Amazon-published eBooks, on which Amazon takes a cut of 30%, are also a common money-laundering source. Amazon has no desire to stop these babble-filled books from being sold because they are personally making so much money off of aiding and abetting these criminals.
"I don't know what this is and I don't care to find out."
I don't know what LinkedIn Bro Poetry is, but I am 100% certain that nothing involving LinkedIn sums up 2017 unless that thing is "Microsoft's increasingly desperate attempts to make LinkedIn into some sort of social harbinger."
My (in my opinion perfectly capable) wife wanted to take this course but decided against it after reading those prerequisites.
It will take more than just free online courses for academia to overcome its walled garden and truly be more accessible. Why is something given as a prerequisite that can just as easily be explained in a couple of minutes in the first lecture?
What? It affects anyone who pays by credit card but doesn't want to give VZW permission to store their card info. It has nothing to do with last-minute payments.
Does nobody else remember this from The Office:
Pam: "I’m failing my computer class."
Jim: “I thought you were good at Flash?”
Pam: “I was. But then they switched to Acrobat just as I was learning Quark. I hate computers.”
Scenes like the virus one in Independence Day are at least believable enough that my dad doesn't think twice about it. Even he knows that dialog from The Office was BS.
From TFA:
"Mr. Gates said the nation owed quality health care to those in uniform, their families and veterans, but pointed out that members of the military health care system have not been charged increases in premiums for 15 years — even though the program’s annual cost has risen to $50 billion from $19 billion a decade ago.
'Health care costs are eating the Defense Department alive,' Mr. Gates said."
He's suggesting changing the cost structure of it, not cutting what it covers. Given no premium increases in 15 years, I'd have to say that it's time to make some changes to it.
Complaining about someones presentation of time when the thing that is in error is the value of the presentation is silly.
Not if you believe that the presentation contributed to the error, as I do. Everyone who knows who Colbert is knows that the show is on at 11:30PM. Using military time confused the issue and introduced an error.
Military time is a synonym for 24-hour clock notation. I call it military time because I only use it when dealing with the military. It may not be your preference, but calling it that is neither wrong nor silly.
If you're going to be a big showoff and use military time, you could at least get it right. It was at 23:30 EDT. Next time, just say 11:30PM EDT and don't be a douchebag. Over and out.
I've taken very similar tests on sites which give ME the results and it shows that, while I possess many good qualities, my reserved nature makes me hard for others to read, particularly in that my expression of happiness or enthusiasm are externally muted.
I'm the same way, and, despite my excellent GPA and decent experience upon graduation from college, I was unable to get a job for a long time. I had no end of interviews, but no follow-ups.
I eventually went to an interview coach, who suggested that I explain to people exactly what you just said. So at my next interview, I ended each of the individual interviews with a brief statement along the lines of "I may not seem like I'm excited about this job, but that's just because of how I am. Etc."
It was hard for me to do, and some people seemed shocked to hear me talk about myself in such an open way, but they all seemed to appreciate it. And a bunch of the interviewers empathized and said they had the same problem. It worked out well, and I'd recommend it to other introverts out there.
Did you see me complain that it crashed a lot? Betas are supposed to be feature-complete. If Chrome is feature-complete, then it sucks even worse than I first thought.
I know what a Beta is. Do you know what crapware is?
One reviewer hadn't even installed the browser yet. Seriously.
I installed Google's browser. It sucked. Didn't ask where I wanted to install it. No adblocker (and probably never will be). Very limited configuration options. Couldn't handle my font colors. Set GoogleUpdate.exe to run every time my computer starts. Took me to a "why are you uninstalling it" web form when I went to uninstall it, and the web form didn't work. Ass sucking from start to finish. Classic Google.
The Lively installer helpfully installs a Google Updater service, which it also sets to run every time my computer boots. Because staying up to date with a program that I'll never use again should be my computer's top priority.
And, when the login fails, you're left with a window whose only option in to click "Sign in". That's right, no close button. Plus, it already made my FF crash.
Any bets on how many decades before this thing comes out of Beta?
