Isn't context great? The title of the article includes "Ten alternatives you need", and the immediately preceding sentence includes "Adobe Photoshop, Windows Media Player and Microsoft Office, have free, open-source alternatives."
The money is still flowing quite fine in silicone valley I never knew that the Chinese had such an interest in Hollywood. Learn something new every day, I guess.
It's been a while since I've been in French class, but wouldn't that just be the feminine form? Of course, I don't know offhand if UTC would be considered masculine or feminine (I think time/temps is masculine, isn't it?).
When they finally get a real job (I'm thinking white collar), they'll find that email is MUCH more pervasive than the other stuff. That's probably because, in many office environments, a large portion of email is addressed to more than one person. In software development groups, you may need to send a message to all of the developers and have any replies also go to the same group. The IM clients that I've used don't handle this situation very well. Using something like Facebook for messages (and honestly, how much different is it from IMAP?) works fine for messages between two people, but breaks down pretty quickly for more complex needs.
I think the answer should be yes, you should be able to seek appropriate civil action. I'm not saying you should win a civil case with just a time and IP address, but it should be enough to go to a court and have them ask the ISP, school, etc. if they know who had that IP address at that time. The amount of evidence required to start a case is quite a bit lower than the amount required to win a case.
I particularly like it when professionals make a guest appearance on the show and end up sounding worse then the talented young contestants. They invariably invite the comparison just by appearing on the show. In fact, I don't understand why some professionals appear on the show, it only highlights the fact that they are over the hill or even worse that they were never as talented as some of the up and coming contestants...a potentially bad career move for them. Or maybe those professionals from 30 years ago were popular because of more than the technical quality of their voice. American Idol doesn't have the only 12 people with good singing voices in the world. There are tons of people around with singing voices as good as, if not better than, anyone on American Idol. Most of them, however, use their talents for musicals, choirs, or the like (or don't sing professionally at all). Personally, I don't really care how good a singer's voice is; if you give them crappy writing and repetitive, machine-generated percussion and guitar parts, I won't be at all interested in listening to them.
"well jet flight is nice and all because of the speed, but all these little constraints and extra controls make it complicated and hard, waahhh!" To continue with that analogy, I think the point is that people should consider if taking a jet flight is the best way to travel three blocks down the street. Jets are good, especially when traveling a couple thousand miles, but they aren't the best solution in all situations.
Congress's approval ratings are in the toilet. Citizens aren't happy with their elected officials. Part of the problem is that most people aren't happy about Congress, but they think their state's representatives and senators are great. Citizens are perfectly happy with their elected officials, it's everyone else's elected officials that they don't like.
ah, so protecting your money and property is now greedy? Isn't that more or less the definition of greedy, being primarily concerned with your own possessions? And I don't think he was referring to protecting your money from a robber that will spend it on cocaine, but preventing it from being used by an organization to help improve people's lives and society as a whole.
Of course, did anyone ever say that America was a country where people had freedom, and the laws actually worked? Any such person is a liar or an idiot. Or simply using the past tense.
Can you, by chance, name any other successful, cool and useful, endeavours that Microsoft has produced over the years? Their hardware (keyboards, mice, Sidewinder gamepad) is usually pretty good. I really liked Freelancer, too. Personally, I like C# and.Net, though you can always debate exactly how much credit Microsoft should get for cloning Java and making a few improvements on it. I thought Windows Media Player (at least around versions 9 and 10) was decent enough, or at least not so bad that I went out and searched for other programs for the small amount of music I listened to on my computer.
Some writers have gotten rid of the paradox with a rather simple key element: everything that the characters do in the past causes the events in the present. When characters travel back in time, they do exactly what they did. The line I always think of is "It all happened just the way I remember it."
we are SICK AND TIRED of paying $15 to the fucking middleman just to keep him supplied with exotic cars, whores, and cocaine. Yeah, that $15 needs to go straight to the artists. It's about time that rock stars have the chance to keep a supply of exotic cars, whores, and cocaine for themselves.
