It's almost interesting how off-topic the first several topics of articles have become these days. You get random google bashing, accusations on trolling, mac praising, and what have you in the first posts, in articles entirely unrelated to these comments.
Are trolls trolling trolls trolling shills trolling?
So you thought you'd...what, exactly, by bringing this to light in a completely irrelevant article?
It doesn't help that I recognize a lot of the names he has posted quite negatively and got the shill vibe from many of them. I don't even like to accuse people of shilling, but some of those accounts post in ways above and beyond what I could consider shilling. The only thing I would say is I'm not sure that it's Microsoft. They certainly engage in a lot of negative publicity towards Google though.
I'll end this stating I like both Google and Microsoft. Make of that what you will.
I really hope this is just poor satire and there really isn't someone as retarded as this.
Re:Really? I found it on youtube in about 10 secon
on
A Copyright Nightmare
·
· Score: 1
I can find a lot of copywritten content on youtube without a lot of effort. That doesn't mean it should be there for you to consume without paying the price.
At least, that's what the heirs to MLKs legacy would have you believe. This whole thing is ridiculous.
It is statistically unusual. No matter how much you want to scream from the top of a mountain that girls are equal in everything, females statistically do not become scientists. Look at the general percentage of male scientists to female scientists. It's not that they're incapable of science, that they're dumber, or any nonsense like that, it's just that far more men get into the field then women for a degree of personal reasons. Whatever it stems from doesn't take away from the fact that girls dominating a science fair is strange to a lot of people for this reason.
Sounds like you're just looking for a reason to be insulted.
If they already had the Server 2k3 license paid for, what reason would they realistically really have to drop it for Linux when they can do what they want with what they have? The deed is already done shelling out for the license, putting Linux on it is just like pouring salt in the wound. Anyway, as you said, the site is just from a government department trying to justify their existence, I doubt it really matters what OS is serving up the content. It's not like they're Google or something.
Are you located in the United States? I've never heard of a cover-everyone policy that was not something you had to pay a wad more for. I've been through a number of big name insurance companies and a few minor ones, and it was always something you had to pay a good deal more for.
You're right that you can buy policies that extend to anyone in the vehicle but most people do not actually purchase that type of insurance unless they actually have a number of other people driving the car. It drives the premium a lot higher because of all the unknowns about who is driving the car.
My ex-girlfriend makes up any excuse she can when the discussion of operating systems comes up to justify her desperate cling to XP, going as far as to ask me for my old XP pro key I no longer use since she didn't have the original license for her OEM copy on her previous machine.
She'll complain about Aero as if it's mandatory, she'll complain about things being in slightly different places and how XP wasn't like that when everyone upgraded from 98 (even though it was), she'll complain that the explorer window is entirely nonsensical, she'll complain about UAC as if it's not entirely disableable (which I wouldn't recommend personally but it's an option for those who insist.)
In the end it seems to usually just boil down to stubbornness to change for most home users or money.
Are you against all meat eating, or just whale? We already kill a lot of things that are delicious today with little moral outrage, and frankly not all whale species are endangered.
I knew my day was going to improve when the truck pulled up at my home with this cable deep within. No ordinary truck, this one was Holy White, and the gold Delivery logo sparkled like a thousand suns reflected through shards of the purest ice formed with unadulterated water collected at the beginning of the universe. The driver, clad in a robe colored the softest of white, floated towards me on the cool fog of a hundred fire extinguishers. He smiled benevolently, like a father looking down upon his only child, and handed me a package wrapped in gold beaten thin to the point where you could see through it. I didn't have to sign, because the driver could see within my heart, and knew that I was pure. Upon opening the package, an angelic choir started to sing, and reached a crescendo as I laid this cable on my stereo system. Instantly, my antiquated equipment transformed into components made from the clearest diamond-semiconductor. The cable knew where to go, and hooked itself into the correct ports without help from me - all the while, the choir sang praises to the almighty digital god. With trepidation, I pushed "play," and was instantly enveloped in a sound that echoed the creation of all matter, a sound that vibrated every cell in my body to perfection. I was instantly taken to the next plane, where I saw the all-father. I knew with my entire soul, that all was good in the world.
