You do realize that Win XP's coffin has more nails than a typical big box hardware store, right? I'm a little curious how this particular nail is going to be the one that finally smites the beast.
Yes, there are a significant number of them. Unless something has changed recently, all South Korean bank sites for instance require activeX and as such have to be used with IE. And quite a few sites still use plug ins that aren't available for other browsers. It's obnoxious and annoying, but it's becoming less common as people get sick of IE and jump ship for something that works in a somewhat sane fashion.
On what basis? What you're suggesting is that insider trading isn't wrong or horribly damaging to the functioning of the markets. It's basically just a variation on the pump and dump stock scams dressed up to look legitimate. People buy and sell when the ratings change, despite there being no good reason to base it on a change of ratings.
You can gussy it up all you like, but it's definitely not behavior which should be allowed if we're to have a stock market that functions as anything other than an elaborate scam.
Hmm, that's right as long as you substitute players with "swindling con artists" and gamblers with "individual investors." They don't both have legitimate arguments because the players are doing things which should be illegal. Shenanigans like buying stock with full knowledge of what it will be in the future and trading stocks through methods that aren't on the market so that they can get different prices than are available to the rest of us.
That's basically how hedge funds work, since they cannot get a better yield without additional risk without cheating, they cheat. And to the detriment of everybody that plays by the rules. There are exceptions, but by and large the more clever the methods advertised, the further away you should run from and investment firm. Everything is crafted so as to screw over the outsiders.
Sort of like the trade secret that the big boys get to buy on a current price knowing what it will be in a short period of time. Wall Street really is filled with crooks and thieves. Barring analyst recommendations from being published in that respect is largely pointless. The recommendations are for institutions anyways, and are not generally made on any basis useful to the small time investor.
That's true, but that's also assuming that you're using something that is supported. Windows definitely doesn't have a marketshare of 98%. It's hard to say what it is exactly, but it's probably closer to 92%. OSX itself is in the area of 6% of the total.
The only problem is that these are games. Apart from the ones that are completely linear in content, these aren't as easy to categorize as movies are. Games like the Fallout series for instance are very difficult to rate properly since so much can happen in them and some of the results aren't obvious unless you happen upon one particular event.
That being said rating TV and movies is enough of a challenge. Prior to MASH no movies rated R could contain any cursing, but somehow the censors missed a single utterance. At best you can get a decent sense of do I need to watch it to know or just completely avoid.
Does it though? Whenever I've gotten a new console, I've played it a hell of a lot more than I did 6 months later.
From the article:
Those with PlayStations also spent less time engaged in educational activities after school and showed less advancement in their reading and writing skills over time than the control group, according to tests taken by the kids. While the game-system owners didn't show significant behavioral problems, their teachers did report delays in learning academic skills, including writing and spelling.
And in other news water is wet, blue sky is blue and somewhere a politician is taking a bribe. There's nothing video game specific about this. What they seem to have done is demonstrate that spending less time studying causes issues with academics. That's a shocker.
Umm, Apple has been forcing people to decide for a really long time. I take it you didn't notice that the ITMS for a really long time didn't support any MP3 player that wasn't a variation of iPod. They didn't change the DRM scheme until after they had secured a strong monopoly position in that market space.
But I'm sure that's so much better than actively locking people out of your store while signing things up as exclusive.
Software patents wouldn't be an issue if they had to provide the same level of documentation required for other types of patents. The patent office would laugh you out of the building if you came in and said that you have a new engine that runs on water but that they can't see how it does so since it's proprietary.
iPhone's main advantage from the perspective is user base and that won't necessarily continue if Apple has to compete with competent Android implementations. I'll probably be getting a droid based phone in the near future. A large part of the desirability is that Google allows a number of programs into their marketplace which Apple won't. It got really ridiculous when Apple started banning things which made the iPhone easier to use or could be used in some esoteric way to find objectionable material.
Probably the best thing he can do is crack the whip and make sure the various companies that want to create Android based products do so in a competent way and discourage carriers from behaving like the dicks they tend to be. As in not doing all that stupid adjustments and customizations that hurt usability.
