Yay! Mentalists are really good at altering your behavior or implanting suggestions without you realizing it. It's kind of awesome to watch, and in a way, disturbing. I actually wonder how susceptible I am to all of this, myself...
I've seen doctors use coding. The last place I had healthcare at had to assign every prescription or test to a coding of what it was intended to treat/diagnose.
There are very few people coming in the doors who truly have no coverage, despite what the politicians would have you believe
This is selection bias. We, who have no insurance, don't come into hospitals and other such stuff, because we're going to face enormous costs for doing so, because there is literally no one to pay for the costs, and it gets tacked onto our already shitty debt situation. So, we only head in to a doctor or hospital when we're afraid that whatever is wrong with us is going to kill us.
I had a clogged saliva gland in my mouth for like 3 months, guess what I did about it? Waited until it went away.
Because they're not just 'iCloud' - they're 'iCloud Communications'. They think the name Apple picked is too close to their own name. Kind of like 'Apple Computer' is similar to 'Apple Music' and one might think they are two subsidiaries of the same company, like 'Sony Computer' and 'Sony Music'.
Apple vs Apple was brought to court because Apple (the music company) was worried that adding sound and speakers to the computers meant that Apple (the computer company) was encroaching upon their business sector. If Apple (the computer company) had never gotten anywhere near music, Apple (the music company) would have never had a shot in hell to raise a stink, because trademarks are separated by markets. Thus, there is nothing wrong with having a company named "Apple" if you're a hardware store, or fruit store, or such. You just can't use the mark "Apple" in markets where someone has already been operating: music and computers the two most well known.
Because you don't have to apply for a trademark to have it legally protected. It helps, sure, but it isn't required. If the report is true, and iCloud has been operating under that name since 2005, then Apple is in the wrong.
Apple bought the trademarks for iCloud from Xcerion, which owned them for almost two years. iCloud Communications had lots and lots of time to do something about Xcerion and didn't. Now that Xcerion got 4.5 million dollars for the trademark they want to get in on the deal. It's too late.
This is assuming the iCloud Communications were aware that Xcerion had registered the "iCloud" trademark and were using it. It's not actually as obvious as one might imagine. I mean, Apple apparently managed to overlook a whole company named iCloud...
IE 9 has the fastest Javscript engine period! I know that is not a popular opinion here on slashdot but Microsoft is noticing Chrome and Firefox and is getting nervous and playing catchup. It is better with graphically intensive hi res sites as it has the best GPU assisted rendering of text with DirectWrite/Direct 2D. IE 9 is a huge improvement.... this assumes you run Windows 7 on your netbook of course and it is a free download so give it a shot. If it has a somewhat accelerated graphics it will help scroll IE 9 easier. Chrome is having flake acceleration issues for some users so I do not know. Chrome is great on Linux on my 3 year old laptop. Firefox 3.6 is downright sluggish.
Perhaps you didn't note what I said... I've used IE9, and it runs extremely slow. I do have Windows 7, and IE9 is still horrifyingly sluggish.
Most people in America think of lawsuits as a net positive action rather than a net neutral action. If we went back to the cultural idea of "courts are used to bring you back to where you were"... you know, what they're properly used for... then we might have better understandings in the public of the purpose of courts.
But then, there still always remains the damages for things like discrimination and such like that... how do you rate "damages" in this case to bring them back to neutral. I suppose if people were more willing to settle (both sides, not just the business (usually) trying to avoid any liability, but the people who were harmed) then we'd have a more amicable legal system... but then the whole adversarial model and the general dickheadedness of some people to avoid any and all punishment make any such ideas a total pipe dream.
Any hint of normal human sexuality should be crushed immediately and the person in question must be publicly humiliated. The Bible tells us that our only source of pleasure should be giving money to churches and praying on bloody knees.
[Citation Needed]
I know you are just pointing out the hypocrisy of American culture which pushes sex in advertisements and media, but then publicly scorns any and every public figure who allows the fact that they aren't complete asexual prudes to become common knowledge. You're right about that. However, you are mistaking the way Western culture -- particularly American culture -- has interpreted the Bible with what it really says. Anyone who thinks that the Bible teaches that sex is always evil should really try reading it sometime. I'd recommend starting with Song of Solomon and also 1 Corinthians 7:3-4. In Genesis 1:28, God is reported to have said to people, "Be fruitful and multiply." Any idea how they were supposed to do that without sex? Then, Genesis 2:25 says that "They were naked and NOT ashamed(!)"
