Your theory that non-profits don't receive trademark protection is novel, and already refuted by existing precedent. Yes, public activities can be "trade" even when the underlying purpose is not profit! Wowsers, Pres., you went loco on that one.
VB is still a very common language, users just don't have any way of knowing what language was used because it still gets packaged as an.exe and they don't plaster VB onto the installer anywhere.
Same is true of Java. Lots of things are still Java. Few people will reject software at the installer stage just because it asks to install Java, and once it is installed, new Java programs don't give you any hint about it.
Flash isn't trendy, but I don't think usage as a serious tool has gone down; casual and malware usage is moving, obviously.
ActiveX is very popular for enterprise intranet applications.
You're correct that the information is on the check, but it is very, very different because with a check they're only authorized to withdraw the amount on the check one time. They can actually convert it to an electronic ACH withdrawal if they want to, so as far as that goes you are correct. But if they use it to just take money they think you owe them, that would be criminal check fraud. Whereas when you give the company the information in a monthly payment authorization, you've given a blanket authorization that covers whatever they think the correct amount is. The fine print will say so. So there is a huge difference between "push" and "pull" payment methods, even when they look the same on the ACH system.
Contrary to your belief, there are actually a wide variety of different banks who behave differently in the same situation.
It may be that you had been underage when you opened your account, or some other detail that you omitted in order to make the bank look bad. Or maybe some idiot at the bank did make the mistake, and corrected your mistake incorrectly, causing a problem. It also sounds like they saw the error when it was presented, but that you were very "difficult" about it.
I've had a wide variety of experiences with banks. I've had to argue with numerous bank managers. Some people might assume I'm difficult, but all of those arguments were people telling me "no" where they actually had to say "yes," and I'm 100% on winning my arguments with bank managers. It isn't their money, after all, and it was never my math that was wrong. The bank I use now? I don't have to argue with them. If they make a mistake, I ask nicely... and they fix it.
If you just assume "the banks" are all awful, you won't even know to pay attention to which ones are trustworthy!
Pro tip: If you don't want to pay a bank fee, ask to have the fee "rescinded." Most banks have a policy to rescind fees at the branch manager's discretion for customer satisfaction or retainment. However, few banks have a policy to "take back" or "forgive" fees, so you have to ask using the correct word. Rescind. I learned that tip when I was a whippersnapper from old Dave at the chess club, and it has worked every time. The only bank fee I've paid are ones that I expect to pay; a surprise fee, I ask, and they rescind every time. Especially if I indicate that if I cause the fee a second time, I'll happily pay it. It lets them feel like they're training me, instead of like they're giving me a discount.
Some people have a love-hate relationship with them; they love having the brand that people tell them is cool, but they hate being the customer of that brand because they're willing to tolerate any sort of abuse and they'll keep buying and everybody knows it.
Personally, I switched straight from full love to full I-don't-hate-you-but-don't-call-me-ever-again when I realized how much better the IIgs was than the Mac, and that they were discontinuing the Apple ][ line.
A lot of actions in history were decried by an elite and received with indifference by everyone else... only to turn into tyrannies or surface later as very bad decisions which affected lots of people.
Right, that is why none of these phones have dual headphone jacks and I can't make use of my quadraphonic headphones from before I was born.
No, because the others won't be allowed to have what Apple has, and none of them individually has enough market share to cause headphone makers to use their new not-a-plug.
They would need a standard, and most existing bluetooth devices only support low-res audio. So their headphones would simply sound worse to most users. There would not be a lot of products available. Users would go to the headphone isle at the store, and stand there saying, "gosh, none of these work with my phone except this pair that costs more than the phone did. Maybe I should just return the phone."
The market condition that would need to exist before the change would be worthwhile for the headphone makers to switch would be for the standard (cheap) bluetooth devices to support CD-quality sound. Then they would want to push users that way. And the headphone makers have to jump first, because other than Apple nobody can get their customers to commit to brand-lock across those products.
What I find funniest about it is that on my main pocket device, I have the headphone jack taped over with electrical tape for waterproofing. (wet climate) And yet, I would never choose a device without a standard audio port.
You mean the standard hard plastic crap that don't fit and are painful to wear? Thanks, Apple, but no thanks.
Even with regular headphones I find it really hard to find a comfortable pair without spending a lot of money, and I don't even care much about sound quality. I can't imagine narrowing it down to whatever is trendy. The right $30 pair works great for me, but I'll bet I'd end up having to spend $200 to get a good pair of around-ear phones for something proprietary, because the only choice would be something targeted at audio professionals.
