Eraserhead
Mar 4, 05:47 PM
It does not.
To expand.
According to:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10464617
Only 18 teachers have been sacked in the UK for incompetence over the past 40 years. You could increase that figure by 500x or something and even at that level it would be extremely difficult for the unions to get public sympathy for teachers being treated badly. Given there are half a million teachers in the UK, even with 500x more of them being fired for incompetence that would still only be 225 a year or 0.05% of them a year.
There is no way that the unions have that kind of power - I think its far more likely to be down to too much bureaucracy.
Teachers on average make more than private sector employees. The average in Ohio is $50,314, source
But you of course have to take education levels into account, so that isn't even true.
The two economists work out the fraction of American workers� pay that cannot be explained by factors such as differences in education and experience. This �wage premium� reflects the extent to which workers have been able to extract more pay than is merited by their qualifications. Those who believe that America�s state workers are vastly overpaid will be surprised to learn that this premium is in fact higher in the private sector than in the public sector in many American states. But states where the opposite is true are ones like California, Florida and New York
http://www.economist.com/node/18285587?story_id=18285587
To expand.
According to:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10464617
Only 18 teachers have been sacked in the UK for incompetence over the past 40 years. You could increase that figure by 500x or something and even at that level it would be extremely difficult for the unions to get public sympathy for teachers being treated badly. Given there are half a million teachers in the UK, even with 500x more of them being fired for incompetence that would still only be 225 a year or 0.05% of them a year.
There is no way that the unions have that kind of power - I think its far more likely to be down to too much bureaucracy.
Teachers on average make more than private sector employees. The average in Ohio is $50,314, source
But you of course have to take education levels into account, so that isn't even true.
The two economists work out the fraction of American workers� pay that cannot be explained by factors such as differences in education and experience. This �wage premium� reflects the extent to which workers have been able to extract more pay than is merited by their qualifications. Those who believe that America�s state workers are vastly overpaid will be surprised to learn that this premium is in fact higher in the private sector than in the public sector in many American states. But states where the opposite is true are ones like California, Florida and New York
http://www.economist.com/node/18285587?story_id=18285587
spicyapple
Aug 7, 04:21 PM
Remember, the original 22" Cinema Display sold for $3999. And at the time, buying one in Canada with an exchange rate of 1.5 meant the lcd sold for nearly $6,000 CDN. :eek:
$2000 for 30" LCD... haha that's cheap! :D
$2000 for 30" LCD... haha that's cheap! :D
Nermal
Oct 3, 01:47 PM
The problem is that I don't see how it can be iTunes compatible without Apple's involvement. (See above post on Real Harmony). iTunes will only query ITMS for validating a DRMed file, not DoubleTwist or Amazon. Without iTunes things get a lot less compelling.
I guess it depends how much of FairPlay they end up replicating. If they replicate the server too, then it'll probably be simple to tell iTunes to look at the third-party server (just capture the data going to Apple's IP address and send it off to DoubleTwist).
I guess it depends how much of FairPlay they end up replicating. If they replicate the server too, then it'll probably be simple to tell iTunes to look at the third-party server (just capture the data going to Apple's IP address and send it off to DoubleTwist).
snberk103
Apr 13, 09:22 AM
The 9/11 hijackers did not bring anything on the plane that was banned. No amount of groping or searching by airport security would've prevented 9/11.
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
I thought box cutters were banned? Can you provide a link to support your statement?
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
I thought box cutters were banned? Can you provide a link to support your statement?
SilentPanda
Apr 21, 12:08 PM
I clicked on a post rated 0 and it went to -2. I clicked on another post rated 0, and it went to -2. I clicked - again and it went to -1.
Can you give your browser details in case that is part of the problem?
Can you give your browser details in case that is part of the problem?
Calidude
Apr 17, 08:10 AM
More to the point, where do you draw the line? Should every school curiculum include the struggles of Jews, Blacks, Native Americans, Chinese, Muslims, Hispanics, Christians, Women, etc... gonna be kinda tough to fit all that in. Or does your plan draw the line somewhere? I mean are gay people more important than Native Americans? In terms of history, whom do you believe got screwed over more and whose struggles should be taught in school?
