The "will of the people" was split pretty much 50-50, well within the margin of error for anything as large as a national election. Would the appointment of "the other guy instead" have any better reflected that will?
How do you know that? There's still no --help option or similar to list command line switches and what they do. Also, "invalid" options are silently ignored.
Isn't it great that we live in a society in which "My business model is a piece of crap, I need help from the government or my company will go out of business!" isn't universally ridiculed until the speaker at least feels a bit bad about himself?
1) Was the mailing unsolicited? 2) Was the mailing made to a set of people, whose individual identities [ie: not simply their being in that set] were unimportant to the main content of the message? 3) Is the message intended to encourage the recipient to do something? (including non-tangible things such as having a certain opinion)
They should have planned for this kind of thing and taken it into account, like by having a few months of performing shake-down tests and finding any problems then!
Piracy hurts sales a little bit, yes. But mostly it's just annoying to see so many people enjoying your game without paying for it. Would so many have bought it in the first place? No. Will some who have been exposed to it now buy the sequel? Probably.
Attempts to control piracy are not attempts to get more money. They're attempts to make the game makers feel less annoyed. It's okay that they want to feel less annoyed. It's not about greed or anything that normally gets thrown around. It's just not something I'm likely to sympathize with too much.
If a company says "we will get you high placement", they are going to be doing something which search engines will do all they can to block, forcing you to the bottom of the results.
If a company says "we will help you make YOUR page more attractive to search engines", they just might know how. Google bombing is not the way to the top. Displaying good content in a way which robots like/is/.
There's the guys who say "Post your links into a blog's message board. Search engines like to see links to your site on blogs."
And there's the guys who say "Make a blog about your site and keep it up to date with information about the industry you're in. Search engines like to see links to your site on blogs."
In the end, it's good content which search engines are trying to find. SEO is about letting search engines know about that content, not about tricking their algorithms.
Isn't all "bouncing" of light, and therefor fiber optics too, just a series of absorption-emission-events? Correct me if you know better, this is just a "didn't I read somewhere once that the same photon doesn't come back when it "reflects" off a mirror?" thing
True that Legos have always been superior to every similar brick. I can't help but wonder if MegaBlocks suck so much because they weren't allowed to make something that worked like Lego.
Legos are definitely generation-worthy: I can't think of one non-flat lego peice that I've broken.
But everyone wants _more_ legos, what's wrong with you?:)
Or maybe I think assholes saying "LUL BUT I 3 LEGO", ignoring basic rights because of it, should fuck off.
I did get that Lego set I wanted as a child. I love Lego. I plan on bringing boxes of them 4000 miles to my new home in a couple of weeks.
But a lot more than I like Legos, I like governments not telling people that they aren't even allowed to try to do better than what's currently out there.
The government saying "you cannot make the same thing this guy is making, even if you can do it better and cheaper", and continuing to do so because "if others could make the same thing, it would destroy the town!" [Which pretty much sums up your original post.] would be, well, fucking stupid.
"But Lego is a really great company!" is not a reason to deny others the right to compete. "But Lego has been really great quality!" is not a reason to deny others the right to compete. "But Lego would be able to hold its own even if it had competition!" is certainly not a reason to deny others the right to compete. "But Lego is a really REALLY great company!" is not a reason to deny others the right to compete. "But competition would destroy Lego!" is not a reason to deny others the right to compete.
etc etc etc
I've no apologies for saying "You know what? Fuck you." when you say that I should ignore the rights of others to protect the petty desires of the obsolete. It doesn't matter how great Lego is, they've had exclusive rights long enough and should NOT get to trample all over others just because of your fond childhood memories.
And you know what? Fuck those who can't compete. If they make a superior product (which they had been doing), people will buy them. If they can't produce it better and cheaper, and rely on governments to keep them in business when by all rights they SHOULD NOT BE, fuck 'em. You should not have a right to exclusively make something just because you did it first. Yes, for a limited time it's okay to protect new ideas, to ensure that there will be rewards for coming up with those ideas- ie, give the little guy a chance to build up enough to compete with the big guys later -but after that LIMITED time, fuck 'em. You need to come out and play in the real world, not just fuck over the consumer.
Entire town depend on one business? Fuck that town. "If the government stopped forcing this business to exist, the whole town would die off!" is an argument AGAINST the town, not FOR governments butting into things.
Lego bricks have been an excellent, though pricey, product for my entire memory. I expect that if anyone is allowed to make Lego bricks, the original Lego brick will still wind up superior. But if it turns out Joe Brick can make better ones out of carbon fiber, why in fuck's name would anyone want to support something which is stuck in a technological rut? I'd shed no tears for those who go out of business because they couldn't cut it.
And I'd seriously love to get my hands on some cheaply produced ultra-strong near-weightless lego bricks to build Spaceship III with.
Only the "front end", not the programs run under it? You mean, Windows 7 is only faster as an Operating System, and doesn't magically make arbitrary applications run any faster!?!? OUTRAGE!!
How exactly is changing operating systems supposed to improve video encoding performance?
Yes, I did RTFA. I see that their tests ran faster on XP. WTF?
Slashdot Mirror
The "will of the people" was split pretty much 50-50, well within the margin of error for anything as large as a national election. Would the appointment of "the other guy instead" have any better reflected that will?
Isn't it available ad-free starting from about an hour BEFORE the closing credits roll on television sets all across Britain?
How do you know that? There's still no --help option or similar to list command line switches and what they do. Also, "invalid" options are silently ignored.
Chrome? wtf?
So I tried to update Chrome after reading this, to see what they've fixed.
"Google Chrome is up to date"
wtf?