But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.
I don't often find joke reviews funny, but I really did laugh at this one.
The group of anons denying "Anonymous" involvement is wrong.
This happens a lot when a particular group in the collective does not agree with one of the activities the others are participating in. Lets be realistic here, there is no actual structure. You're in "Anonymous" just by saying you are and participating. Suddenly they're "rogue" segments that don't represent the pretty view the other group has painted for the name "Aonymous." They're all Anonymous. Anyone actually claiming to represent Anonymous as a group is an idiot.
Make no mistake, it was "Anonymous" who did the attack, as relatively useless as it is to actually make that distinction.
What do you honestly expect Anonymous to do to a Mexican drug cartel, honestly? We can call them cowards all we want, but look at it from a reality standpoint. What could they really do? They could release names of supporters and figureheads? Assuming they really did have access to such information (which is highly suspect anyway,) what does that do? It just puts more people in mortal danger as the cartel retaliates and kills people as they've been showing off lately.
They could don their Guy Fawkes masks and...protest. I think that would work out well for them. They could DDOS or hack cartel servers? I'm sure they have them but how would they find this information out and how useful would it be?
It was a stupid target to begin with. Backing down was not only the smartest move they could make, it was the only move they could make. I'm sure their original goal was just an attempt at intimidation to hope for a good result. The result was unfavorable to say the least. That's the end of the story.
Slashdot Mirror
It's almost interesting how off-topic the first several topics of articles have become these days. You get random google bashing, accusations on trolling, mac praising, and what have you in the first posts, in articles entirely unrelated to these comments.
Are trolls trolling trolls trolling shills trolling?
Thanks for confirming you were the original AC. Not that it was particularly difficult to see in the first place.
What about when video cameras are off?
Parent really deserves modpoints.
So, which one of those accounts he's accusing are you?
Or do you expect people to believe you're spamming this crap in every single irrelevant thread out of the kindness of your heart?
So you thought you'd...what, exactly, by bringing this to light in a completely irrelevant article?
It doesn't help that I recognize a lot of the names he has posted quite negatively and got the shill vibe from many of them. I don't even like to accuse people of shilling, but some of those accounts post in ways above and beyond what I could consider shilling. The only thing I would say is I'm not sure that it's Microsoft. They certainly engage in a lot of negative publicity towards Google though.
I'll end this stating I like both Google and Microsoft. Make of that what you will.
I really hope this is just poor satire and there really isn't someone as retarded as this.
I can find a lot of copywritten content on youtube without a lot of effort. That doesn't mean it should be there for you to consume without paying the price.
At least, that's what the heirs to MLKs legacy would have you believe. This whole thing is ridiculous.
Does he look like a subscriber to you?
It is statistically unusual. No matter how much you want to scream from the top of a mountain that girls are equal in everything, females statistically do not become scientists. Look at the general percentage of male scientists to female scientists. It's not that they're incapable of science, that they're dumber, or any nonsense like that, it's just that far more men get into the field then women for a degree of personal reasons. Whatever it stems from doesn't take away from the fact that girls dominating a science fair is strange to a lot of people for this reason.
Sounds like you're just looking for a reason to be insulted.
Sure, if you want the most terrible encoding of the video. Their lowest quality video makes 240p on YouTube look high def by comparison.
If they already had the Server 2k3 license paid for, what reason would they realistically really have to drop it for Linux when they can do what they want with what they have? The deed is already done shelling out for the license, putting Linux on it is just like pouring salt in the wound. Anyway, as you said, the site is just from a government department trying to justify their existence, I doubt it really matters what OS is serving up the content. It's not like they're Google or something.
Are you located in the United States? I've never heard of a cover-everyone policy that was not something you had to pay a wad more for. I've been through a number of big name insurance companies and a few minor ones, and it was always something you had to pay a good deal more for.
