"incidents raise concern" -> as if this is something new ? it has been so since internet had become available for masses to host websites personally. anyone who had remotely got affiliated with hosting industry knows that.
why the fuck is this submitted and accepted as if it is something new ?
Im waiting for someone to come up with 'cover expenses' idea. ie, like, lets say you are someone who is undertaking a free project or giving your music away for free. (like this guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9-esIM2CY ).
you come up with a website, and you post your monthly expenses as they come up. and people donate. people know what they are donating to, and people actually see that they are covering your ass. and your monthly expenses and living gets covered. and you can even come up with small or big projects you want to undertake and people will fund it if they want, as much as they want.
They made best handsets. the voice quality, both incoming and outgoing, are still spectacular. not found in any other device. sad that stuff peripheral to actual phone call quality is determining the fate of a handset maker.
you have the space to hold a pad vertically to watch a video on a cramped bus, but, dont have the space to let a netbook's lower implement with keyboard etc sit on your lap ? or are you watching videos while going around in the bus standing ? wouldnt both the pad or the netbook get shoved up your ass if the bus stopped suddenly nonetheless ?
Apple is selling to a loyal audience, who buy apple products pushed with great marketing if they dont suck enough to discard. The other companies have to sell to the general masses, who prioritize a lot of other things than brand loyalty or hip factor first. That makes it hard to sell them stuff they wont seriously use.
A few weeks ago we had a hard discussion on/. under an article, in which an apple fan went as far to define "showing presentations while walking, looking at recipes in the kitchen" as 'mobile computing' to support his proposition, and in a serious manner, as if these could qualify as a good percentage of what computing can you do as mobile to justify the usability of the device.
the thing you are not getting is, the more freedom you allow for this kind of thing, bigger headstart you will give.
yes, if you ban guns only outlaws will have it. but the guns they will have will be much more weaker than what they would have without ban, due to the difficulty of obtaining and acquiring guns. see united states and see how criminals are able to sport heavy weapons. see countries which banned guns, and how criminals are at the level of 9mms, shotguns and at most uzis.
When that happens, the movements that want to protect freedoms should not stay in "talking" level either. It goes both ways.
Those Islamic groups and pro-slavery people? Nobody's stopping you from forming an opposition to them. Gather your own movement. They step it up? You step it up too...........
yes. and this is why i am telling that you dont know shit about these and naive to the level of 'dangerous'.
fundamentalism is never at the same level with pro-liberty ideas when it comes to activity. so you think that those fundamentalist parties will just ramp up their activities like innocent, freedom-loving ideologies ? they are so stupid as to foresee that at one point in time, they will meet prevention of their practices ?
fundamentalist sources prepare for effecting their aims at any cost right from the start. this is why by the time you notice that fundamentalist groups are challenging liberties, you dont have the power to prevent anything from happening. actually you lose the power to even protect your own liberty at that point in time.
the perfect examples for this is the activities of nazi party and fascist parties in recent history, and fundamental islamism in contemporary times. in iranian 'islamic revolution', pro-liberty groups did not have any means to counter them by the time they became a threat.
even in europe now, all islamist groups proceed with the awareness of that eventual confrontation. did you know that, in quran schools which are slightly more radical than mainstream, children are also taught martial arts, for some reason ? you didnt. because it happens behind closed doors of these schools which have tall walls and barbed wire over those walls.
no. the naive western perspective about freedoms just 'being', and people mounting a revolution when those freedoms are threatened, unfortunately doesnt work. as the europeans are currently finding out with islamists totally blanketing out various districts in major german cities and calling for establishment of sharia law for them. i can tell you from experience that when their numbers pass a certain threshold, they also demand sharia law for everyone, and they are ready to do anything to suppress you if you oppose them.
cities... almost all of the city names come from ancient historical roots, some names go back into 1500 BC, evolved over time. you will find ankara as ankyra, ancyra, angora throughout history. izmir as smyrna. and many more. even the small town names are as such. some hasnt even changed in spelling throughout thousands of years.
it just means that you people in the west dont know shit yet. you think if you let people talk and preach, but ban practice of what they preach, 'freedoms' will work out.