I'd add to that list that there's no way to manage plugins except to manually delete the files.
iTunes has helpfully made itself a FF plugin, and the only way to stop the iTunes plugin from loading when FF launches is to either disable loading of ALL plugins, or delete the npitunes.dll file from my computer. But iTunes puts the file back every time I launch it, so that doesn't really work.
Being complicit in letting a shitty program take over my computer is an unforgivable sin as far as I'm concerned.
That would make it a predicted or expected blockbuster, not a blockbuster.
Calling it a blockbuster before it even comes out is advertising and nothing more.
Since the whole damn thing is contained in the summary.
It would be nice if the authors had explained why they thought they had a right to privacy when in public, or whether they believed that Google was taking pictures inside people's houses. But I guess a fear mongering rant was what they were in the mood for instead.
I think this story is meaningless without someone explaining what was meant by "safe." Did they ask people if they felt safer from malware, or did they ask if they felt safer when buying something from an online retailer? These are very different forms of safety.
Also of note is that the article consistently confused the issue of whether people said they felt safer or whether more people said they felt safe.
On a related note, according TFA, France holds net security in the highest regard, not Brazil. Brazil showed the greatest improvement in people who hold it in high regard. I think. The article was so poorly written that I can't even say for sure if that's what it was saying.
Is that you know the reporter will keep his job. If you're dumb enough to misinterpret by that degree the words that someone spoke to you, then you should have no job reporting on anything.
The article actually contained the sentence "Across the globe, researchers searching for signs of life in space were abuzz this week with word that a mystery signal has been picked up by a giant radio-telescope in Puerto Rico."
This was not just a science neophyte failing to understand big sciency words, this was a reporter blatantly making shit up.
Slashdot Mirror
Createspace is owned by Amazon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Amazon-published eBooks, on which Amazon takes a cut of 30%, are also a common money-laundering source. Amazon has no desire to stop these babble-filled books from being sold because they are personally making so much money off of aiding and abetting these criminals.
Here's one prolific author, for example:
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=d...
"I don't know what this is and I don't care to find out."
I don't know what LinkedIn Bro Poetry is, but I am 100% certain that nothing involving LinkedIn sums up 2017 unless that thing is "Microsoft's increasingly desperate attempts to make LinkedIn into some sort of social harbinger."
I had one funny issue, Splenda was causing me problems. When I cut that out, it made a world of difference.
Can you expand on what your issue was with Splenda?
By the same logic, news about my cat belongs on Slashdot because I am a nerd and it would matter to me.
My (in my opinion perfectly capable) wife wanted to take this course but decided against it after reading those prerequisites.
It will take more than just free online courses for academia to overcome its walled garden and truly be more accessible. Why is something given as a prerequisite that can just as easily be explained in a couple of minutes in the first lecture?
What? It affects anyone who pays by credit card but doesn't want to give VZW permission to store their card info. It has nothing to do with last-minute payments.
Does nobody else remember this from The Office:
Pam: "I’m failing my computer class."
Jim: “I thought you were good at Flash?”
Pam: “I was. But then they switched to Acrobat just as I was learning Quark. I hate computers.”
Scenes like the virus one in Independence Day are at least believable enough that my dad doesn't think twice about it. Even he knows that dialog from The Office was BS.
According to an old Geocities page, they are things that fly around in the sky.
No shit it's orders for Russian troops. The mystery remains: what orders?
From TFA:
"Mr. Gates said the nation owed quality health care to those in uniform, their families and veterans, but pointed out that members of the military health care system have not been charged increases in premiums for 15 years — even though the program’s annual cost has risen to $50 billion from $19 billion a decade ago.
'Health care costs are eating the Defense Department alive,' Mr. Gates said."
He's suggesting changing the cost structure of it, not cutting what it covers. Given no premium increases in 15 years, I'd have to say that it's time to make some changes to it.
If you RTFA, it says that 12% of people have clicked on a spam message. It then uses the phrase "responded to" to describe what those people did.
Clicking on an email is not the same as responding to it. I've clicked on spam emails. I've never responded to one.
Complaining about someones presentation of time when the thing that is in error is the value of the presentation is silly.
Not if you believe that the presentation contributed to the error, as I do. Everyone who knows who Colbert is knows that the show is on at 11:30PM. Using military time confused the issue and introduced an error.
