Wouldn't surprise me, I have a hard time imagining how anybody could be so incompetent at running a company. I'm sure those sorts of things are said in private at meetings all the time, but to tell the customers that they should just suck it up and that they're expecting to lose customers was unbelievable.
I wish request policy would add a black list functionality so I could block things like facebook even if I have the rest of the scripts on a particular site enabled. Request policy is nice in that it enables or disables scripts based upon the site you're visiting not the site that's serving the script so I can enable sites for my bank and have them disabled elsewhere or more commonly enable them elsewhere and disable them when I'm at my bank site.
Precisely, I've had to block most advertising because it's a pain to block just certain types of ads. It's mostly those intelletext ads and the huge honking flash animations that cover up elements on the screen that I most want blocked. Sometimes a tasteful text only or simple GIF ad at the side of the screen does advertise something that I'm genuinely interested in.
I'd recommend allowing scripts by default and using request policy to limit the scope of the jabascript. I can definitely understand the annoyance, I used to run noscript with scripts disabled by default, but most of the sites I'd go to would be completely broken unless I allowed a half dozen scripts from places that I'd never heard of. Most of them would turn out to be Content Delivery Network scripts, but annoying nonetheless.
If they'll allow only tasteful ads with adblock, I'm probably going to install it as I don't generally mind those kinds of ads, it's mostly the bright flashy ones and the flash ads that cover up paee elements that I want blocked.
TBH, most people that install noscript want bugs and functionality worked on regularly. Plus, I have a hard time imagining that they get much money like that as I don't recall ever seeing any ads on that page.
I'm personally more comfortable with that than silent upgrades and having to figure out why something is suddenly not working the way that it had been.
People who aren't tech savvy aren't likely to be installing adblock, and those that are can handle the changing of a single option. The people that are likely to be the most annoyed though are either nerd raging or are in the habit of manually installing huge numbers of installs.
The difference between flamebait and trolling is really somewhat subjective, but just being terse and grating really shouldn't be enough. Otherwise you could categorize pretty much every post in this topic as flamebait.
The ones that really seem to drive the fanboys the most nuts are pointing out things like Apple didn't invent the MP3 player and that the iPod's UI was derivative. Granted it was refined and the wheel was new, but the database driven UI had already been done.
The issue isn't that it can't be done it's that they typically don't have the incentive to do so. B&N greatly improved the first gen Nook after release. They added a full fledged web browser, greatly improved the page flip speed and generally making it function better than it did on launch.
Realistically, that stuff ought to be done before the product launches, but if the company cares it definitely can be done, you just don't always know where the bug lies, in software or hardware.
That makes more sense, but it's still inexcusable mission creep. The FBI and local law enforcement, not ICE are the parties that are supposed to be monitoring and dealing with that. The ICE was not given those drones to spy on American citizens even if those citizens refuse to acknowledge a nationality.
The issue is that ICE isn't responsible for cattle rustling and using them in this fashion that far from the border represents significant mission creep. If they found them while doing routine surveillance of the borer or near the border that would be one thing, but Grand Forks is quite far from the border with Canada and this isn't really something which the ICE has any right to intervene on.
I'm sure they understand it, why do you think that copyright terms are that long without requiring re-regestration of or use? Historically there was no need for abandonware because the maximum copyright term was such that there'd still be plenty of copies around when a work entered the public domain.
The real issue is that most voters don't understand that copyright is for the purposes of enriching the public and ensuring that culture continues to develop fully and vibrantly.
I had a crappy ISP DSL modem which I ultimately replaced with a TP-Link 8816, quite nice and fairly inexpensive. I've had far fewer connection problems since it automatically dials in when it loses its connection without my having to intervene.
It's not discriminatory. If I yell at some random black person for being a thief that would be racist and discriminatory. However if I called some black person that just got finished mugging me a thief, that would be neither racist nor discriminatory.
Same deal here, Apple filed suit having not paid royalties for some of the products it had shipped and now Motorola is requiring them to pay more than they otherwise would have. It's not discriminatory, they aren't singling Apple out for reasons other than Apple's bad behavior. Now, if some other company engages in similar behavior to Apple and doesn't have to pay extra for the license, then it would likely be discriminatory.
It depends on your set up. I typically have the same IP address for long periods of time because the ISP doesn't reassign them unless you've gone offline for a period of time. If I turned it off and back on I might get a new IP, but as long as the connection is there consistently they don't bother handing out a new IP.