The thing is though that DNA and every other method we've come up with has been imperfect and in certain jurisdictions, such as Texas, the government sees no problem with executing known innocents. Which is precisely why this should never, ever happen, even keeping DNA from individuals that aren't convicted is extremely troubling. If there's cause to know later, then you can get another sample.
That's always so odd, since from a scientific stand point we still aren't really that much closer to really understanding things like quantum entanglement or the force which causes people to believe that they're subjective reality is more real than somebody else's subjective reality.
It's completely, completely different. Democrats support imposing stiff penalties on infringement because it's supported by the media companies. Republicans support it because it's basically anti-American and corporatist.
You mean democratically elected as opposed to former President Bush, right? Democracy in the US would have required that Bush lose to Gore as dictated in the 12th amendment.
Since the vote in Florida was never settled in terms of actual required recounts, Bush had no legal claim to any of the votes. Late on, further investigation indicated that had the recounts been completed that it would've almost certainly given Gore the necessary votes to win the election.
The point is that Bush's representatives cried foul every time a vote went against them during the process, whether or not there was cause to claim that it belonged to them.
Yeah, I'll be modded down for this, but if you're going to make such silly comments somebody has to point it out. Chavez while in office has behaved largely the same way that Bush did, but to a much greater degree.
That's true, however the stupid censorship that the conservatives demand is nothing compared with what Chavez is likely seeking. It's stupid enough to have the media pretend like drugs aren't around and that kids don't have sex, but barring criticism of the government is a very different thing altogether.
That's not to say that we couldn't use more censorship here, Fox news for example regularly runs stories which are completely devoid of any actual journalism under the auspice of freedom of the press. At times the stories are pretty much trumped up to support conservative causes. Requiring that news media do some actual investigation and wall off the editorial section from the news section would be a great step in the right direction.
Attorneys are only obligated to put up a vigorous defense, not to win. An important distinction since strategically it would be better for Obama's supporters for them to lose. A loss at the Supreme court would be a real pain in the ass for conservatives in the future trying to engage in that sort of smear campaign. These jobs do not require a security clearance nor does NASA request that they have it.
That's not true. One might very well be open about that everywhere except at work. Which wouldn't make it any sort of risk. It's the sort of thing that neo-conservative trash likes to do so that they know what sorts of people to deny on spurious grounds.
Remember the Bush administration used information of this sort to decide who was and was not eligible for employment. Or have you forgotten the litmus testing by some of the political appointees?
Yep, and technically speaking it's only barely related to the size of the chip. It's the number of transistors on a chip. So you can divide those however you like on a single chip and it makes no difference in that respect. For typical home users, I doubt that there's going to be any reason to go with more than a quad core set up any time soon. And possibly ever, the only reason why a typical home user would even want that many is to reduce the possibility of waiting on processor capacity to basically zero.
Home power users on the other hand are probably going to want a combination of a large number of cores and high speed. Expanding need to whatever the high end hardware can do.
That would be the reason why the change was necessary. MS doesn't do a particularly responsible job of supporting IE, and way too many people think that IE is the internet and Outlook is email.
I doubt this will change much other than possibly making it so that fewer people that don't want/need IE have it on their computer and possibly making MS provide a better option for updates rather than via an activex website.
Sensible default? I'd think the better question would be why does a brand new installation of Windows have javascript at all if none of the browsers are installed.
When I think about it, on some level it seems wrong that browsers default to having javascript enabled and to doing stupid things like saving form data. At very least make those things options available to turn on during the first time you open the browser. Or more specifically directing you to do it yourself with adequate instructions.
Right, but they are, and methods of producing energy which are less damaging to our ability to compete with foreign nations aren't. We aren't realistically going to strip most of those subsidies, but we might be able to make them more neutral or even slant them towards more useful sources.
Slashdot Mirror
You do realize that Win XP's coffin has more nails than a typical big box hardware store, right? I'm a little curious how this particular nail is going to be the one that finally smites the beast.