You still require supplies (a computer, typewriter, or even pencil and paper) to write. At the very least, you require enough food to keep your body functioning for those 20 hours per week. The cost for those items might be very low, or you may earn enough money the rest of the week that the cost is negligible compared to your income, but the cost can never be zero.
if a car couldn't be expected to go more than a couple of hundred miles between top ups you'd have problems doing anything but commuting. Just out of curiosity, how far do you think a normal gasoline car can travel on a single tank?
Yup, there are a lot of people that seem to think that Net Neutrality is meant to destroy all forms of quality of service. Obviously (to anyone that knows a fair amount about networking, at least), amount of bandwidth used will affect connection speed. There's also nothing wrong with prioritizing protocols; streaming audio and video should clearly have higher priority than BitTorrent, since delays in audio and video data are annoying, while it isn't a real problem if it takes an extra minute or two to get a Linux.iso. The only thing that Net Neutrality is supposed to care about is the end points; carriers shouldn't be allowed to throttle traffic solely because it's coming from Google or Yahoo instead of MSN.
Now let's say I'm looking at my traffic logs, and I see that a ton of traffic is going to and from YouTube. So much so that I have to buy more transit to operators connected closer to YouTube. So now I have a bigger bill. And that cost has to be covered (TANSTAAFL).
I could raise rates for my subscribers. Or I could say to YouTube, "Hey, guys, you're a hot ticket. If you give me some more money, I'll buy a faster pipe to you guys. If not, well, you're going to be stuck on an overloaded transit line." There's nothing wrong with that scenario. YouTube pays you a specific amount of money for a specific amount of bandwidth. If YouTube is getting more traffic than the bandwidth can support, transfer speeds will be lower because traffic has to be throttled. This is a purely physical issue; a connection cannot carry more data than its bandwidth will allow. Additionally, if YouTube wants to increase their bandwidth, they can simply pay you more money, with the cost increasing approximately linearly with the amount of bandwidth you're buying.
What Net Neutrality is about is making sure that traffic to YouTube is not throttled solely because they aren't Yahoo and that YouTube can buy more bandwidth at the same rate as Yahoo.
The difference is that of the four statements you list, two wouldn't be considered statements of fact (no sane court would rule that saying Bush isn't biologically human is meant to be a real statement of fact), one isn't a specific statement ("He lied" is pretty vague), and the other is debatable enough and somewhat vague (you can't really prove or disprove someone's motivations for taking an action). While agree that the school administrators don't really have a case for "lying" and "manipulating" being libel, "falsifying budget numbers" is specific enough, and most likely able to be proved or disproved by a detailed audit, that it could at least get looked at by a court.
Calling your site a "blog" and using sensationalist headlines does not magically change statements of fact to opinions.
lying: Everyone lies about something, so unless the person cites specific examples that are relevant to school administration, I don't think a libel case would stick
manipulation: See above, but it's probably even harder to prove that some statement is intended to manipulate (isn't that what almost everything anyone says meant to do?)
falsifying budget numbers: This is a fairly specific and serious charge, so I could see a legitimate libel suit for this
using their positions for "personal gain": If they get paid, of course the positions are for personal gain, so there would need to be some very specific examples of stuff like bribery
violating the Open Meetings Act: I would guess that this is a specific accusation, but I don't know anything about this law, so the law might be broad enough that just saying "they violated this law" is too vague to be considered a statement of fact as far as libel is concerned
spying on employees: By itself, this might be too vague, since "spying" could mean someone looked over an employee's shoulder at their computer monitor, but some specific example of illegally monitoring employees would be enough for libel
I would say that there's at least one, possibly three or four, statements in the list given in the summary that are statements of fact and subject to libel law, no matter what you call the web page that you post them on.
Not only that but I'm not sure why they are surprised that employees can view the surfing habits of individuals users on the site that they host. I would be surprised if more than a handful of senior employees and/or IT staff have the server access required to directly view information about individual users. Well, maybe not too surprised. More like dismayed, I guess.
