Re: Up vote
Unfortunately many ISP have started hijacking this useful response (along with the useful 404).
1948 posts • joined 6 Oct 2008
Unfortunately many ISP have started hijacking this useful response (along with the useful 404).
KSes do not guarantee the project will accomplish it's goals, only that the backers will get their rewards. This becomes an issue when the reward is a copy of the product (the goal). The original intent was cases like the Reading Rainbow kickstarter, where almost all the rewards where things like tee-shirts and mugs, the funding goals where to get a reading-show produced and in the hands of children.
Can't we just shoot them?
I can commit the perfect murder.
That doesn't mean I DID commit the perfect murder, or that I have murdered anyone.
Why is this so hard to understand?
Well I have good news for you! If you take a bunch of mono channels and put them together you get surround. then you just need the LFE channel.
Doesn't make it any less daft of an idea though (just like all the IoT garbage).
Eye wouldn't be to worried about this if eye where the cops...
Eye will be going now.
Linux doesn't get viruses.
They are talking about the embassy.
Can we get a clue-bat icon?
You don't really expect elReg to use that useless image for something useful do you?
And to residents (I'm told) it's pronounced "West By God Virginia"
but it's not paranoia when they are really out to get you!
well, people won't see you when walking down the street wearing one.
It might have taken less time to list what you CAN do on it.
"Both justifications prevent Google and Facebook from exploring new, imaginative and mutually useful (to customer and provider) ways of doing business. Ways that don’t require data collection and hoarding."
I'm not sure this is a solid argument to Google that they shouldn't horde. While I can imagine many businesses that don't require hording, it's only VARY few that the hording actually precludes.
So, as the meme driven kids today say: "Why not both?"
(note: I'm not really suggesting that I want google to track everyone. Just that this argument is not something that they are going to find compelling)
I suppose that makes it more (in)appropriate that I misread "blue origins" and "blue orgasms"
So, other than that, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?
Everyone pays one idiot tax or another.
I bought some imaginary space ships, myself.
Get over yourself.
I hope you're going to leave it up. I have no idea who he's responding to, but that's hilarious.
Pretty sure the part that sucks is them buying a bunch of "edgesucks.com" type domains (considering that's what the story was talking about). elReg doesn't just report on MS doing that, there have been numerous articles in the past about companies doing that.
But you want someone to identify something that sucks about it, fine: when you go to type in the address bar, you can't tell how it's going to respond. You can single, double, or triple click it never highlights. Sometimes backspace deletes the entire text, sometimes it it backspaces a single character, and it never gives any indicator as to what it's going to do.
You'd have to REALLY think a product sucks to spend 2.5 kUSD for the domain to protest them.
In fairness, Joe Belfore makes me want to punch Joe Belfore in the face.
"Edge" make me think of someone at the top of a building about to off themselves.
If you think Dell PCs are not enemy combatants, you've not worked on one!
true, but before you do, every PC is full of holes...
Microsoft (what? they aren't evil enough for you?)
I don't even get the opportunities they think they are losing.
"OH NO! Too many people might BUY MY PRODUCT!"
I don't think anyone is saying they have to make it mulit-lingual, just that if you sell it, you have to sell it to everyone on equal terms.
They are cheaper and more effective.
(at least if you buy them from a reasonable source rather then the usual suspects for textbooks)
Then they should employ someone who is or face the consequences.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
It's not bad. It's just not good either.
"This almost certainly doesn't affect any other Linux developer or user in the slightest, since there is already a better and more optimal nvidia driver out there for free (nvidias own Linux driver). Yes it doesn't come with source code, but that is mostly if not completely a philosophical rather than practical limitation, since who in the real world ever has an actual need or even desire to dive in and modify video driver code?"
That's not true. Because linux is a monolithic kernel, the nVidia driver potentially has access to the entire memory space. Because of this ANY bug you are experiencing with the kernel cannot be ruled out as a nVidia driver problem (potentially other software too, but usually it's trying to track down a kernel problem).