Yes, there are a significant number of them. Unless something has changed recently, all South Korean bank sites for instance require activeX and as such have to be used with IE. And quite a few sites still use plug ins that aren't available for other browsers. It's obnoxious and annoying, but it's becoming less common as people get sick of IE and jump ship for something that works in a somewhat sane fashion.
On what basis? What you're suggesting is that insider trading isn't wrong or horribly damaging to the functioning of the markets. It's basically just a variation on the pump and dump stock scams dressed up to look legitimate. People buy and sell when the ratings change, despite there being no good reason to base it on a change of ratings.
You can gussy it up all you like, but it's definitely not behavior which should be allowed if we're to have a stock market that functions as anything other than an elaborate scam.
Hmm, that's right as long as you substitute players with "swindling con artists" and gamblers with "individual investors." They don't both have legitimate arguments because the players are doing things which should be illegal. Shenanigans like buying stock with full knowledge of what it will be in the future and trading stocks through methods that aren't on the market so that they can get different prices than are available to the rest of us.
That's basically how hedge funds work, since they cannot get a better yield without additional risk without cheating, they cheat. And to the detriment of everybody that plays by the rules. There are exceptions, but by and large the more clever the methods advertised, the further away you should run from and investment firm. Everything is crafted so as to screw over the outsiders.
Sort of like the trade secret that the big boys get to buy on a current price knowing what it will be in a short period of time. Wall Street really is filled with crooks and thieves. Barring analyst recommendations from being published in that respect is largely pointless. The recommendations are for institutions anyways, and are not generally made on any basis useful to the small time investor.
That's true, but that's also assuming that you're using something that is supported. Windows definitely doesn't have a marketshare of 98%. It's hard to say what it is exactly, but it's probably closer to 92%. OSX itself is in the area of 6% of the total.
Linky for the estimate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS_market_share
The only problem is that these are games. Apart from the ones that are completely linear in content, these aren't as easy to categorize as movies are. Games like the Fallout series for instance are very difficult to rate properly since so much can happen in them and some of the results aren't obvious unless you happen upon one particular event.
That being said rating TV and movies is enough of a challenge. Prior to MASH no movies rated R could contain any cursing, but somehow the censors missed a single utterance. At best you can get a decent sense of do I need to watch it to know or just completely avoid.
From the article:
Those with PlayStations also spent less time engaged in educational activities after school and showed less advancement in their reading and writing skills over time than the control group, according to tests taken by the kids. While the game-system owners didn't show significant behavioral problems, their teachers did report delays in learning academic skills, including writing and spelling.
And in other news water is wet, blue sky is blue and somewhere a politician is taking a bribe. There's nothing video game specific about this. What they seem to have done is demonstrate that spending less time studying causes issues with academics. That's a shocker.
That's funny, I have the same problem with women. Unfriendly response and no hello either.
Umm, Apple has been forcing people to decide for a really long time. I take it you didn't notice that the ITMS for a really long time didn't support any MP3 player that wasn't a variation of iPod. They didn't change the DRM scheme until after they had secured a strong monopoly position in that market space.
But I'm sure that's so much better than actively locking people out of your store while signing things up as exclusive.
Software patents wouldn't be an issue if they had to provide the same level of documentation required for other types of patents. The patent office would laugh you out of the building if you came in and said that you have a new engine that runs on water but that they can't see how it does so since it's proprietary.
iPhone's main advantage from the perspective is user base and that won't necessarily continue if Apple has to compete with competent Android implementations. I'll probably be getting a droid based phone in the near future. A large part of the desirability is that Google allows a number of programs into their marketplace which Apple won't. It got really ridiculous when Apple started banning things which made the iPhone easier to use or could be used in some esoteric way to find objectionable material.
Probably the best thing he can do is crack the whip and make sure the various companies that want to create Android based products do so in a competent way and discourage carriers from behaving like the dicks they tend to be. As in not doing all that stupid adjustments and customizations that hurt usability.
