Re: More evil
Makes sense: Cameron for c**ts, Clegg for c**ks and Millband for t*ts. And Gordon Brown for Ar**holes.
950 posts • joined 28 Jul 2011
Makes sense: Cameron for c**ts, Clegg for c**ks and Millband for t*ts. And Gordon Brown for Ar**holes.
They should have left the sex scenes in but censored the offending areas with the floating heads of Cameron and Clegg. Then dub over the moaning with old Party Political Broadcasts.
-Elop is probably being returned to the fold so he can be speed groomed for Ballmer's chair over the next 12 months
-This is probably the best deal Nokia's shareholders can get based on Nokia's CURRENT situation (Chunk of cash, bailed out of the failing phone side and retaining other parts of the business)
-Google must be absolutely fuming (Software missteps aside, Nokia have always been regarded as the #1 phone hardware manufacturer, and with their shenanigans MS have picked them up for half the price Google paid for Motorola?)
The Twitter announcement would have been
"I’ll continue to support the company and its great people by staying on as an advisor for the legal, trust & safety, corporate development an"
"the "swimming pool" slides open to reveal an underground launch pad."
Are you sure you're not thinking of Tracey Island?
I thought Google had just changed the App T's & C's so that push notifications/adverts are now a big no-no? Someone's gonna have to pull a u-turn, and it ain't gonna be big G...
I think I'd rather contribute to a Kickstarter fund that paid Uwe Boll to retire and never go near a film again.
That's the other reason Apple are more likely to settle than fight; they run a risk of their own legal team setting a precedent that could come back to bite them in the arse in cases against Samsung and the like if they ever decided to swat a few flies in court.
I would hesitate to call them spammers or scammers - from the article I can't see what they are doing wrong. FaceBookers are following them of their own free will and marketers are paying them to post adverts. It probably violates Advertising guidelines or somesuch but if you can't tell when someone is selling you something you need to get off the internet.
Well played that man. As for informing callers about the billed rate, surely it can't be that hard to set up a prerecorded message when connection is made?
Personally we don't even have a telephone plugged in to the landline at mine, and with a little care over who I give my mobile number to I can't remember the last time I had a sales call. Obviously not a solution for everyone, but something more and more people are doing nowadays.
My guess is they are trying to eventually develop facilities that allow 3D teleconferencing, what with Microsoft's usual relentless focus on businesses. More power to them if they can get it done, I just hope they don't manage to break the interface or shaft consumers in the process.
To be fair, if I could tongue my own genitalia, I probably wouldn't bother with a tablet either.
Will need to seriously up the timetable for the destruction of Nokia if he wants to get the big MS chair in the next 12 months.
We don't even know if the woman actually defaulted on her loan, we just know Dell say she owes them money. Could as easily be a paperwork ballsup knowing big organisations.
Without explaining what they are/do, they might as well have announced it comes with Dilithium Crystals and no less than 32 nanospleens.
... is probably a backdoor way of convincing companies to use airgaps and test and improve their security. I would presume the insurance companies will write in minimal standards of security protection to the agreements (much like mandating locked doors and burglar alarms). It's a sad state of affairs, but I bet security will be taken a lot more seriously when there is an insurance policy that could be invalidated.
Unwanted <> having no value. If I received a Bugatti Veyron tomorrow, it would be an unwanted gift. I could still definitely turn it to my advantage (Even second hand, I'm sure I could sell it and buy a pretty nice house with the proceeds.)
That's exactly why Russia won't give him up unless America somehow promises them the moon on a stick: a yank requesting asylum from Russia is a MASSIVE PR coup.
We desperately need to put in a similar style of "naughty step" proviso for government contractors here. Starting with contracts that have scaling penalties when a company blows the budget they were given for completing a project and ask for more. Too much lowballing of tenders only for the true cost to come out once everyone is heavily invested.
There is no 'free' content, only free-to-the-viewer content which is paid for by ads. If paid for content with no ads gets enough of the eyeballs, ad-supported content could well hit a tipping point where either advertisers don't see the point of spending money on such a reduced viewer base or the station will try running adverts at a rate of 1 a minute or higher and drive away the remaining eyeballs. not that I'm sure this would happen, but I think it's a far from unlikely scenario. Almost all of the best TV already comes from the pay channels nowadays, we could well be at or past the tipping point already.
"What matters is that the cat is out of the bag, if they can't make it work this week they will find a way to make it work next week."
My money is on someone eventually trying to make a horrifically dangerous shoulder mounted recoilless rifle style model.
"I wonder how hard it would be to set up a service for people who don't want to be anon online."
Ask Mark Zuckerberg.
Don't you know them no good dangerous criminals can hack your brain through that thar teevee nowadays?!
I'm a little disappointed that Sky won the ruling. Companies that trademark names that already mean something should have to accept the consequences (namely a lesser degree of protection from similar forms to the trademark). I seem to recall the Rosetta Stone company having a spat with Google a while back over naming confusion as well.
I was thinking something similar except they don't even have to give up on hardware altogether - just consoles. If they would port their superstar games to Xbox or Playstation and/or selected phones they could make a mint. They could still release kooky hardware on platforms not their own, having the Wii-style games without having to pay for making a console. I'm sure Microsoft or Sony would let them release games on XB/PS with specialist peripherals like a balance board or a Wiimote or a face recognising pasta strainer or whatever mental shit they want to try this time.