You're right that you can buy policies that extend to anyone in the vehicle but most people do not actually purchase that type of insurance unless they actually have a number of other people driving the car. It drives the premium a lot higher because of all the unknowns about who is driving the car.
My ex-girlfriend makes up any excuse she can when the discussion of operating systems comes up to justify her desperate cling to XP, going as far as to ask me for my old XP pro key I no longer use since she didn't have the original license for her OEM copy on her previous machine.
She'll complain about Aero as if it's mandatory, she'll complain about things being in slightly different places and how XP wasn't like that when everyone upgraded from 98 (even though it was), she'll complain that the explorer window is entirely nonsensical, she'll complain about UAC as if it's not entirely disableable (which I wouldn't recommend personally but it's an option for those who insist.)
In the end it seems to usually just boil down to stubbornness to change for most home users or money.
Er, what? UAC a "waste of time for experienced people"? It's about useless for anyone but experienced people.
Or are you of the belief that applications should just automatically have admin privileges without user consent?
It's a Foster Motherland.
Are you against all meat eating, or just whale? We already kill a lot of things that are delicious today with little moral outrage, and frankly not all whale species are endangered.
Not that I'm putting my support in with whaling.
A review from that $10,000 cable:
I knew my day was going to improve when the truck pulled up at my home with this cable deep within. No ordinary truck, this one was Holy White, and the gold Delivery logo sparkled like a thousand suns reflected through shards of the purest ice formed with unadulterated water collected at the beginning of the universe. The driver, clad in a robe colored the softest of white, floated towards me on the cool fog of a hundred fire extinguishers. He smiled benevolently, like a father looking down upon his only child, and handed me a package wrapped in gold beaten thin to the point where you could see through it. I didn't have to sign, because the driver could see within my heart, and knew that I was pure. Upon opening the package, an angelic choir started to sing, and reached a crescendo as I laid this cable on my stereo system. Instantly, my antiquated equipment transformed into components made from the clearest diamond-semiconductor. The cable knew where to go, and hooked itself into the correct ports without help from me - all the while, the choir sang praises to the almighty digital god. With trepidation, I pushed "play," and was instantly enveloped in a sound that echoed the creation of all matter, a sound that vibrated every cell in my body to perfection. I was instantly taken to the next plane, where I saw the all-father. I knew with my entire soul, that all was good in the world.
But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.
I don't often find joke reviews funny, but I really did laugh at this one.
You are trying way too hard. A genuine miracle may have never happened before but that doesn't preclude us from defining the idea of a miracle.
I lose brain cells every time I hear this.
The group of anons denying "Anonymous" involvement is wrong.
This happens a lot when a particular group in the collective does not agree with one of the activities the others are participating in. Lets be realistic here, there is no actual structure. You're in "Anonymous" just by saying you are and participating. Suddenly they're "rogue" segments that don't represent the pretty view the other group has painted for the name "Aonymous." They're all Anonymous. Anyone actually claiming to represent Anonymous as a group is an idiot.
Make no mistake, it was "Anonymous" who did the attack, as relatively useless as it is to actually make that distinction.
What do you honestly expect Anonymous to do to a Mexican drug cartel, honestly? We can call them cowards all we want, but look at it from a reality standpoint. What could they really do? They could release names of supporters and figureheads? Assuming they really did have access to such information (which is highly suspect anyway,) what does that do? It just puts more people in mortal danger as the cartel retaliates and kills people as they've been showing off lately.
They could don their Guy Fawkes masks and...protest. I think that would work out well for them. They could DDOS or hack cartel servers? I'm sure they have them but how would they find this information out and how useful would it be?
It was a stupid target to begin with. Backing down was not only the smartest move they could make, it was the only move they could make. I'm sure their original goal was just an attempt at intimidation to hope for a good result. The result was unfavorable to say the least. That's the end of the story.
Admit it; you probably wont leave.
Yikes, I'm bad with the typos today. I hope all the grammar nazis are away for Christmas today.