it doesnt work out. the parties wanting to end freedoms increasingly gain supporters, and start demanding an end to the freedoms you though everyone was going to have for eternity. the simplest of these examples from europe are the proceeds of islamist groups in europe, and from america, the fact that the right-wing sources have now started to give speeches and statements evaluating to 'slavery was not bad' on governorial level in midwest states of america.
it was no different with fascism in italy, or nazism in germany. once let out of the bottle, the movements that want to end freedoms do not stay in 'talking' level.
there is no difference in between the two. one is preventing that liberty, the others is preventing the preparation of grounds for that liberty being exercised. if you do not prevent the proliferation and preaching of that idea, sufficient number of people can be persuaded into it to practice it. there is no difference in between preventing either.
your stance is just 'you can talk about it, but not do it'. there is nothing more free in it at all. regardless of how much you talk about something, if you cant do it, it is not a liberty. and those who talk about it, WILL want to exercise it at a point in future.
netflix is just one service. battle net serves a lot of other services - games ranging from wow to sc, and probably with diablo 3 even single player games.
you are living in a world where freedom of enslaving is banned. not only that, but the proliferation of that idea is also banned. yet, you are talking about freedoms.
with your proposition people who would want to enslave people or preach that are being ripped off their freedoms. its censorship.
This just proved that those devices would go like bread and butter if sold from that price point. A manager needs to be stupid not to realize this kind of proof of concept.
a creator is SO weak that, it needs to supplant its own security, by ordering someone who 'he' created, to kill someone else. so, that god needs killing of someone else, and yet, 'he' is the creator of the fucking UNIVERSE ? creator of MORALITY kills MORALITY ?
Slashdot Mirror
"incidents raise concern" -> as if this is something new ? it has been so since internet had become available for masses to host websites personally. anyone who had remotely got affiliated with hosting industry knows that.
why the fuck is this submitted and accepted as if it is something new ?
Im waiting for someone to come up with 'cover expenses' idea. ie, like, lets say you are someone who is undertaking a free project or giving your music away for free. (like this guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9-esIM2CY ).
you come up with a website, and you post your monthly expenses as they come up. and people donate. people know what they are donating to, and people actually see that they are covering your ass. and your monthly expenses and living gets covered. and you can even come up with small or big projects you want to undertake and people will fund it if they want, as much as they want.
transparent, trustworthy, interactive, meaningful.
They made best handsets. the voice quality, both incoming and outgoing, are still spectacular. not found in any other device. sad that stuff peripheral to actual phone call quality is determining the fate of a handset maker.
nothing in united states of america can be safe when its about privacy.
i noticed that you conveniently missed netbook in between laptop and tablet.
works well. even with wow or other games. has lots of choices. paid, free options.
meaning, run, shoot shoot (without the adequacy of a fps), then talk talk (without sufficient interaction), run, shoot shoot, talk talk ?
non-interactive interactive bastardized movie you mean.
but maybe if they made it like 1, there can be at least some input from the player side in terms of gameplay.
you have the space to hold a pad vertically to watch a video on a cramped bus, but, dont have the space to let a netbook's lower implement with keyboard etc sit on your lap ? or are you watching videos while going around in the bus standing ? wouldnt both the pad or the netbook get shoved up your ass if the bus stopped suddenly nonetheless ?
Apple is selling to a loyal audience, who buy apple products pushed with great marketing if they dont suck enough to discard. The other companies have to sell to the general masses, who prioritize a lot of other things than brand loyalty or hip factor first. That makes it hard to sell them stuff they wont seriously use.
/. under an article, in which an apple fan went as far to define "showing presentations while walking, looking at recipes in the kitchen" as 'mobile computing' to support his proposition, and in a serious manner, as if these could qualify as a good percentage of what computing can you do as mobile to justify the usability of the device.
A few weeks ago we had a hard discussion on
it must be something else. maybe baby farts, or honky tonk truck drivers. but it cant definitely be due to global * gasp * warming !!!
the thing you are not getting is, the more freedom you allow for this kind of thing, bigger headstart you will give.
yes, if you ban guns only outlaws will have it. but the guns they will have will be much more weaker than what they would have without ban, due to the difficulty of obtaining and acquiring guns. see united states and see how criminals are able to sport heavy weapons. see countries which banned guns, and how criminals are at the level of 9mms, shotguns and at most uzis.