And Genesis 2:25 was in the Garden of Eden, and prior to the original sin/fall of man. It is followed by Genesis 3:7: "At that moment their eyes were opened, and they suddenly felt shame at their nakedness. So they sewed fig leaves together to cover themselves."
Seriously, trying to use Genesis 2:25 to say that humans shouldn't be ashamed to be naked is like saying that lions and lambs should lay down to sleep together. According to Christian theology, that no longer applies to the world.
It's getting a bit old that any click within a comment, including within the textarea while I'm trying to reply, gets interpreted as clicking on the "Parent" link, thus requiring me to open the entire thread all the way to the root.
Yes, yes, GOD YES. I'm so sick of it.. I tried running Safari to try another browser, and the performance is terrible on my Netbook... I know IE is terrible performance as well. I haven't tried Firefox, so I won't say for sure that Chrome is the only reasonable browser for my Netbook, but its looking darn close.
I'm not trolling... it was an honest joke, because it's widely considered to be where the expression "clean hands" came from... or at least the expression "I wash my hands of this".
I like BtrFS, I used to use ReiserFS, but then apparently he killed his wife or something and it pretty much killed the project. BtrFS seems to be a cool similar form of idea, but updated... like a Reiser4, but without the negative connotation...
No. I likewise don't need a broad band connection, a decently fast computer... hell, I might be able to manage with some paper, a pencil and candle light just so long as I can get that code into the computer at the end. However, would that hurt my coding speed, oh yeah. A second monitor is like any tool for a job, you can probably get by without it, but like trying to clean your house with a toothbrush, it won't be nearly as cost effective.
God damn pedantic computer programmers....;) *CHEERS!*
This could of course be fixed by giving them a larger monitor and fixing the way maximize works in the OS.
This wasn't entirely the case on my end. When I was working, I had two monitors at work, and since I had a decent resolution, I didn't run around with everything on maximize (coming from the mac and *nix world, the idea of running everything maximized sounds kind of stupid and silly) but I still used the second monitor all the time, because we were almost always remoted into 4 different machines that themselves were usually remoted into 10 or 15 other machines.
Having the RDP window up full screen on the second monitor made interacting with the remote systems a breeze, compared to shuffling computer desktops around.
Day 1) Walk in the door, optimistic about what can be done with this "Enterprise" platform.
Day 2) Walk in the door, with a headache, hoping to find an answer for how to manage what were simple tasks under *nix.
Day 3) Walk in the door. Sit down at your desk. Plant your head firmly on the keyboard and cry.
Day 4) Walk in the door, rip your soul out of your chest, stomp on it, and throw it in the nearest recycle bin. Sit down at your desk, and wonder why in 4 days you can't find a valid answer to automation that was so simple under *nix.
Day 5) Walk in the door. Sit down at your desk, and think about how miserable you are now that you're working on a Windows-only network. Leave 2 hours early, and drink away your pain at the nearest bar.
The longer it goes on, the worse the pain gets, until you realize that you have a stash of cheap liquor and pot in your desk drawer, and you use more of both in one day than an entire fraternity use in a hard partying weekend.
All of this is true. The answer Microsoft themselves came up with? Perl for Windows. There was also a horrible mess of garbage in CMD script that was the *nix equivalent to #!/usr/bin/perl... so that we could run perl scripts from the command line without typing "perl scriptname.pl" first... it was about a good 25 lines of code...
I could go on, but I don't have as much time as you do. If you want to be taken seriously by people, you should get some legal training before you comment. Even if you want to argue that legal training is not required to make comments on legal cases, you STILL need to get legal training to understand WHY it's not required in order to make a coherent argument for your case. That's just a long way of saying that you're full of shit.
This is perhaps the most important point that nearly everyone misses. They think "the law isn't that hard, I can figure this out", but then walk into a briar patch without even realizing it... anyone who is a judge, lawyer, hell, even a paralegal knows just how convoluted and complex the law is.