If you were to walk onto the street and ask 100 people which group of people were persecuted the most out of blacks, Native Americans, Jews, women or gays, I'm pretty sure the majority of people would place gays last, out of those groups. Now a liberal state like New York, Hawaii or California may add gay history to their school programs, but don't expect to see it in the majority of the US States. It's simply not important to single out a persons sexuality to highlight their importance in history. Was Oppenheimer's religion put before his contributions to the bomb? I mean is there a little star next to his name with an annotation listing his religion?
Maybe its just me. But I simply don't care if someone was black, blue, brown, Jewish, the Egyptian god Ra, whatever... its the persons contributions, not their ethnicity, sexual pref or religious affiliation that define(d) them. Treat people equally, not with preference.
Well said.
Most people here really don't get that accomplishments aren't being promoted so much as the homosexuality of the historical figures.
If you were to walk onto the street and ask 100 people which group of people were persecuted the most out of blacks, Native Americans, Jews, women or gays, I'm pretty sure the majority of people would place gays last, out of those groups. Now a liberal state like New York, Hawaii or California may add gay history to their school programs, but don't expect to see it in the majority of the US States. It's simply not important to single out a persons sexuality to highlight their importance in history. Was Oppenheimer's religion put before his contributions to the bomb? I mean is there a little star next to his name with an annotation listing his religion?
Maybe its just me. But I simply don't care if someone was black, blue, brown, Jewish, the Egyptian god Ra, whatever... its the persons contributions, not their ethnicity, sexual pref or religious affiliation that define(d) them. Treat people equally, not with preference.
Well said.
Most people here really don't get that accomplishments aren't being promoted so much as the homosexuality of the historical figures.
BBEmployee
Apr 8, 06:42 PM
Once I went to Best Buy to get a toslink cable with a mini plug end for my macbook. The employee in the department asked if I needed help. I responded that I need a toslink cable with a miniplug end rather than the regular. The employee in charge of the cable section had never heard of such a thing. I described it but the employee had this look that suggested I was confused. LOL
Local retail would be worth a little extra cost if employees were actually trained to be knowledgable in the products. That would require paying decent wages to knowledgable staff. Sadly the retail outlets like to charge more and pay minimum wage to people who are expected to know the location of items on shelves and that's it. Most of the employees in Best Buy that I've encountered could have been replaced with grocery store clerks and the service would be the same. I'm not insulting the workers. Just pointing out the expectations of the clerks in these places. And of course if you want employees to be interested in the product line more, they should be paid more.
They're supposed to be trained. There's a fairly expansive, albeit oftentimes overly general website focused solely on training employees for their given departments tech needs. They're supposed to be required courses. I had to go through quite a bit of testing and had to do a lot of training courses (despite not really needing them) before I got a blue shirt. Too bad I actually preferred the white shirt of the "in training" new employee. I guess I don't really like the stigma attached to the blue shirt...I honestly felt demoted when I got it.
Local retail would be worth a little extra cost if employees were actually trained to be knowledgable in the products. That would require paying decent wages to knowledgable staff. Sadly the retail outlets like to charge more and pay minimum wage to people who are expected to know the location of items on shelves and that's it. Most of the employees in Best Buy that I've encountered could have been replaced with grocery store clerks and the service would be the same. I'm not insulting the workers. Just pointing out the expectations of the clerks in these places. And of course if you want employees to be interested in the product line more, they should be paid more.
They're supposed to be trained. There's a fairly expansive, albeit oftentimes overly general website focused solely on training employees for their given departments tech needs. They're supposed to be required courses. I had to go through quite a bit of testing and had to do a lot of training courses (despite not really needing them) before I got a blue shirt. Too bad I actually preferred the white shirt of the "in training" new employee. I guess I don't really like the stigma attached to the blue shirt...I honestly felt demoted when I got it.
andrewbecks
May 2, 08:55 PM
Really its not brain surgery.
Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).