And when I bought my headphones, I still had a floppy drive. How so? Because every 5 years or so instead of throwing them away, I just re-solder whichever connection started getting flaky.
We don't need to replace every piece of technology we own every 2 years you assholes
You sure as fuck better have planned to be forced to if you bought Apple! lol I mean, you either don't have the problem, or it isn't a problem because you made the choice intentionally. It is the most expensive common brand, so it isn't like a person couldn't afford to choose.
I checked a regular search and got "About 8,190,000 results" for "bisexual penises"
Maps doesn't give any results for bisexual penis, but "bisexual" gives me the LGBT student services at the local University, and "penis" gives me a Japanese fertility temple. I'm very slightly disappointed that google didn't figure out "penis" and list the local adult shops. But "adult shop," which is what the sign outside will actually say, does list them all on maps. "adult arcade" lists the adult shops, and also an over-21 video game bar.
I've searched out for some pretty depraved stuff, and I've never had any trouble getting google to tell me about any of it, at least if I can figure out what google thinks it is called.
It doesn't work to have a small number of famous people on television repeat a thing. That doesn't make the internet care. You have to have lots of different people saying the thing on the internet for the internet to notice. Most of the talk on the internet about Trump is saying different things than Trump himself is saying.
Though I am surprised about Robert Epstein, I guess there is just too broad an array of pejoratives to choose from for any of them to get a high ranking.
I think Robert Epstein is giving Alphabet (Google) way too much credit in it's ability to "manipulate" people.
You're misunderstanding his point:
Honest spammers like him were really proud of their SEO schemes, for it to backfire on them makes them really sad. They feel like their false happiness was stolen from them. They thought they could buy popularity at a discount, that instead of buying ads they could trick an ad company's computers into listing them at the top for free. But the ad company had more programmers than them. Waaaaa, waaaaa, waaaaa.
No need to wring your hands and worry about that a private party's decision about the rankings that they give out might be according to them, and their interests. That isn't something that "can lead to injustice against which their is no appeal," it is actually just freedom. My opinion of your website, or google's, is my own and not yours to covet; there is no injustice in me exercising my own prerogatives according to my interests. And so there is no need to wring your hands worrying about it.
The funny part is that google isn't even doing anything worth complaining about; the actual complaint here is that, oh no, google fights back against people trying to fraudulently manipulate google's rankings to return a different result.
The most hilarious part (and that outs you as a teenager) is that you associate buzz cuts... with cops. Uhm, yeah. When you're older, you'll have more regular examples.
Also, when you get older you're learn that there are lots of workplace rules that are designed to protect the employees and have nothing to do with wearing a suit. No, a casual dress code doesn't mean you can say **** or ***** at work, and therefore you should also not be the one flashing it on the screen during a presentation.
Except that automated linking isn't facilitating, and it is easy to find any software package on google. How easy it is to find a particular package depends almost entirely on the quality of the name it has and how searchable that is.
They obviously could do the thing they're accused of here, and it would be their own free speech. The funny part is that free speech dictates that it is up to Google to choose, not random other people that are not google who do not have "google's speech" as their personal prerogative. However, google actually does link to... everything.
Hey there, Derpy Dan, thanks for stopping by. Did you know that Google is a private entity, and when they choose what to republish, or not to, that isn't censorship, it is actually Google's free speech. Telling Google what they should have to say? An attempt at censorship, but luckily, Google doesn't care and won't be affected.
This is perhaps the most spammy link slashdot has ever put out. Just random drivle from a tabloid. What does Bat Boy think about Google? What do the Martian Overlords think? Just turn the page, it will be there.
Especially when the current law requires a driver to stay in their lane and attempt to stop. Swerving out of your lane to avoid somebody jumping in the road is already against the rules. You're required to reduce your speed as much as possible before the impact, not to make a split-second decision to swerve.
If you had time to check if it is safe to swerve, you actually could have stopped in that time. When you have time to avoid an obstacle by changing lanes is when you have more time, and you'd also have been able to easily stop.
Why are these magical thinkers still thinking they're better at this than traffic engineers? Don't swerve, you're not really that special, just freakin' do it the way the driver manual tells you because slowing down and crashing is better than swerving and crashing, even if you think you're really good at swerving.
Slashdot Mirror
Your theory that non-profits don't receive trademark protection is novel, and already refuted by existing precedent. Yes, public activities can be "trade" even when the underlying purpose is not profit! Wowsers, Pres., you went loco on that one.
VB is still a very common language, users just don't have any way of knowing what language was used because it still gets packaged as an .exe and they don't plaster VB onto the installer anywhere.
