Re: sacked for making dodgy Facebook posts
It's only a bit of piss, Steve, you big fairy. Resorting to pissing in a public place might not be the best behaviour, but it doesn't warrant being put on the register (not this one).
20 posts • joined 6 Jul 2009
That in order to be underweight according to the BMI you have to be really, really skinny. Most people you'd consider thin/skinny are still well within normal BMI range, whilst you only have to be a bit chubby to be overweight according to the BMI. So this revelation isn't really that surprising.
What you're missing is the fact that over the last few years they've been branching out into selling their own line of consumer electronics, rather than just stocking warehouses with books and DVDs. Granted, I'm not sure how well things are going to work out with them moving into the bricks and mortar retail space, but their pockets are easily deep enough to give it a go even if it fails.
When everything is headed towards device convergence, how anyone could believe consoles wont eventually be made obsolete reeks of short-sightedness. Consoles are going to suffer the same fate as dedicated MP3 players, rendered redundant by general purpose devices.
Why will people buy a dedicated gaming console a decade or two from now when you can just login to your OnLive account (or an alternative service) with your Internet-connected television? And that just covers one part of the market (18-40 year old male, traditional gamer demographic). Already right now there's a growing sector in more casual and social gaming (not saying I like it, but it's true). Women and older people are gaming more, and they don't own consoles, they use their laptops, tablets and phones. The userbases for games like Angry Birds and Farmville completely eclipse the ones for games like Skyrim or Battlefield 3.
You can see why Mozilla are insisting on this asinine versioning system and release schedule though. Would there be an article here and on other sites if this version was labelled 4.5 (which is what it actually is) instead of 9.0? Chrome started the whole thing with labelling every point releases as a new version, and as a result got near constant coverage from tech news outlets whilst actually doing very little, hard to blame the Firefox developers from doing to same to try and hold on to marketshare.
I approve. I've been handling some seven-inchers lately (ooh er missus) and thinking how much better the user experience is than my smartphone, and in fact I could just about get away with using a seven-ish inch Android tablet [i]as[/i] my actual phone - it'd still be significantly smaller and lighter than my first couple of mobile phones. Five inches might be the sweet spot (that's what she said. etc.).
Shouldn't "sensible bloke" have said "desperate old sicko" in that post? Driving 1000 miles and back, potentially losing your job and/or wife/girlfriend, as well as getting an STD and/or being stabbed by some deranged drunken woman doesn't sound like a particularly sensible idea.
Have you ever used a smartphone/smartphone-esque device before? Your post sounds like something someone might have said in 1997 or thereabouts. The screen is smaller, yes, and the user interface is designed with that in mind - as are websites, increasingly. The convenience and applications of having a small computing device with you at all times can be massive, although this obviously depends on your lifestyle.
Those scoffing at the idea that this woman would still be on the radar of whatever paramilitary/criminal set that has it in for her, are hopelessly naive. These sorts of people have very long memories, and often continually keep tabs or try to locate informants for decades - long after the members present at the time are dead or in prison.
No obviously not, as that's a ludicrous example and unrelated to what I said. If Amazon make it explicitly clear in their licensing agreements that eBooks downloaded via Whispernet are on a license basis, and not owned outright, and Amazon reserve the right to remove files for reasons such as this, then yes that's perfectly acceptable, and if you aren't comfortable, simply don't get a Kindle - most people however are probably quite happy with that trade off in exchange for the convenenience over other eReaders and physical books.
If there were a license agreement when purchasing a physical book that Amazon could come to your house and remove it, then you most likely would purchase the book elsewhere, wouldn't you? And if not, then you can't complain if and when that actually occurs.
And it could have been largely averted if Amazon has contacted customers to offer some degree of notice and an explanation of why it would be necessary to remove the eBooks from their Kindles and providing some sort of gift voucher for a different title for free or something, for the inconvenience in addition to a refund.
I don't see any major issue over Amazon removing material from user's kindles, that they previously sold to them, provided it's upfront and honest, and made more explicit that you're licensing books rather than purchasing them outright, when you purchase a Kindle/eBook. Getting your kickers in a twist over that part alone seems like a huge overreaction given the raririty of such incidents and the massively beneficial trade off of the Kindle versus paper books.
If they'd just write the spec to allow both H.254 and Theora. Although undesirable in comparasion to settling on one codec, it would have satisfied both parties and be far preferable to the free for all it seems as though it will turn out to be. Most browsers would support both codecs eventually.
But when will potential employers or police ever actually do this? Yeah, go ahead and scoff and call me naive, but when has this ever happened with regard to things we already have online or consider confidential? I've never been forced to login into my bank details, or hand over my credit card details or personal information to the police, a possible employer, or anyone. And guess what happens to the first company or police department that decides to do this? National scandal, and any information they may have gleaned from people's records will be deemed inadmissable for whatever they were trying to do (deem suitable for employment, or prosecution, etc.).
As if Google's databases are going to be any less secure than the government's ones, or those of health insurance companies. Efforts should be made at stressing the importance of making sure a proper system of access, accountability and minimising the amount of personal information stored rather than people screaming about organising a riot if the government stores their health details on servers runing Windows (which they already do).
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019