When that happens, the movements that want to protect freedoms should not stay in "talking" level either. It goes both ways. Those Islamic groups and pro-slavery people? Nobody's stopping you from forming an opposition to them. Gather your own movement. They step it up? You step it up too ...........
yes. and this is why i am telling that you dont know shit about these and naive to the level of 'dangerous'.
fundamentalism is never at the same level with pro-liberty ideas when it comes to activity. so you think that those fundamentalist parties will just ramp up their activities like innocent, freedom-loving ideologies ? they are so stupid as to foresee that at one point in time, they will meet prevention of their practices ?
fundamentalist sources prepare for effecting their aims at any cost right from the start. this is why by the time you notice that fundamentalist groups are challenging liberties, you dont have the power to prevent anything from happening. actually you lose the power to even protect your own liberty at that point in time.
the perfect examples for this is the activities of nazi party and fascist parties in recent history, and fundamental islamism in contemporary times. in iranian 'islamic revolution', pro-liberty groups did not have any means to counter them by the time they became a threat.
even in europe now, all islamist groups proceed with the awareness of that eventual confrontation. did you know that, in quran schools which are slightly more radical than mainstream, children are also taught martial arts, for some reason ? you didnt. because it happens behind closed doors of these schools which have tall walls and barbed wire over those walls.
no. the naive western perspective about freedoms just 'being', and people mounting a revolution when those freedoms are threatened, unfortunately doesnt work. as the europeans are currently finding out with islamists totally blanketing out various districts in major german cities and calling for establishment of sharia law for them. i can tell you from experience that when their numbers pass a certain threshold, they also demand sharia law for everyone, and they are ready to do anything to suppress you if you oppose them.
cities ... almost all of the city names come from ancient historical roots, some names go back into 1500 BC, evolved over time. you will find ankara as ankyra, ancyra, angora throughout history. izmir as smyrna. and many more. even the small town names are as such. some hasnt even changed in spelling throughout thousands of years.
it just means that you people in the west dont know shit yet. you think if you let people talk and preach, but ban practice of what they preach, 'freedoms' will work out.
it doesnt work out. the parties wanting to end freedoms increasingly gain supporters, and start demanding an end to the freedoms you though everyone was going to have for eternity. the simplest of these examples from europe are the proceeds of islamist groups in europe, and from america, the fact that the right-wing sources have now started to give speeches and statements evaluating to 'slavery was not bad' on governorial level in midwest states of america.
it was no different with fascism in italy, or nazism in germany. once let out of the bottle, the movements that want to end freedoms do not stay in 'talking' level.
and im no right wing. just, you are naive.
there is no difference in between the two. one is preventing that liberty, the others is preventing the preparation of grounds for that liberty being exercised. if you do not prevent the proliferation and preaching of that idea, sufficient number of people can be persuaded into it to practice it. there is no difference in between preventing either.
your stance is just 'you can talk about it, but not do it'. there is nothing more free in it at all. regardless of how much you talk about something, if you cant do it, it is not a liberty. and those who talk about it, WILL want to exercise it at a point in future.
and yet you still were able to understand what he meant to tell perfectly havent you.
http://www.learningbooks.net/wholeword.html
netflix is just one service. battle net serves a lot of other services - games ranging from wow to sc, and probably with diablo 3 even single player games.
you are living in a world where freedom of enslaving is banned. not only that, but the proliferation of that idea is also banned. yet, you are talking about freedoms.
with your proposition people who would want to enslave people or preach that are being ripped off their freedoms. its censorship.
why it shouldnt turn into a term like that.
This just proved that those devices would go like bread and butter if sold from that price point. A manager needs to be stupid not to realize this kind of proof of concept.
if it was god's word, why was it superseded ? or, has 'god' changed his 'mind' ?
a creator is SO weak that, it needs to supplant its own security, by ordering someone who 'he' created, to kill someone else. so, that god needs killing of someone else, and yet, 'he' is the creator of the fucking UNIVERSE ? creator of MORALITY kills MORALITY ?
it is an exception in a state which can be maintained. your version cannot. it eventually ends freedoms. this, just ends freedom to end freedom.
its not about you lack balls then.
if you had the mindset i talked about, it would mean you were more american than norwegian.