Same is true of Java. Lots of things are still Java. Few people will reject software at the installer stage just because it asks to install Java, and once it is installed, new Java programs don't give you any hint about it.
Flash isn't trendy, but I don't think usage as a serious tool has gone down; casual and malware usage is moving, obviously.
ActiveX is very popular for enterprise intranet applications.
You're correct that the information is on the check, but it is very, very different because with a check they're only authorized to withdraw the amount on the check one time. They can actually convert it to an electronic ACH withdrawal if they want to, so as far as that goes you are correct. But if they use it to just take money they think you owe them, that would be criminal check fraud. Whereas when you give the company the information in a monthly payment authorization, you've given a blanket authorization that covers whatever they think the correct amount is. The fine print will say so. So there is a huge difference between "push" and "pull" payment methods, even when they look the same on the ACH system.
Nope. The banks are just as bad.
Contrary to your belief, there are actually a wide variety of different banks who behave differently in the same situation.
It may be that you had been underage when you opened your account, or some other detail that you omitted in order to make the bank look bad. Or maybe some idiot at the bank did make the mistake, and corrected your mistake incorrectly, causing a problem. It also sounds like they saw the error when it was presented, but that you were very "difficult" about it.
I've had a wide variety of experiences with banks. I've had to argue with numerous bank managers. Some people might assume I'm difficult, but all of those arguments were people telling me "no" where they actually had to say "yes," and I'm 100% on winning my arguments with bank managers. It isn't their money, after all, and it was never my math that was wrong. The bank I use now? I don't have to argue with them. If they make a mistake, I ask nicely... and they fix it.
If you just assume "the banks" are all awful, you won't even know to pay attention to which ones are trustworthy!
Pro tip: If you don't want to pay a bank fee, ask to have the fee "rescinded." Most banks have a policy to rescind fees at the branch manager's discretion for customer satisfaction or retainment. However, few banks have a policy to "take back" or "forgive" fees, so you have to ask using the correct word. Rescind. I learned that tip when I was a whippersnapper from old Dave at the chess club, and it has worked every time. The only bank fee I've paid are ones that I expect to pay; a surprise fee, I ask, and they rescind every time. Especially if I indicate that if I cause the fee a second time, I'll happily pay it. It lets them feel like they're training me, instead of like they're giving me a discount.
Right, because historically the leaks have always been false? Or have they?
Some people have a love-hate relationship with them; they love having the brand that people tell them is cool, but they hate being the customer of that brand because they're willing to tolerate any sort of abuse and they'll keep buying and everybody knows it.
Personally, I switched straight from full love to full I-don't-hate-you-but-don't-call-me-ever-again when I realized how much better the IIgs was than the Mac, and that they were discontinuing the Apple ][ line.
I've been waiting for that story for years, I hope the wait is nearly going to pay off!
A lot of actions in history were decried by an elite and received with indifference by everyone else... only to turn into tyrannies or surface later as very bad decisions which affected lots of people.
Right, that is why none of these phones have dual headphone jacks and I can't make use of my quadraphonic headphones from before I was born.
No, because the others won't be allowed to have what Apple has, and none of them individually has enough market share to cause headphone makers to use their new not-a-plug.
They would need a standard, and most existing bluetooth devices only support low-res audio. So their headphones would simply sound worse to most users. There would not be a lot of products available. Users would go to the headphone isle at the store, and stand there saying, "gosh, none of these work with my phone except this pair that costs more than the phone did. Maybe I should just return the phone."
The market condition that would need to exist before the change would be worthwhile for the headphone makers to switch would be for the standard (cheap) bluetooth devices to support CD-quality sound. Then they would want to push users that way. And the headphone makers have to jump first, because other than Apple nobody can get their customers to commit to brand-lock across those products.
if you don't want one then don't buy it.
Gosh, I wish I would of thought of that!
OK, I won't buy it! I promise.
Guess what, it didn't help. I still don't want it. ;)
What I find funniest about it is that on my main pocket device, I have the headphone jack taped over with electrical tape for waterproofing. (wet climate) And yet, I would never choose a device without a standard audio port.
You mean the standard hard plastic crap that don't fit and are painful to wear? Thanks, Apple, but no thanks.
Even with regular headphones I find it really hard to find a comfortable pair without spending a lot of money, and I don't even care much about sound quality. I can't imagine narrowing it down to whatever is trendy. The right $30 pair works great for me, but I'll bet I'd end up having to spend $200 to get a good pair of around-ear phones for something proprietary, because the only choice would be something targeted at audio professionals.
