investors are going to balk because somebody is not going to be paid. As long as the US government is making the promised payments and is capable of continuing them there isn't a problem.
But, should investors in US bonds start to worry about the security of their bonds, we definitely would see something really ugly. Right now we're benefiting from the fact that investors trust our bonds more than any other set of bonds. A failure to lift the debt ceiling would represent a very clear sign that the deal has been changed. More risk, higher rates demanded for debt, and a very likely scenario where we ultimately have to default because we can't cut our debt fast enough to satisfy our debts.
Considering how in bed the GOP is with Wall Street, I'm surprised that they're even willing to contemplate not paying our bills.
You do realize that the shit was just hitting the fan as Bush was leaving office, right? And that when the President took office the economy was more or less in free fall. In that context only a great fool would suggest that it wasn't Bush's fault. The President deserves a great deal of credit for being able to keep the unemployment rate that low considering where he started.
Tax cuts were a significant portion of the problem, they weren't the only problem, but they were a significant portion of the problem. It's doubtful that we'd still be in the mess we're in had Bush not left us with nearly $10tn worth of debt, we could have gotten another round or two of stimulus with that money. But the biggest issue is that Bush left us with two very expensive wars which were providing us with very little bang for the buck.
On top of that under Bush the DoJ effectively stopped investigating antitrust violations and he was very much opposed to the sorts of regulation which would have prevented the sort of catastrophic down turn that later showed up as he was leaving.
Which explains why Firefox 5.0 didn't have either? It didn't have any large changes or a long period in development.
I wouldn't see anything wrong with a 5.0 release following by a matter of months a 4.0 release, but to do so without making any large changes is just plain silly. What they should be doing is smaller point releases every few months and when a feature is ready which justifies a major release, release it and bump the major version number. What they're doing here is just plain confusing. I don't want to recommend my parents upgrade to the next version if I don't know if it's a minor or a major revision.
Bullshit, this isn't something that you can assign a few bean counters to and end up with a meaningful number. What about the various engineers that got fired up about creating the shuttle? Or the many children that grew up wanting to pilot the shuttle that grew up to be scientists?
This isn't something that you can readily tally up and deem to be unprofitable. There's areas like battery technology which received a huge boost because of research that NASA was doing, not to mention air and water filtration technology.
The issue is that we have a tendency to hand out money without strings attached because we don't want to piss off the dictator. Aid should come with strings attached in terms of promoting a stable democracy and should be closely eyed.
It was a really stupid idea on our part to hand weapons over to Pakistan knowing full well that most of those weapons weren't being used for their intended purpose.
While I do agree that they shouldn't be pushing their luck, compared to its peers, Google is far less evil than the competition. That being said, they have benefited from an illegal monopoly and should be broken, just like any other monopoly that gets that way by violating antitrust laws.
Not really, antitrust lawsuits are about keeping the market competitive. Unfortunately for much of the last decade the DoJ has been looking the other way when companies like Google have behaved in anticompetitive ways, but it is still a serious issue to anybody that wants quality service.
Mergers rarely if ever benefit the consumer, most of the time they're more about eliminating pesky competition and sleeping in a bed stuffed with hundreds.
I'm just astonished that it took them that long to come under scrutiny given the crap they've been pulling like buying out doubleclick that alone should have triggered an investigation.
You do realize that you can just remove the protection, right? The encryption has been broken for quite some time now. AnyDVD HD
His best course of action was to consult with an actual attorney before doing this. Afterward his best course of action was to keep his mouth shut unless he's got an attorney present.
Consulting with the EFF is pretty low on the list of things to do in a situation like this.
I take it you haven't been following the European reaction to Google's WAP fiasco, because I doubt very much that he'd be getting better treatment over there. I get the feeling that doing it over there would result in some crazy huge fine for violating privacy rights.
I suspect that they'll go the wiretap route as it appears that he isn't even bother to deny that he wiretapped those computers. The computer charges are probably just what got the Secret Service involved rather than the local police or FBI.
I'm sorry, but this wasn't legal, I'm not aware of any part of the country where it's legal to wiretap computers without a warrant. I get the feeling that was the case and if so whatever security officer he claims granted permission would also have some explaining to do.
That's not true, it would be true if politicians hadn't figured out that they could borrow from it so that they wouldn't have to raise taxes or cut spending during their terms, then skip off to retirement with their Federal pensions while everybody else gets benefits cut.
At this point the Feds owe quite a bit of money to Social Security, but with the GOP refusing to allow for tax hikes or to cut the large sources of spending, it's unlikely to get fixed before things collapse.
But, OTOH it's not likely that people will get nothing, they'll just git a fraction of what was promised.
I'm guessing the phone, mainly because as people age the technological knowledge tends to increase. There's still a deficit, but my grandmother can do far more with a computer than your average person could 20 years ago.
You can also do that with a CC, the upside being that the CC company has a lot more pull than you do if there's a problem on the account. If they fail to deliver the money as promised or refund it you can report them to the CC company for fraud and have the CC company issue a charge back. Which under the circumstances would be the right thing to do considering that most people don't give PayPal money just to keep. And nobody in their right minds keeps money in a PayPal account.
No, it should be P****l. Shit is perfectly fine though.
You forgot the "leave it completely open for the benefit of humanity" option that seems to always crop up with regards to WAP.