I've learned a lot about law from spending way too much free time on it. I could probably work as a paralegal where I learned all this stuff: Washington state. (Mostly, I know about domestic violence protection law, and renter's rights.) In fact, helping a lawyer, he told me I was "the best paralegal he's ever had", and another lawyer recommended helping out at a volunteer group helping renters and such get representation and understanding their rights, as a way to break into working professionally as a paralegal.
All this said, I moved to New Mexico... and I know that just about everything I learned there is meaningless here... thus the paradox that if you can tell how well someone has learned the law by how strongly they assert that they know it. (It lines up inversely proportional.)
And if, out of over 1,000 defendants, there are at least several dozen who decide to fight the case, they'd be more likely to be able to split the costs of hiring a good lawyer than if only one defendant was named who had to pay all the costs on their own. Both embarrassment and legal fees are less of a burden when you can share them with hundreds of other people.
That only works if some nontrivial number of defendants refuse to settle. It seems to me past cases have shown that this does not happen. Do you have any evidence to show that it would?
Actually, even worse... at this point, after identifying the individuals the company would begin suits in various districts, or split the suits into individual actions. Viola, the clients are now no longer aware that they have co-defendents, but any shared legal costs suddenly evaporate.
This is exactly what happened in most fishing-campaign copyright suits, already...
Knowing where you live and properly motivated, I think you life could get a little more fucked up.
I've had to move a hojillion times since I last ever signed into my PSN account. So, they're not going to be able to use it to find me. (Ok, not a hojillion times, but 8 times in the last about two years...) Hell, I'm not even in the same STATE anymore...
Slashdot Mirror
Yay! Mentalists are really good at altering your behavior or implanting suggestions without you realizing it. It's kind of awesome to watch, and in a way, disturbing. I actually wonder how susceptible I am to all of this, myself...
I've seen doctors use coding. The last place I had healthcare at had to assign every prescription or test to a coding of what it was intended to treat/diagnose.
There are very few people coming in the doors who truly have no coverage, despite what the politicians would have you believe
This is selection bias. We, who have no insurance, don't come into hospitals and other such stuff, because we're going to face enormous costs for doing so, because there is literally no one to pay for the costs, and it gets tacked onto our already shitty debt situation. So, we only head in to a doctor or hospital when we're afraid that whatever is wrong with us is going to kill us.
I had a clogged saliva gland in my mouth for like 3 months, guess what I did about it? Waited until it went away.
"Founded in 1985, iCloud Communications is an established business run by a seasoned management team."
I'm interested in these seasoned managers, is the purpose of the seasoning to mask bitterness and un-palatability?
Do management teams come in any other form? ;)
Then why didn't they apply for a trademark?
Because they're not just 'iCloud' - they're 'iCloud Communications'. They think the name Apple picked is too close to their own name. Kind of like 'Apple Computer' is similar to 'Apple Music' and one might think they are two subsidiaries of the same company, like 'Sony Computer' and 'Sony Music'.
Apple vs Apple was brought to court because Apple (the music company) was worried that adding sound and speakers to the computers meant that Apple (the computer company) was encroaching upon their business sector. If Apple (the computer company) had never gotten anywhere near music, Apple (the music company) would have never had a shot in hell to raise a stink, because trademarks are separated by markets. Thus, there is nothing wrong with having a company named "Apple" if you're a hardware store, or fruit store, or such. You just can't use the mark "Apple" in markets where someone has already been operating: music and computers the two most well known.
Because you don't have to apply for a trademark to have it legally protected. It helps, sure, but it isn't required. If the report is true, and iCloud has been operating under that name since 2005, then Apple is in the wrong.
Apple bought the trademarks for iCloud from Xcerion, which owned them for almost two years. iCloud Communications had lots and lots of time to do something about Xcerion and didn't. Now that Xcerion got 4.5 million dollars for the trademark they want to get in on the deal. It's too late.
This is assuming the iCloud Communications were aware that Xcerion had registered the "iCloud" trademark and were using it. It's not actually as obvious as one might imagine. I mean, Apple apparently managed to overlook a whole company named iCloud...
IE 9 has the fastest Javscript engine period! I know that is not a popular opinion here on slashdot but Microsoft is noticing Chrome and Firefox and is getting nervous and playing catchup. It is better with graphically intensive hi res sites as it has the best GPU assisted rendering of text with DirectWrite/Direct 2D. IE 9 is a huge improvement. ... this assumes you run Windows 7 on your netbook of course and it is a free download so give it a shot. If it has a somewhat accelerated graphics it will help scroll IE 9 easier. Chrome is having flake acceleration issues for some users so I do not know. Chrome is great on Linux on my 3 year old laptop. Firefox 3.6 is downright sluggish.