When I checked the site it didn't have any information at all.
The deal with these patents is that everybody infringes, it's just a question of whether you've got a big enough patent warchest to force cross licensing.
That's mostly because Apple filed suit having never paid for a license in the first place. Seems reasonable to me, I'm not sure how precisely making somebody pay above and beyond the standard royalties in a case like this isn't fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. Apple could have avoided it by paying the licensing fee at the time or by not suing.
I'm not personally sure I understand how charging somebody that just filed suit against oneself isn't fair or reasonable.
This tends to come down to what the real product is. In a case like this it sounds like the hardware is the product rather than the software. So it may make sense to open source the software so that people will hopefully build products around it. The company should have patents to protect itself against most of what the competition could exploit from the source code, or at least the hardware component.
In terms of the project it's likely to be a benefit as enterprising programmers could do things to add on, such as implementing an interface to Blender to more readily synchronize the motion of the cameras with the motion in the 3d world.
Ultimately, it's a really hard call, and it may end up making more sense to just document the API and provide that to customers as that's less likely to bite.
Reread my post. I said nothing of the kind. Where exactly do you think those funds to buy IPO shares come from? And moreover who do you think it is that typically snaps up most of those shares?
As far as the workers at FB go, I'd be shocked if when all is said and done if the shares actually represent a fair appraisal of their work and the risk they took working for an outfit that could have gone belly up before they saw any money from an IPO.
Zynga would be on example. But it things like the interest rates being well below inflation, 401k plans that mostly offer up subpar investments with ridiculously huge fees. The Federal reserve printing money to keep the moneyed class in fine wines while completely ignoring the effects that it has on small businesses and individual investors. Not to mention congress critters that are completely immune to insider trading laws.
Where precisely do you think all this money to invest comes from? Here's a hint, it's not workers setting aside for retirement.
I'd be lying if I suggested that it was something other than wishful thinking. I would have thought that it would have already collapsed given the blatant disrespect that FB has for the users.
Slashdot Mirror
Naive people installing products they don't know anything about is why there's a thriving anti-malware industry.
Wouldn't surprise me, I have a hard time imagining how anybody could be so incompetent at running a company. I'm sure those sorts of things are said in private at meetings all the time, but to tell the customers that they should just suck it up and that they're expecting to lose customers was unbelievable.
I wish request policy would add a black list functionality so I could block things like facebook even if I have the rest of the scripts on a particular site enabled. Request policy is nice in that it enables or disables scripts based upon the site you're visiting not the site that's serving the script so I can enable sites for my bank and have them disabled elsewhere or more commonly enable them elsewhere and disable them when I'm at my bank site.
Precisely, I've had to block most advertising because it's a pain to block just certain types of ads. It's mostly those intelletext ads and the huge honking flash animations that cover up elements on the screen that I most want blocked. Sometimes a tasteful text only or simple GIF ad at the side of the screen does advertise something that I'm genuinely interested in.
I'd recommend allowing scripts by default and using request policy to limit the scope of the jabascript. I can definitely understand the annoyance, I used to run noscript with scripts disabled by default, but most of the sites I'd go to would be completely broken unless I allowed a half dozen scripts from places that I'd never heard of. Most of them would turn out to be Content Delivery Network scripts, but annoying nonetheless.
If they'll allow only tasteful ads with adblock, I'm probably going to install it as I don't generally mind those kinds of ads, it's mostly the bright flashy ones and the flash ads that cover up paee elements that I want blocked.
TBH, most people that install noscript want bugs and functionality worked on regularly. Plus, I have a hard time imagining that they get much money like that as I don't recall ever seeing any ads on that page.
I'm personally more comfortable with that than silent upgrades and having to figure out why something is suddenly not working the way that it had been.
People who aren't tech savvy aren't likely to be installing adblock, and those that are can handle the changing of a single option. The people that are likely to be the most annoyed though are either nerd raging or are in the habit of manually installing huge numbers of installs.
The difference between flamebait and trolling is really somewhat subjective, but just being terse and grating really shouldn't be enough. Otherwise you could categorize pretty much every post in this topic as flamebait.
The ones that really seem to drive the fanboys the most nuts are pointing out things like Apple didn't invent the MP3 player and that the iPod's UI was derivative. Granted it was refined and the wheel was new, but the database driven UI had already been done.
