Re: Pull the other...
What's wrong with that?
Coffee in the morning to get things going, the antidote for which is beer in the afternoon!
Icon - Because there's no cup of coffee and it's Friday!
284 posts • joined 7 Jun 2012
You should stand on your office chair obviously... Don't forget to oil the casters too so they don't squeak. Record it for YouTube as well - we'd love to see the resulting, err, Christmas lights!
Joke Alert - Just in case any Darwin Award candidates think I'm being serious
This is all good except the part about requiring access to be maintained even if cookies are disabled.
First, I would assume they are only referring to tracking cookies rather than authorisation cookies, that said, given the lack of technical understanding exhibited by most law makers, that cannot be a given.
Secondly, Yes, you have the right not to accept cookies, but unless it's a government website, they should be under no obligation to serve you content.
I've just bought some 22" (technically 21.5") Dell Ultrasharps for £120 ea. They have great picture quality, the stands are some of the best I've used (You can rotate the monitors to portrait - great for reading on) and they have a good selection of ports. Unless you're using them from a distance, I'm not sure why you'd want to pay more for a bigger, but worse monitor?
But when your product scores "1 out of 5 stars" and is called "quite literally the worst router ever made", are you going to proudly advertise that on the box of your product? Then you end up with those advertising they got a good rating - if they can be bothered. As for everyone else, you don't know if they're bad, or have just never been reviewed.
Personally I favour Cisco routers, which can be bought used from eBay for the same sort of prices as a decent SOHO router. The upsides of them are a generally better (if not perfect) level of security, greater reliability, and a better build quality. Downsides are that they're generally bigger, noisier, and more power hungry; they don't generally have wi-fi on them, and they are more expensive. Finally they have no fancy web interface, so they have to be configured using a command line which means you need an above-basic level of knowledge to set them up.
I have a number of tutorials on my website about doing this, and given the number of messages I get from people that have never touched a Cisco router before, it's something more and more people seem to be doing.
This actually makes a lot of sense for offline storage, but only in certain situations. I have been working with someone looking at getting into 4K RAW video production which means you're looking at data rates of 250MB/s. When you're talking about filling a £250 6TB hard drive with four hours of processed video, being able to move them to LTO6 tapes costing £30 each makes sense, even given the cost of the drive.
For those of us that aren't producing 4K RAW videos on the other hand, I see little benefit of using this for "personal" storage over a bunch of external SSDs.
Take a leaf from the BOFH. Convince the boss to put some of these in your data centre, then actually install some posh(ish) looking cables and the difference becomes the expenses (beer) fund!
The funny thing is, they do look quite cool, and that would justify me spending perhaps £2 on a cable instead of the 99p a normal cat 6 cable costs on eBay!
From what I can see so far, I'm sympathetic to Adobe and co. This isn't a student or a one man band that's being chased. When you become a multi-billion dollar company, you should spend a bit of time getting your house into order, stop being a cheapskate, and buy some software licences (or keep your current licences in order). I would also imagine, there has been opportunities for Forever 21 to make an appropriate payment to get themselves licenced without the need to go to court.
Perhaps not, but the company is owned by the shareholders, meaning if nothing else, the CEO and the board that agreed to pay more tax than the absolue legal minimum is likely to find themselves down the job centre about 20 nanoseconds after agreeing to do so (If you can afford to pay extra tax then you can afford to give it to us [shareholders].)
Regardless of whether it's right or not, and whether there's a legal basis or not, there would also be lawsuits.
I think the whole sound is attrocious thing is overdone. I have a 40 inch Samsung in an average sized living room running the onboard speakers, and it is perfectly audible at a wide range of volumes as well as going more than loud enough for watching any kind of TV programming.
BUT. While the sound is perfectly competent, it's nothing spectacular. You should look at it in the way that some people decide to remove the perfectly ok stereo from their car and spend a small fortune to make it louder etc. They didn't need to, but they wanted to do so because it's what they like. What you wouldn't say is that the car companies are taking them to the cleaners.
Oh, and I'm planning to install a 5.1 surround sound setup at some point!
If the laptop batteries I have disassembled are anything to go by (I'm not one for following the instructions not to disassemble them) then once you remove the casing, you are left with a series of AA type cells wired in series to a small controller board.
From what I can tell, what they're really doing is finding a reliable source of good-enough Li-ion cells, rather than reusing laptop batteries wholesale (I saw a picture of this the other day on another news site).
It depends whether this is a flat fee, if it is then it's not too bad. Many years ago, one of the Exchange servers where I worked crapped itself. We had a Microsoft engineer on the phone from about 3pm until midnight to get it all sorted out. Once you're talking about a full days work to fix a problem, $499 doesn't sound unreasonable.
I had to laugh at the idea that a CCTV camera will ever be able to eavesdrop on you. Yes it may be technically possible, but if you look at all the CCTV footage available on the internet, even if the person was holding up a placard with what they're saying printed like in the cartoons, it'd still be an unreadable blurry mess.
Yes and No. If you own a single share of the company and you are fighting the majority opinion, then yes, you have the right to sell your shares and shut up.
However, while you own those shares, you do in fact own part of the company, and therefore the board works for you. Therefore if you can control (or convince others to) enough of the shares, then the board have to do as you say.
That said, the fact he's resorted to the lawyers suggests that he falls into the first camp.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019