Actually, if I'm not mistaken, I believe that Windows 7 is actually version 6.1.
v1: Windows 1.0
v2: Windows 2.0
v3: Windows 3.x, Windows NT 3.1
v4: Windows 95 (4.0.x), Windows NT 4 (also 4.0.x), Windows 98 (4.1.x), Windows ME (4.9)
v5: Windows 2000 (5.0.x), Windows XP (5.1.x), Windows XP 64-bit (5.2.x)
v6: Windows Vista (6.0.x), Windows 7 (6.1.x)
Don't ask me why--seems a bit illogical to me. Especially since, at some point, they'll likely have a v7.x and it will likely create additional confusion.
Wikipedia has a little more detail on this:
There has been some confusion over naming the product Windows 7, while versioning it as 6.1 to indicate its similar build to Vista and increase compatibility with applications that only check major version numbers, similar to Windows 2000 and Windows XP both having 5.x version numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7
Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).
Actually, if I'm not mistaken, I believe that Windows 7 is actually version 6.1.
v1: Windows 1.0
v2: Windows 2.0
v3: Windows 3.x, Windows NT 3.1
v4: Windows 95 (4.0.x), Windows NT 4 (also 4.0.x), Windows 98 (4.1.x), Windows ME (4.9)
v5: Windows 2000 (5.0.x), Windows XP (5.1.x), Windows XP 64-bit (5.2.x)
v6: Windows Vista (6.0.x), Windows 7 (6.1.x)
Don't ask me why--seems a bit illogical to me. Especially since, at some point, they'll likely have a v7.x and it will likely create additional confusion.
Wikipedia has a little more detail on this:
There has been some confusion over naming the product Windows 7, while versioning it as 6.1 to indicate its similar build to Vista and increase compatibility with applications that only check major version numbers, similar to Windows 2000 and Windows XP both having 5.x version numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7
BlindMellon
Apr 25, 05:33 PM
I don't get the fascination with a marginal bigger screen, if I need a bigger screen I get my iPad.
I actually really dislike the borderless look. I hope they don't do this. A larger screen is one thing I really don't need. If I want a big screen, I'll get an iPad.
yep, 3.7" screen = iPad. :rolleyes:
I actually really dislike the borderless look. I hope they don't do this. A larger screen is one thing I really don't need. If I want a big screen, I'll get an iPad.
yep, 3.7" screen = iPad. :rolleyes:
smugDrew
Apr 12, 03:48 AM
Windows 8?!! :rolleyes: it's not even at Beta stage. More useless transparencies and now with extra fat Ribbon UI boobery. How exciting.
OS X Lion - if you're a Dev you shouldn't be talking about it...
OS X Lion - if you're a Dev you shouldn't be talking about it...
OneMike
Apr 8, 02:42 PM
http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/4150/photoapr0834035pm.jpg (http://img825.imageshack.us/i/photoapr0834035pm.jpg/)
8GB of ram and a 1TB 2.5 HD
8GB of ram and a 1TB 2.5 HD
Dane D.
Mar 4, 07:47 PM
http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2010/oct/17/ha-fdrs-warning-public-employee-unions-a-no-no/
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the patron saint of the American labor movement, was a man of strong character. One has to look no further than the heroic way he coped with his crippling polio. This dreadful disease undoubtedly made him the consummate realist.
For example, although he had a lock on labor's vote, he expressed caution about public sector unions. In a little-known letter he wrote to the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees in 1937, Roosevelt reasoned:
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable."
Even he had enough sense to know what will happen over time.
To quote Margaret Thatcher, http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher
Update: Margaret Thatcher, in a TV interview for Thames TV This Week [[1]]on Feb. 5, 1976, Prime Minister Thatcher said, "...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them."
Basically public unions are legal money laundering operations. Follow the money: I pay taxes which go to pay the public employees who pay union dues, which the union bosses take and contribute to Democratic candidates who get elected who pass favorable legislation to benefit the public unions. Lovely system that have going. Has anybody noticed that these people could care less about where the money comes from, these protesters are whining because the cookie jar is threaten to be closed. Just love watching all these cry babies on T.V., real classy people. The runaway Wisconsin Senators are demostrating just who they really are, spoiled children.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the patron saint of the American labor movement, was a man of strong character. One has to look no further than the heroic way he coped with his crippling polio. This dreadful disease undoubtedly made him the consummate realist.