And when I bought my headphones, I still had a floppy drive. How so? Because every 5 years or so instead of throwing them away, I just re-solder whichever connection started getting flaky.
We don't need to replace every piece of technology we own every 2 years you assholes
You sure as fuck better have planned to be forced to if you bought Apple! lol
I mean, you either don't have the problem, or it isn't a problem because you made the choice intentionally. It is the most expensive common brand, so it isn't like a person couldn't afford to choose.
I checked a regular search and got "About 8,190,000 results" for "bisexual penises"
Maps doesn't give any results for bisexual penis, but "bisexual" gives me the LGBT student services at the local University, and "penis" gives me a Japanese fertility temple. I'm very slightly disappointed that google didn't figure out "penis" and list the local adult shops. But "adult shop," which is what the sign outside will actually say, does list them all on maps. "adult arcade" lists the adult shops, and also an over-21 video game bar.
I've searched out for some pretty depraved stuff, and I've never had any trouble getting google to tell me about any of it, at least if I can figure out what google thinks it is called.
OTOH, try an image search for Santorum.
It doesn't work to have a small number of famous people on television repeat a thing. That doesn't make the internet care. You have to have lots of different people saying the thing on the internet for the internet to notice. Most of the talk on the internet about Trump is saying different things than Trump himself is saying.
Though I am surprised about Robert Epstein, I guess there is just too broad an array of pejoratives to choose from for any of them to get a high ranking.
I think Robert Epstein is giving Alphabet (Google) way too much credit in it's ability to "manipulate" people.
You're misunderstanding his point:
Honest spammers like him were really proud of their SEO schemes, for it to backfire on them makes them really sad. They feel like their false happiness was stolen from them. They thought they could buy popularity at a discount, that instead of buying ads they could trick an ad company's computers into listing them at the top for free. But the ad company had more programmers than them. Waaaaa, waaaaa, waaaaa.
No need to wring your hands and worry about that a private party's decision about the rankings that they give out might be according to them, and their interests. That isn't something that "can lead to injustice against which their is no appeal," it is actually just freedom. My opinion of your website, or google's, is my own and not yours to covet; there is no injustice in me exercising my own prerogatives according to my interests. And so there is no need to wring your hands worrying about it.
The funny part is that google isn't even doing anything worth complaining about; the actual complaint here is that, oh no, google fights back against people trying to fraudulently manipulate google's rankings to return a different result.
The most hilarious part (and that outs you as a teenager) is that you associate buzz cuts... with cops. Uhm, yeah. When you're older, you'll have more regular examples.
Also, when you get older you're learn that there are lots of workplace rules that are designed to protect the employees and have nothing to do with wearing a suit. No, a casual dress code doesn't mean you can say **** or ***** at work, and therefore you should also not be the one flashing it on the screen during a presentation.
Except that automated linking isn't facilitating, and it is easy to find any software package on google. How easy it is to find a particular package depends almost entirely on the quality of the name it has and how searchable that is.
They obviously could do the thing they're accused of here, and it would be their own free speech. The funny part is that free speech dictates that it is up to Google to choose, not random other people that are not google who do not have "google's speech" as their personal prerogative. However, google actually does link to... everything.
If only they could actually find something missing from the search results, then the complaints would be so much more troubling. ;)
Hey there, Derpy Dan, thanks for stopping by. Did you know that Google is a private entity, and when they choose what to republish, or not to, that isn't censorship, it is actually Google's free speech. Telling Google what they should have to say? An attempt at censorship, but luckily, Google doesn't care and won't be affected.
This is perhaps the most spammy link slashdot has ever put out. Just random drivle from a tabloid. What does Bat Boy think about Google? What do the Martian Overlords think? Just turn the page, it will be there.
Or, there was an economic boom in the mid to late 90s, reducing the deficit.
Especially when the current law requires a driver to stay in their lane and attempt to stop. Swerving out of your lane to avoid somebody jumping in the road is already against the rules. You're required to reduce your speed as much as possible before the impact, not to make a split-second decision to swerve.
If you had time to check if it is safe to swerve, you actually could have stopped in that time. When you have time to avoid an obstacle by changing lanes is when you have more time, and you'd also have been able to easily stop.
Why are these magical thinkers still thinking they're better at this than traffic engineers? Don't swerve, you're not really that special, just freakin' do it the way the driver manual tells you because slowing down and crashing is better than swerving and crashing, even if you think you're really good at swerving.
without sacrificing the ability to carry passengers
Passenger.