Perhaps you didn't note what I said... I've used IE9, and it runs extremely slow. I do have Windows 7, and IE9 is still horrifyingly sluggish.
For what? The damages are going to be too small to pay lawyer's fees.
They would sue for "specific performance". Namely, get a court order telling Groupon to run the ad, or be in contempt of court.
Most people in America think of lawsuits as a net positive action rather than a net neutral action. If we went back to the cultural idea of "courts are used to bring you back to where you were"... you know, what they're properly used for... then we might have better understandings in the public of the purpose of courts.
But then, there still always remains the damages for things like discrimination and such like that... how do you rate "damages" in this case to bring them back to neutral. I suppose if people were more willing to settle (both sides, not just the business (usually) trying to avoid any liability, but the people who were harmed) then we'd have a more amicable legal system... but then the whole adversarial model and the general dickheadedness of some people to avoid any and all punishment make any such ideas a total pipe dream.
Any hint of normal human sexuality should be crushed immediately and the person in question must be publicly humiliated. The Bible tells us that our only source of pleasure should be giving money to churches and praying on bloody knees.
[Citation Needed]
I know you are just pointing out the hypocrisy of American culture which pushes sex in advertisements and media, but then publicly scorns any and every public figure who allows the fact that they aren't complete asexual prudes to become common knowledge. You're right about that. However, you are mistaking the way Western culture -- particularly American culture -- has interpreted the Bible with what it really says. Anyone who thinks that the Bible teaches that sex is always evil should really try reading it sometime. I'd recommend starting with Song of Solomon and also 1 Corinthians 7:3-4. In Genesis 1:28, God is reported to have said to people, "Be fruitful and multiply ." Any idea how they were supposed to do that without sex? Then, Genesis 2:25 says that "They were naked and NOT ashamed(!)"
And Genesis 2:25 was in the Garden of Eden, and prior to the original sin/fall of man. It is followed by Genesis 3:7: "At that moment their eyes were opened, and they suddenly felt shame at their nakedness. So they sewed fig leaves together to cover themselves."
Seriously, trying to use Genesis 2:25 to say that humans shouldn't be ashamed to be naked is like saying that lions and lambs should lay down to sleep together. According to Christian theology, that no longer applies to the world.
It's getting a bit old that any click within a comment, including within the textarea while I'm trying to reply, gets interpreted as clicking on the "Parent" link, thus requiring me to open the entire thread all the way to the root.
Yes, yes, GOD YES. I'm so sick of it.. I tried running Safari to try another browser, and the performance is terrible on my Netbook... I know IE is terrible performance as well. I haven't tried Firefox, so I won't say for sure that Chrome is the only reasonable browser for my Netbook, but its looking darn close.
TBH, it wasn't much of a joke either.
Granted, but it was hardly in any way classifiable as a "troll". Bad jokes != trolling.
Knock, Knock.
Who's there?
Troll.
Troll, who?
Apparently, this is a troll. WTF?
I'm not trolling... it was an honest joke, because it's widely considered to be where the expression "clean hands" came from... or at least the expression "I wash my hands of this".
The Palestinians don't believe in freedom of speech. RMS should cancel his entire trip; his talk would be wasted on them anyway.
A wise person once ascribed Jesus to say: "I came not for the healthy, but for the sick."
Trying to pick a bad guy in the region is pretty easy. It's pretty much all bad. I've seen no one that doesn't have blood on their hands.
I hear that Pontius Pilate was the last person with clean hands in that region...
Yeah, I was actually a bit annoyed about that. I'm not convinced he killed his wife, but fine, suppose he did.
Last I heard, he had led them to the body. That's usually pretty good evidence of guilty, but I held out doubt until then.
The code didn't murder anyone, and it's open source. Why abandon it?
Politics and people rarely ever act rationally. :(
I like BtrFS, I used to use ReiserFS, but then apparently he killed his wife or something and it pretty much killed the project. BtrFS seems to be a cool similar form of idea, but updated... like a Reiser4, but without the negative connotation...