For example, although he had a lock on labor's vote, he expressed caution about public sector unions. In a little-known letter he wrote to the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees in 1937, Roosevelt reasoned:
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable."
Even he had enough sense to know what will happen over time.
To quote Margaret Thatcher, http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher
Update: Margaret Thatcher, in a TV interview for Thames TV This Week [[1]]on Feb. 5, 1976, Prime Minister Thatcher said, "...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them."
Basically public unions are legal money laundering operations. Follow the money: I pay taxes which go to pay the public employees who pay union dues, which the union bosses take and contribute to Democratic candidates who get elected who pass favorable legislation to benefit the public unions. Lovely system that have going. Has anybody noticed that these people could care less about where the money comes from, these protesters are whining because the cookie jar is threaten to be closed. Just love watching all these cry babies on T.V., real classy people. The runaway Wisconsin Senators are demostrating just who they really are, spoiled children.
cult hero
Mar 25, 05:54 PM
I really *like* the fact that the OS X and iOS groups seem to be talking to each other and sharing ideas with each other, rather than being in squabbling little camps that snipe at each other like you see at Microsoft.
Me too. The trouble I see here is that every time OS X adopts some interface concept or anything else from iOS there is this ridiculous frenzy that goes like this: "OH NOES!!!!!!111111one APPLE IS GONNA LOCK DOWN APPS!"
Which, they COULD do but I just don't think they're that stupid. (If they do it's back to Linux for me.)
Me too. The trouble I see here is that every time OS X adopts some interface concept or anything else from iOS there is this ridiculous frenzy that goes like this: "OH NOES!!!!!!111111one APPLE IS GONNA LOCK DOWN APPS!"
Which, they COULD do but I just don't think they're that stupid. (If they do it's back to Linux for me.)
lordonuthin
May 10, 09:02 PM
But you loose the bigadv unit every time almost no?
That is true, unfortunately with my new i7980x I haven't gotten any bigadv units yet, I may need to reinstall folding to see if that works, which means losing a normal unit... And most of the problems were before I had folding going anyway.
That is true, unfortunately with my new i7980x I haven't gotten any bigadv units yet, I may need to reinstall folding to see if that works, which means losing a normal unit... And most of the problems were before I had folding going anyway.
Highland
Aug 2, 08:04 PM
Stop being such asses and realise that proprietary DRM on music, video, pictures or digital books is a really, really, ridiculously stupid thing for consumers and society. I'd rather have no DRM, but if we have to, let's make it something that everyone can use.
Also... this isn't being driven entirely by Apple. The content owners are as much, if not more to blame. We all need to start speaking up about this or we're going to REALLY regret it in a few year's time.That's just wrong on so many levels. I wish I had more time...
I dare you to try and argue against those points. Trust me, I've spent long enough in the music industry and observed all the DRM and copy protection stuff that's been happening since... well... a very long time (since DAT days etc).
#1 "proprietary DRM on music, video, pictures or digital books is a really, really, ridiculously stupid thing" -- So you don't want to have free interchange on products you own with content you've bought a license to play? I'm not saying we have a legal right to play the content where we like, I'm saying we SHOULD.
#2 "I'd rather have no DRM, but if we have to, let's make it something that everyone can use." -- I think it'd be much better to have one DRM model for all. The idea of heaps of different online stores all selling music that only works with one or two devices is just insane. And if you think that wouldn't work because it'd be cracked... well, every DRM model can and will be cracked in time. They all suffer that flaw.
#3 "Also... this isn't being driven entirely by Apple. The content owners are as much, if not more to blame." -- The DRM is there because labels want it, not because Apple does. Period. Don't even bother arguing about that one.
#4 "We all need to start speaking up about this or we're going to REALLY regret it in a few year's time." -- CDs won't be around forever. So what are we going to do when DRMed files are the ONLY choice? That's not an option I like to think about. We need to fight this right now or be in a whole lot of trouble.
Honestly, there's really not really a sane way to argue that proprietary DRM is good for consumers. There's quite a few ways to argue that it's morally not a good thing for society. There's also a few ways to argue that it breaches fair trading practices.