Military time is a synonym for 24-hour clock notation. I call it military time because I only use it when dealing with the military. It may not be your preference, but calling it that is neither wrong nor silly.
If you're going to be a big showoff and use military time, you could at least get it right. It was at 23:30 EDT. Next time, just say 11:30PM EDT and don't be a douchebag. Over and out.
I've taken very similar tests on sites which give ME the results and it shows that, while I possess many good qualities, my reserved nature makes me hard for others to read, particularly in that my expression of happiness or enthusiasm are externally muted.
I'm the same way, and, despite my excellent GPA and decent experience upon graduation from college, I was unable to get a job for a long time. I had no end of interviews, but no follow-ups.
I eventually went to an interview coach, who suggested that I explain to people exactly what you just said. So at my next interview, I ended each of the individual interviews with a brief statement along the lines of "I may not seem like I'm excited about this job, but that's just because of how I am. Etc."
It was hard for me to do, and some people seemed shocked to hear me talk about myself in such an open way, but they all seemed to appreciate it. And a bunch of the interviewers empathized and said they had the same problem. It worked out well, and I'd recommend it to other introverts out there.
I would, but the tags are still in Beta.
Did you see me complain that it crashed a lot? Betas are supposed to be feature-complete. If Chrome is feature-complete, then it sucks even worse than I first thought.
I know what a Beta is. Do you know what crapware is?
One reviewer hadn't even installed the browser yet. Seriously.
I installed Google's browser. It sucked. Didn't ask where I wanted to install it. No adblocker (and probably never will be). Very limited configuration options. Couldn't handle my font colors. Set GoogleUpdate.exe to run every time my computer starts. Took me to a "why are you uninstalling it" web form when I went to uninstall it, and the web form didn't work. Ass sucking from start to finish. Classic Google.
The Lively installer helpfully installs a Google Updater service, which it also sets to run every time my computer boots. Because staying up to date with a program that I'll never use again should be my computer's top priority.
And, when the login fails, you're left with a window whose only option in to click "Sign in". That's right, no close button. Plus, it already made my FF crash.
Any bets on how many decades before this thing comes out of Beta?
Are you thinking of Tools->Add-Ons->Extensions? Because that exists on my FF. Similar control of Plugins does not.
I'd add to that list that there's no way to manage plugins except to manually delete the files.
iTunes has helpfully made itself a FF plugin, and the only way to stop the iTunes plugin from loading when FF launches is to either disable loading of ALL plugins, or delete the npitunes.dll file from my computer. But iTunes puts the file back every time I launch it, so that doesn't really work.
Being complicit in letting a shitty program take over my computer is an unforgivable sin as far as I'm concerned.
The comparable analogy would be to call a tropical depression a hurricane simply because it was predicted to become one later.
No, I wouldn't support that - especially if it were being done only to sell a product.
That would make it a predicted or expected blockbuster, not a blockbuster. Calling it a blockbuster before it even comes out is advertising and nothing more.
Since the whole damn thing is contained in the summary.
It would be nice if the authors had explained why they thought they had a right to privacy when in public, or whether they believed that Google was taking pictures inside people's houses. But I guess a fear mongering rant was what they were in the mood for instead.
I think this story is meaningless without someone explaining what was meant by "safe." Did they ask people if they felt safer from malware, or did they ask if they felt safer when buying something from an online retailer? These are very different forms of safety.
Also of note is that the article consistently confused the issue of whether people said they felt safer or whether more people said they felt safe.
On a related note, according TFA, France holds net security in the highest regard, not Brazil. Brazil showed the greatest improvement in people who hold it in high regard. I think. The article was so poorly written that I can't even say for sure if that's what it was saying.
Is that you know the reporter will keep his job. If you're dumb enough to misinterpret by that degree the words that someone spoke to you, then you should have no job reporting on anything.
The article actually contained the sentence "Across the globe, researchers searching for signs of life in space were abuzz this week with word that a mystery signal has been picked up by a giant radio-telescope in Puerto Rico."
This was not just a science neophyte failing to understand big sciency words, this was a reporter blatantly making shit up.