No. I likewise don't need a broad band connection, a decently fast computer... hell, I might be able to manage with some paper, a pencil and candle light just so long as I can get that code into the computer at the end. However, would that hurt my coding speed, oh yeah. A second monitor is like any tool for a job, you can probably get by without it, but like trying to clean your house with a toothbrush, it won't be nearly as cost effective.
God damn pedantic computer programmers.... ;) *CHEERS!*
This could of course be fixed by giving them a larger monitor and fixing the way maximize works in the OS.
This wasn't entirely the case on my end. When I was working, I had two monitors at work, and since I had a decent resolution, I didn't run around with everything on maximize (coming from the mac and *nix world, the idea of running everything maximized sounds kind of stupid and silly) but I still used the second monitor all the time, because we were almost always remoted into 4 different machines that themselves were usually remoted into 10 or 15 other machines.
Having the RDP window up full screen on the second monitor made interacting with the remote systems a breeze, compared to shuffling computer desktops around.
Day 1) Walk in the door, optimistic about what can be done with this "Enterprise" platform.
Day 2) Walk in the door, with a headache, hoping to find an answer for how to manage what were simple tasks under *nix.
Day 3) Walk in the door. Sit down at your desk. Plant your head firmly on the keyboard and cry.
Day 4) Walk in the door, rip your soul out of your chest, stomp on it, and throw it in the nearest recycle bin. Sit down at your desk, and wonder why in 4 days you can't find a valid answer to automation that was so simple under *nix.
Day 5) Walk in the door. Sit down at your desk, and think about how miserable you are now that you're working on a Windows-only network. Leave 2 hours early, and drink away your pain at the nearest bar.
The longer it goes on, the worse the pain gets, until you realize that you have a stash of cheap liquor and pot in your desk drawer, and you use more of both in one day than an entire fraternity use in a hard partying weekend.
All of this is true. The answer Microsoft themselves came up with? Perl for Windows. There was also a horrible mess of garbage in CMD script that was the *nix equivalent to #!/usr/bin/perl ... so that we could run perl scripts from the command line without typing "perl scriptname.pl" first... it was about a good 25 lines of code...
I could go on, but I don't have as much time as you do. If you want to be taken seriously by people, you should get some legal training before you comment. Even if you want to argue that legal training is not required to make comments on legal cases, you STILL need to get legal training to understand WHY it's not required in order to make a coherent argument for your case. That's just a long way of saying that you're full of shit.
This is perhaps the most important point that nearly everyone misses. They think "the law isn't that hard, I can figure this out", but then walk into a briar patch without even realizing it... anyone who is a judge, lawyer, hell, even a paralegal knows just how convoluted and complex the law is.
I've learned a lot about law from spending way too much free time on it. I could probably work as a paralegal where I learned all this stuff: Washington state. (Mostly, I know about domestic violence protection law, and renter's rights.) In fact, helping a lawyer, he told me I was "the best paralegal he's ever had", and another lawyer recommended helping out at a volunteer group helping renters and such get representation and understanding their rights, as a way to break into working professionally as a paralegal.
All this said, I moved to New Mexico... and I know that just about everything I learned there is meaningless here... thus the paradox that if you can tell how well someone has learned the law by how strongly they assert that they know it. (It lines up inversely proportional.)
And if, out of over 1,000 defendants, there are at least several dozen who decide to fight the case, they'd be more likely to be able to split the costs of hiring a good lawyer than if only one defendant was named who had to pay all the costs on their own. Both embarrassment and legal fees are less of a burden when you can share them with hundreds of other people.
That only works if some nontrivial number of defendants refuse to settle. It seems to me past cases have shown that this does not happen. Do you have any evidence to show that it would?
Actually, even worse... at this point, after identifying the individuals the company would begin suits in various districts, or split the suits into individual actions. Viola, the clients are now no longer aware that they have co-defendents, but any shared legal costs suddenly evaporate.
This is exactly what happened in most fishing-campaign copyright suits, already...
Knowing where you live and properly motivated, I think you life could get a little more fucked up.
I've had to move a hojillion times since I last ever signed into my PSN account. So, they're not going to be able to use it to find me. (Ok, not a hojillion times, but 8 times in the last about two years...) Hell, I'm not even in the same STATE anymore...
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these....