Also... this isn't being driven entirely by Apple. The content owners are as much, if not more to blame. We all need to start speaking up about this or we're going to REALLY regret it in a few year's time.That's just wrong on so many levels. I wish I had more time...
I dare you to try and argue against those points. Trust me, I've spent long enough in the music industry and observed all the DRM and copy protection stuff that's been happening since... well... a very long time (since DAT days etc).
#1 "proprietary DRM on music, video, pictures or digital books is a really, really, ridiculously stupid thing" -- So you don't want to have free interchange on products you own with content you've bought a license to play? I'm not saying we have a legal right to play the content where we like, I'm saying we SHOULD.
#2 "I'd rather have no DRM, but if we have to, let's make it something that everyone can use." -- I think it'd be much better to have one DRM model for all. The idea of heaps of different online stores all selling music that only works with one or two devices is just insane. And if you think that wouldn't work because it'd be cracked... well, every DRM model can and will be cracked in time. They all suffer that flaw.
#3 "Also... this isn't being driven entirely by Apple. The content owners are as much, if not more to blame." -- The DRM is there because labels want it, not because Apple does. Period. Don't even bother arguing about that one.
#4 "We all need to start speaking up about this or we're going to REALLY regret it in a few year's time." -- CDs won't be around forever. So what are we going to do when DRMed files are the ONLY choice? That's not an option I like to think about. We need to fight this right now or be in a whole lot of trouble.
Honestly, there's really not really a sane way to argue that proprietary DRM is good for consumers. There's quite a few ways to argue that it's morally not a good thing for society. There's also a few ways to argue that it breaches fair trading practices.
fivepoint
Mar 4, 11:49 AM
I'm sorry, but I just have to smile at some of this. It manages to be self-contradictory and over the top, all in just nine words. I could almost see you waving your pom-pons while you wrote it.
Sorry, but you guys are self-destructing, and while it's painful to watch what you're doing to the economy and to good, hard-working people, at least we're seeing you implode in ways far greater than we'd ever dreamed. Keep watching those polls. You're doing everything you can to help the Democrats in 2012.
Oh, and please stop getting tea stains all over my flag.
Ooops...
GOP Takes Unprecedented 10-Point Lead on Generic Ballot (http://www.gallup.com/poll/142718/GOP-Unprecedented-Lead-Generic-Ballot.aspx)
Republicans also maintain wide gap in enthusiasm about voting
PRINCETON, NJ -- Republicans lead by 51% to 41% among registered voters in Gallup weekly tracking of 2010 congressional voting preferences. The 10-percentage-point lead is the GOP's largest so far this year and is its largest in Gallup's history of tracking the midterm generic ballot for Congress.
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/4nitz4hkueaj85zreale-w.gif
Sorry, but you guys are self-destructing, and while it's painful to watch what you're doing to the economy and to good, hard-working people, at least we're seeing you implode in ways far greater than we'd ever dreamed. Keep watching those polls. You're doing everything you can to help the Democrats in 2012.
Oh, and please stop getting tea stains all over my flag.
Ooops...
GOP Takes Unprecedented 10-Point Lead on Generic Ballot (http://www.gallup.com/poll/142718/GOP-Unprecedented-Lead-Generic-Ballot.aspx)
Republicans also maintain wide gap in enthusiasm about voting
PRINCETON, NJ -- Republicans lead by 51% to 41% among registered voters in Gallup weekly tracking of 2010 congressional voting preferences. The 10-percentage-point lead is the GOP's largest so far this year and is its largest in Gallup's history of tracking the midterm generic ballot for Congress.
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/4nitz4hkueaj85zreale-w.gif
robotartfashion
Dec 10, 06:09 PM
stop appreciating the Name of the game instead of the game itself...this game is awful. You're making excuses and justifying the stupid **** that the game has and dealing with it.
When you're playing a game and players start spawning directly behind you and shooting you in the back EVERY SINGLE MATCH, its time to realize that the game sucks.
When you're playing a WAR game and cannot be a successful sniper in it, its time to realize the game sucks.
The maps are too small and the Spawns suck causing multiplayer to blow. If you want to make excuses for all the nonsense and frustration in the game and play on...then have at it. But the game is not nearly as good as Modern Warfare 2.