The issue isn't that it can't be done it's that they typically don't have the incentive to do so. B&N greatly improved the first gen Nook after release. They added a full fledged web browser, greatly improved the page flip speed and generally making it function better than it did on launch.
Realistically, that stuff ought to be done before the product launches, but if the company cares it definitely can be done, you just don't always know where the bug lies, in software or hardware.
That makes more sense, but it's still inexcusable mission creep. The FBI and local law enforcement, not ICE are the parties that are supposed to be monitoring and dealing with that. The ICE was not given those drones to spy on American citizens even if those citizens refuse to acknowledge a nationality.
The issue is that ICE isn't responsible for cattle rustling and using them in this fashion that far from the border represents significant mission creep. If they found them while doing routine surveillance of the borer or near the border that would be one thing, but Grand Forks is quite far from the border with Canada and this isn't really something which the ICE has any right to intervene on.
I'm sure they understand it, why do you think that copyright terms are that long without requiring re-regestration of or use? Historically there was no need for abandonware because the maximum copyright term was such that there'd still be plenty of copies around when a work entered the public domain.
The real issue is that most voters don't understand that copyright is for the purposes of enriching the public and ensuring that culture continues to develop fully and vibrantly.
I had a crappy ISP DSL modem which I ultimately replaced with a TP-Link 8816, quite nice and fairly inexpensive. I've had far fewer connection problems since it automatically dials in when it loses its connection without my having to intervene.
It's not discriminatory. If I yell at some random black person for being a thief that would be racist and discriminatory. However if I called some black person that just got finished mugging me a thief, that would be neither racist nor discriminatory.
Same deal here, Apple filed suit having not paid royalties for some of the products it had shipped and now Motorola is requiring them to pay more than they otherwise would have. It's not discriminatory, they aren't singling Apple out for reasons other than Apple's bad behavior. Now, if some other company engages in similar behavior to Apple and doesn't have to pay extra for the license, then it would likely be discriminatory.
It depends on your set up. I typically have the same IP address for long periods of time because the ISP doesn't reassign them unless you've gone offline for a period of time. If I turned it off and back on I might get a new IP, but as long as the connection is there consistently they don't bother handing out a new IP.
When I checked the site it didn't have any information at all.
The deal with these patents is that everybody infringes, it's just a question of whether you've got a big enough patent warchest to force cross licensing.
Actually, you'd make more progress cutting attorneys.
That's mostly because Apple filed suit having never paid for a license in the first place. Seems reasonable to me, I'm not sure how precisely making somebody pay above and beyond the standard royalties in a case like this isn't fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. Apple could have avoided it by paying the licensing fee at the time or by not suing.
I'm not personally sure I understand how charging somebody that just filed suit against oneself isn't fair or reasonable.
As opposed to Western Europe which was left completely intact?
I know the difference between ordinal numbers and cardinal numbers. The difference isn't relevant as an octet tops out at 255.
Just because you're being pedantic doesn't make me any less right about it.
This tends to come down to what the real product is. In a case like this it sounds like the hardware is the product rather than the software. So it may make sense to open source the software so that people will hopefully build products around it. The company should have patents to protect itself against most of what the competition could exploit from the source code, or at least the hardware component.
In terms of the project it's likely to be a benefit as enterprising programmers could do things to add on, such as implementing an interface to Blender to more readily synchronize the motion of the cameras with the motion in the 3d world.
Ultimately, it's a really hard call, and it may end up making more sense to just document the API and provide that to customers as that's less likely to bite.
Reread my post. I said nothing of the kind. Where exactly do you think those funds to buy IPO shares come from? And moreover who do you think it is that typically snaps up most of those shares?
As far as the workers at FB go, I'd be shocked if when all is said and done if the shares actually represent a fair appraisal of their work and the risk they took working for an outfit that could have gone belly up before they saw any money from an IPO.
Zynga would be on example. But it things like the interest rates being well below inflation, 401k plans that mostly offer up subpar investments with ridiculously huge fees. The Federal reserve printing money to keep the moneyed class in fine wines while completely ignoring the effects that it has on small businesses and individual investors. Not to mention congress critters that are completely immune to insider trading laws.
Where precisely do you think all this money to invest comes from? Here's a hint, it's not workers setting aside for retirement.
I'd be lying if I suggested that it was something other than wishful thinking. I would have thought that it would have already collapsed given the blatant disrespect that FB has for the users.
Not really, the top of the octet is at 255. An address like 257.257.257.257 would be rather larger than one that goes 256.256.256.256 .