The thing is though that DNA and every other method we've come up with has been imperfect and in certain jurisdictions, such as Texas, the government sees no problem with executing known innocents. Which is precisely why this should never, ever happen, even keeping DNA from individuals that aren't convicted is extremely troubling. If there's cause to know later, then you can get another sample.
That's always so odd, since from a scientific stand point we still aren't really that much closer to really understanding things like quantum entanglement or the force which causes people to believe that they're subjective reality is more real than somebody else's subjective reality.
It's completely, completely different. Democrats support imposing stiff penalties on infringement because it's supported by the media companies. Republicans support it because it's basically anti-American and corporatist.
You mean democratically elected as opposed to former President Bush, right? Democracy in the US would have required that Bush lose to Gore as dictated in the 12th amendment.
Since the vote in Florida was never settled in terms of actual required recounts, Bush had no legal claim to any of the votes. Late on, further investigation indicated that had the recounts been completed that it would've almost certainly given Gore the necessary votes to win the election.
The point is that Bush's representatives cried foul every time a vote went against them during the process, whether or not there was cause to claim that it belonged to them. Yeah, I'll be modded down for this, but if you're going to make such silly comments somebody has to point it out. Chavez while in office has behaved largely the same way that Bush did, but to a much greater degree.
That's true, however the stupid censorship that the conservatives demand is nothing compared with what Chavez is likely seeking. It's stupid enough to have the media pretend like drugs aren't around and that kids don't have sex, but barring criticism of the government is a very different thing altogether.
That's not to say that we couldn't use more censorship here, Fox news for example regularly runs stories which are completely devoid of any actual journalism under the auspice of freedom of the press. At times the stories are pretty much trumped up to support conservative causes. Requiring that news media do some actual investigation and wall off the editorial section from the news section would be a great step in the right direction.
Attorneys are only obligated to put up a vigorous defense, not to win. An important distinction since strategically it would be better for Obama's supporters for them to lose. A loss at the Supreme court would be a real pain in the ass for conservatives in the future trying to engage in that sort of smear campaign. These jobs do not require a security clearance nor does NASA request that they have it.
That's not true. One might very well be open about that everywhere except at work. Which wouldn't make it any sort of risk. It's the sort of thing that neo-conservative trash likes to do so that they know what sorts of people to deny on spurious grounds.
Remember the Bush administration used information of this sort to decide who was and was not eligible for employment. Or have you forgotten the litmus testing by some of the political appointees?
Assuming you haven't disabled it, like you should, for security reasons.
Yep, and technically speaking it's only barely related to the size of the chip. It's the number of transistors on a chip. So you can divide those however you like on a single chip and it makes no difference in that respect. For typical home users, I doubt that there's going to be any reason to go with more than a quad core set up any time soon. And possibly ever, the only reason why a typical home user would even want that many is to reduce the possibility of waiting on processor capacity to basically zero.
Home power users on the other hand are probably going to want a combination of a large number of cores and high speed. Expanding need to whatever the high end hardware can do.
Just be happy they aren't still doing that iAnalProbe promotion. 1 iAnalProbe with the purchase of any copy of Windows 7.
That would be the reason why the change was necessary. MS doesn't do a particularly responsible job of supporting IE, and way too many people think that IE is the internet and Outlook is email.
I doubt this will change much other than possibly making it so that fewer people that don't want/need IE have it on their computer and possibly making MS provide a better option for updates rather than via an activex website.
Sensible default? I'd think the better question would be why does a brand new installation of Windows have javascript at all if none of the browsers are installed.
When I think about it, on some level it seems wrong that browsers default to having javascript enabled and to doing stupid things like saving form data. At very least make those things options available to turn on during the first time you open the browser. Or more specifically directing you to do it yourself with adequate instructions.
Right, but they are, and methods of producing energy which are less damaging to our ability to compete with foreign nations aren't. We aren't realistically going to strip most of those subsidies, but we might be able to make them more neutral or even slant them towards more useful sources.