And for people that wait another year or two, it might not matter. I just checked a couple sites to see prices, and I noticed that LG has players that handle both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. They're quite a bit more expensive than the HD-DVD players, but I would assume the prices will drop in the not-too-distant future.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't context great? The title of the article includes "Ten alternatives you need", and the immediately preceding sentence includes "Adobe Photoshop, Windows Media Player and Microsoft Office, have free, open-source alternatives."
It's been a while since I've been in French class, but wouldn't that just be the feminine form? Of course, I don't know offhand if UTC would be considered masculine or feminine (I think time/temps is masculine, isn't it?).
I think the answer should be yes, you should be able to seek appropriate civil action. I'm not saying you should win a civil case with just a time and IP address, but it should be enough to go to a court and have them ask the ISP, school, etc. if they know who had that IP address at that time. The amount of evidence required to start a case is quite a bit lower than the amount required to win a case.
Some writers have gotten rid of the paradox with a rather simple key element: everything that the characters do in the past causes the events in the present. When characters travel back in time, they do exactly what they did. The line I always think of is "It all happened just the way I remember it."
You still require supplies (a computer, typewriter, or even pencil and paper) to write. At the very least, you require enough food to keep your body functioning for those 20 hours per week. The cost for those items might be very low, or you may earn enough money the rest of the week that the cost is negligible compared to your income, but the cost can never be zero.
Yup, there are a lot of people that seem to think that Net Neutrality is meant to destroy all forms of quality of service. Obviously (to anyone that knows a fair amount about networking, at least), amount of bandwidth used will affect connection speed. There's also nothing wrong with prioritizing protocols; streaming audio and video should clearly have higher priority than BitTorrent, since delays in audio and video data are annoying, while it isn't a real problem if it takes an extra minute or two to get a Linux .iso. The only thing that Net Neutrality is supposed to care about is the end points; carriers shouldn't be allowed to throttle traffic solely because it's coming from Google or Yahoo instead of MSN.
What Net Neutrality is about is making sure that traffic to YouTube is not throttled solely because they aren't Yahoo and that YouTube can buy more bandwidth at the same rate as Yahoo.
The difference is that of the four statements you list, two wouldn't be considered statements of fact (no sane court would rule that saying Bush isn't biologically human is meant to be a real statement of fact), one isn't a specific statement ("He lied" is pretty vague), and the other is debatable enough and somewhat vague (you can't really prove or disprove someone's motivations for taking an action). While agree that the school administrators don't really have a case for "lying" and "manipulating" being libel, "falsifying budget numbers" is specific enough, and most likely able to be proved or disproved by a detailed audit, that it could at least get looked at by a court.
- lying: Everyone lies about something, so unless the person cites specific examples that are relevant to school administration, I don't think a libel case would stick
-
manipulation: See above, but it's probably even harder to prove that some statement is intended to manipulate (isn't that what almost everything anyone says meant to do?)
-
falsifying budget numbers: This is a fairly specific and serious charge, so I could see a legitimate libel suit for this
-
using their positions for "personal gain": If they get paid, of course the positions are for personal gain, so there would need to be some very specific examples of stuff like bribery
-
violating the Open Meetings Act: I would guess that this is a specific accusation, but I don't know anything about this law, so the law might be broad enough that just saying "they violated this law" is too vague to be considered a statement of fact as far as libel is concerned
-
spying on employees: By itself, this might be too vague, since "spying" could mean someone looked over an employee's shoulder at their computer monitor, but some specific example of illegally monitoring employees would be enough for libel
I would say that there's at least one, possibly three or four, statements in the list given in the summary that are statements of fact and subject to libel law, no matter what you call the web page that you post them on.Couple of friends of mine and I explained missing socks several years ago. They barrier tunnel out the side of the dryer.
And for people that wait another year or two, it might not matter. I just checked a couple sites to see prices, and I noticed that LG has players that handle both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. They're quite a bit more expensive than the HD-DVD players, but I would assume the prices will drop in the not-too-distant future.