This isn't just theoretical. nVidia has shipped buggy drivers, and it's much harder to get dev attention if you're running a tainted kernel for this reason.
I think that's a pretty obvious "no."
"I think you're missing the point. The billions of desktops don't know how or <u>don't desire to switch engines</u> tomorrow, that's the problem!"
No, that's not a problem. That's google doing search well enough that it's not worth the time test every piddly competitor. Here's the reality, 94% of my searches put what i'm looking for on the first page, another 4% I have to dig deeper, and the last 1% gives me nothing useful. I only marginally care about that 4%, and only REALLY care about the 1%. The problem is, the competitors don't do them noticeably better.
So, tell me, WHY should I go out of my way to use something that isn't better?
"Have you actually tried to write a competitor site and then tried to actually get it promoted? When Google is the one controlling the views of billions of desktop, how do you think your company, who is a direct competitor, is actually going to fare regarding promotion when Google controls the view and, unchecked, will also stop you from being noticed at all?"
Even when you AREN'T a competitor to Google this is a problem. The already established site is who Google's going to rank higher simply because it's more likely that's what people are looking for. What do you purpose, have Google list in reverse order of relevancy?
I'm glad I wasn't the only one to see this problem.
Guess I'll be uninstalling chrome. (which is unfortunate. It works fairly well)
Invaliding a patent is one thing, but I'll believe they are actually doing their job when I see them start rejecting this garbage to begain with!
"I agree they need scrutiny by an independent organisation, but I trust the people working in these agencies more than I trust the politicians in charge.."
Then you're an idiot. They've been caught, numerous times, spying on people because they have a nice set of tits.
elReg takes the piss out of everybody. If you want "fair and balanced" go to foxnews.com.
One better. have the DNS servers start returning NXDOMAIN, or a link to an explanation of the problem, not just for the analytics domain, for all of Baidu.
I think you missed the point. We jumped the shark when it became a profession rather then a pastime, just like sports.
Oh common, you guys can't tell me you didn't like Fondlebangle!
The problem is neither a strict "first to file" nor a strict "first to invent" is ideal.
First to file means if I put a product on the market with a feature I think isn't worth patenting, you can then get a patent and turn around and sue me all apple-style.
First to invent is a legal nightmare to enforce.
What's needed is a hybrid of the features of the two. The first person to file get it, but in the case that an existing product has the feature (but didn't have it long enough to meet the legal definition of prior art) they can continue to use it in all their products, present and future without royalties.
(none of this appears to be relevant in this case though)
ReFS is already more advanced than pretty much any other file system on the market - and it's not yet feature complete: "In 2014, a review of ReFS and assessment of its readiness for production use, concluded that ReFS had key advantages over two of its main file system competitors - ZFS and Btrfs"
The key advantage was memory usage, and the only reason it was an advantage was because they had dedup enabled on ZFS, a feature ReFS does not even support . Disabling that feature (which is not enabled by default, and generally accepted as a awful idea unless you are completely sure you know what you are doing) eliminated that one advantage.
ReFS lacks: dedup, COW snapshots, compression, quotas, hard-links, extended attributes, oh and a little thing called "the ability to boot off it". It's also a completely dog if you have integrity checking enabled (something ZFS has, and performs fine with)
It ALWAYS looked like a solution in search of a problem to some of us.
They did on TIFKAM
Take dick pictures, label them "potential bomb targets"
harass the terrorists and the spooks in one fell swoop.
So, privacy should be opt-in? I think you all (and the ad industry, and the W3C) have it completely ass-backward. It should be a "Stalk me" flag. Honestly, the big problem is the damn flags don't DO anything; you're still trusting a morally bankrupt industry to do the right thing.
Didn't Bill Hicks have something to say about ad men?
I couldn't have said it better myself. governments have given me every reason to NOT trust them.
Why would you hire hacker's who aren't good enough to not get caught?
but going on for two pages? Beers all around!