In fact that was the Achilles heel of the Wii in my opinion - it's Unique Selling Point was nothing that couldn't be easily copied by the big two simply by adding some peripherals. And lo and behold after Nintendo took the risk and proved there was a market for 'motion' games, that's exactly what happened - leaving the Wii an under powered machine that no longer did anything unique.
Something similar (hiding the OS like it was a negative selling point) happened in the Vista era. I still remember helping a friend of my mum's pick out a basic XP PC that did everything she needed (Basically browsers, email and occasionally printing) at the store, and keeping schtum when the guys at the till brought out and started ringing up a slightly better specced machine for the same price. It wasn't until we'd got home and fired it up that Karma struck and I realised I'd taken a Vista machine.
(Cue much wasted time looking for drivers that don't exist yet, followed by 'downgrading' the machine to XP like I should have done in the first place.)
When you compare it to the amounts spent or squandered to get that $853M, yes.
...are the Hollywood elite strapped for cash at the minute? I can't turn on the telly without Kevin Bacon, Jennifer Aniston, Bruce Willis or Al Pacino burbling on at me about mobiles or internet.
For a second there I thought Microsoft.com in it's entirety was about todisappear from google results. That would have been very popcorn-worthy.
"THEY ARE NOT STOPPING YOU FROM LOOKING AT PORN."
BUT THEY WANT ME TO SIGN A REGISTER LIKE A FUCKING SEX OFFENDER.
FOR ENGAGING IN NORMAL ADULT BEHAVIOUR.
THAT IS THE ISSUE, GET IT THROUGH YOUR SKULL.
Still waiting for a device that will sling whatever is on my TV at the time across the Wi-Fi to a tablet or phone. But I guess that doesn't help sell subscriptions to on-demand services...
"If they're going to do it properly, then they ought to pardon *everyone* that was convicted of the same offence, going back to whenever it was made an offence."
While I agree with the spirit of that idea, is it really that cut and dried? That assumes everyone convicted of gross indecency was a persecuted homosexual. Surely flashers and other genuine criminals would have been prosecuted under the same indecency laws.
Personally I'd much rather politicians leave it alone than use it for cheap heat. And I don't think we should be 'tidying up' our history with pardons. Maybe it's better to have an example that reminds us that the law CAN be wrong.
Mars is still here! I was worried when I didn't see any comments from him on the NSA articles; good to see the SMARTR AI Global Interdiction Quantum Drones didn't get him.
How long until Wall Street sharks are partnering with/paying hackers or social engineers to knacker specific stocks so they can short them? If it's not happening already of course.
I can only imagine MS tried to copy the reality distortion field but something went horribly wrong in the process, leaving them not only believing but hopelessly committed to their own hype.
See '*' footnote re: mistakes in the post.
(hit submit instead of preview by mistake.)
Proofreading has been outsourced to schmucks like us who care enough to do it for free. Much as it grinds my gears, with the 24/7 news cycle of today taking the time to proofread every article is probably just too much time and effort for an organisation that provides its news free to its readers.
I think we should have a national pedant day though, at least one day a year where people are not just encouraged but obliged to rag on every little spelling mistake*. Then we could have a carnival in the evening where someone who habitually writes 'loose' when they mean 'lose' is picked at random an shot as an example to the others.
* I am aware that this complaint about spelling will have several spelling mistakes
** That doesn't have to happen, but it would be nice
Or game 'flashbacks' In Real Life. Not Doom related but when Metal Gear Solid came out on PS1 I still to this day remember the day I panicked when I walked round the corner only to see I had carelessly walked into a security camera's field of view. Then I remembered I'm not Solid Snake and I'm not fighting terrorists. I'm at school and I'm going to be late for class if I keep dicking around.
Unreal Tournament was and still is the daddy. To my eternal shame I still haven't beaten Xan Kreigor fair and square to this day. It's just a shame that the sequel(s) were basically the same game with many of the same maps, only shinier.
DELETE * FROM * ;
Tacit acknowledgement that having a pro government stance will ensure you pay a lesser price for your crimes than equivalent but unloyal peons. I'm sure they will be pushing for this to become a socially accepted/tolerated state of affairs (if it isn't already.)
But then you couldn't send it into buildings for fear of gassing the people it's meant to be rescuing surely?
Oh please, PLEASE bring back Xbox One's hated DRM - say
Xbox Playstation loyalists
Fixed it for you.
I was just thinking this sounded like the magnum opus of a bored BOFH... The question is, who did they trick into destroying all that kit, and how had that scapegoat wronged our (anti)hero?
How good would it be if Amazon refused to let this go and countersued over a frivolous lawsuit?
I second that request for an update. As Jonathan says, there is not much to be said on this subject that is new. I would like to spew some vitriol on the "culture tax" idea though, even if I'm not saying anything new; subsidising a failing model where paying customers are literally treated worse than the offenders is pure idiocy. I do like the bit where they propose targeting 'for-profit' offenders though.
The very thought of relying on my council for anything internet is giving me a migraine.
Most of last year I wondered why Samsung hadn't been trying to get the patent invalidated, and now it has finally dawned - they were keeping this in reserve so they could force a retrial based on new evidence if the original trial went tits up - exactly like they're doing now. Smooth moves Samsung lawyers, I take back all the bad stuff I wrote.
I totally agree something like this should have been done years before now, but no-one else has managed it and Musk has. Calling it useless is just wrong.