Isn't it great that we live in a society in which "My business model is a piece of crap, I need help from the government or my company will go out of business!" isn't universally ridiculed until the speaker at least feels a bit bad about himself?
1) Was the mailing unsolicited?
2) Was the mailing made to a set of people, whose individual identities [ie: not simply their being in that set] were unimportant to the main content of the message?
3) Is the message intended to encourage the recipient to do something? (including non-tangible things such as having a certain opinion)
Congratulations! It's spam.
"Our system flagged you as a terrorist. Turns out you were going to use an expired driver's license as your secondary identification. Come with me."
That isn't a successful system by ANY measure.
because so much better than having greasy tools is having greasy inside of a space station and air
How is arrest rate a valid statistic to consult regarding effectiveness of ANY security system?
"We are now arresting 97% of all passengers detected by this system, usually on unrelated petty charges." == success??
Well, your rules don't /matter/, but I see your point.
They should have planned for this kind of thing and taken it into account, like by having a few months of performing shake-down tests and finding any problems then!
Oh, wait...
afaik, it has always been too hard to generate antimatter for this to be more than a theoretical question.
How the hell is that flamebait?
Yes, but quicktime has always blown that extra special amount of goat anus
I've certainly never been to a strip club containing an abundance of oxygen molecules...
Piracy hurts sales a little bit, yes.
But mostly it's just annoying to see so many people enjoying your game without paying for it. Would so many have bought it in the first place? No. Will some who have been exposed to it now buy the sequel? Probably.
Attempts to control piracy are not attempts to get more money. They're attempts to make the game makers feel less annoyed. It's okay that they want to feel less annoyed. It's not about greed or anything that normally gets thrown around. It's just not something I'm likely to sympathize with too much.
And yes, I buy the games I play.
Oh no! Someone opposed to your position! They must be a shill!
If a company says "we will get you high placement", they are going to be doing something which search engines will do all they can to block, forcing you to the bottom of the results.
If a company says "we will help you make YOUR page more attractive to search engines", they just might know how. Google bombing is not the way to the top. Displaying good content in a way which robots like /is/.
There's the guys who say "Post your links into a blog's message board. Search engines like to see links to your site on blogs."
And there's the guys who say "Make a blog about your site and keep it up to date with information about the industry you're in. Search engines like to see links to your site on blogs."
In the end, it's good content which search engines are trying to find. SEO is about letting search engines know about that content, not about tricking their algorithms.
Isn't all "bouncing" of light, and therefor fiber optics too, just a series of absorption-emission-events?
Correct me if you know better, this is just a "didn't I read somewhere once that the same photon doesn't come back when it "reflects" off a mirror?" thing
True that Legos have always been superior to every similar brick. I can't help but wonder if MegaBlocks suck so much because they weren't allowed to make something that worked like Lego.
Legos are definitely generation-worthy: I can't think of one non-flat lego peice that I've broken.
But everyone wants _more_ legos, what's wrong with you? :)
Or maybe I think assholes saying "LUL BUT I 3 LEGO", ignoring basic rights because of it, should fuck off.
I did get that Lego set I wanted as a child. I love Lego. I plan on bringing boxes of them 4000 miles to my new home in a couple of weeks.
But a lot more than I like Legos, I like governments not telling people that they aren't even allowed to try to do better than what's currently out there.
The government saying "you cannot make the same thing this guy is making, even if you can do it better and cheaper", and continuing to do so because "if others could make the same thing, it would destroy the town!" [Which pretty much sums up your original post.] would be, well, fucking stupid.
"But Lego is a really great company!" is not a reason to deny others the right to compete.
"But Lego has been really great quality!" is not a reason to deny others the right to compete.
"But Lego would be able to hold its own even if it had competition!" is certainly not a reason to deny others the right to compete.
"But Lego is a really REALLY great company!" is not a reason to deny others the right to compete.
"But competition would destroy Lego!" is not a reason to deny others the right to compete.
etc etc etc
I've no apologies for saying "You know what? Fuck you." when you say that I should ignore the rights of others to protect the petty desires of the obsolete. It doesn't matter how great Lego is, they've had exclusive rights long enough and should NOT get to trample all over others just because of your fond childhood memories.
And you know what? Fuck those who can't compete. If they make a superior product (which they had been doing), people will buy them. If they can't produce it better and cheaper, and rely on governments to keep them in business when by all rights they SHOULD NOT BE, fuck 'em. You should not have a right to exclusively make something just because you did it first. Yes, for a limited time it's okay to protect new ideas, to ensure that there will be rewards for coming up with those ideas- ie, give the little guy a chance to build up enough to compete with the big guys later -but after that LIMITED time, fuck 'em. You need to come out and play in the real world, not just fuck over the consumer.
Entire town depend on one business? Fuck that town. "If the government stopped forcing this business to exist, the whole town would die off!" is an argument AGAINST the town, not FOR governments butting into things.
Lego bricks have been an excellent, though pricey, product for my entire memory. I expect that if anyone is allowed to make Lego bricks, the original Lego brick will still wind up superior. But if it turns out Joe Brick can make better ones out of carbon fiber, why in fuck's name would anyone want to support something which is stuck in a technological rut? I'd shed no tears for those who go out of business because they couldn't cut it.
And I'd seriously love to get my hands on some cheaply produced ultra-strong near-weightless lego bricks to build Spaceship III with.
Only the "front end", not the programs run under it?
You mean, Windows 7 is only faster as an Operating System, and doesn't magically make arbitrary applications run any faster!?!? OUTRAGE!!
How exactly is changing operating systems supposed to improve video encoding performance?
Yes, I did RTFA. I see that their tests ran faster on XP. WTF?
I have no idea what that was supposed to mean. Bitter about what? Better luck with what?