Here's the thing Vidder, when you're debating something with someone and you're constantly shouting and belittling their opinions odds are YOU AREN'T GOING TO CHANGE THEIR MINDS!
To EACH THEIR OWN, personally, I was not a fan of Modern Warfare 2 but I like Black Ops. I also love Bad Company 2 which does allow sniping. For me, Black Ops and MW2 are both very arcadey shooters. I expect running and gunning and no realism. It's all down to twitch controls and covering mechanics with teammates.
I would say that you are more likely to get "sniper" kills on Hardcore mode as their is no kill cam and pretty much instantaneous deaths. Regardless, as in real life, if you are in a CQB situation (which most of these maps in Black Ops are) you are going to run the risk of getting stabbed/shot/bitch slapped in the back if you are concentrating on the other end of the street while staring down a scope. You do have the option to watch your back with: claymores, friends, or the sticky cam.
Please above all, calm down. Oh, and have a great day :)
When you're playing a game and players start spawning directly behind you and shooting you in the back EVERY SINGLE MATCH, its time to realize that the game sucks.
When you're playing a WAR game and cannot be a successful sniper in it, its time to realize the game sucks.
The maps are too small and the Spawns suck causing multiplayer to blow. If you want to make excuses for all the nonsense and frustration in the game and play on...then have at it. But the game is not nearly as good as Modern Warfare 2.
Here's the thing Vidder, when you're debating something with someone and you're constantly shouting and belittling their opinions odds are YOU AREN'T GOING TO CHANGE THEIR MINDS!
To EACH THEIR OWN, personally, I was not a fan of Modern Warfare 2 but I like Black Ops. I also love Bad Company 2 which does allow sniping. For me, Black Ops and MW2 are both very arcadey shooters. I expect running and gunning and no realism. It's all down to twitch controls and covering mechanics with teammates.
I would say that you are more likely to get "sniper" kills on Hardcore mode as their is no kill cam and pretty much instantaneous deaths. Regardless, as in real life, if you are in a CQB situation (which most of these maps in Black Ops are) you are going to run the risk of getting stabbed/shot/bitch slapped in the back if you are concentrating on the other end of the street while staring down a scope. You do have the option to watch your back with: claymores, friends, or the sticky cam.
Please above all, calm down. Oh, and have a great day :)
slb
Oct 28, 02:56 PM
Logic Pro 7 has yet to be cracked, so Apple has people who know how to do copyright protection. I suspect Leopard will employ very strong TPM integration compared to Tiger.
iansilv
Apr 29, 11:23 PM
GOOD. I hate tweaking stuff just for the sake of tweaking it. If it works, leave it- no reason to throw out simple intuitive controls.
nmrrjw66
May 6, 10:15 AM
This is a little ridiculous. Is it really a big deal to answer simple questions about firearms? Gun owners should be happy to answer questions about their safety practices. It should also be perfectly reasonable to simply decline to answer those questions.
Ardency
Mar 17, 10:26 AM
Your probably on camera and your probably going to get Banned from Best buy or if the see you in their they will ask for their money or call the cops. You knew you were getting it cheaper then the price it sells for so it's basically you stole from them. so if I were you I would not go into that Best buy ever again. The security guy probably knows who you are now.
Actually he won't, the OP has a receipt that says he paid for the item in full. They have him on camera paying cash. Those two items match up and the OP would be able to use that as evidence to fight it. With the amount of transactions a cashier does it makes it more difficult to pinpoint which transaction the error occurred on.
To those saying the cashier will have his pay docked you're wrong. It is illegal for companies to dock pay for a cash shortage there are exceptions, but in this case the company has no right to it. The only recourse of action is to fire him. Which may or may not happen.
Actually he won't, the OP has a receipt that says he paid for the item in full. They have him on camera paying cash. Those two items match up and the OP would be able to use that as evidence to fight it. With the amount of transactions a cashier does it makes it more difficult to pinpoint which transaction the error occurred on.
To those saying the cashier will have his pay docked you're wrong. It is illegal for companies to dock pay for a cash shortage there are exceptions, but in this case the company has no right to it. The only recourse of action is to fire him. Which may or may not happen.
LightSpeed1
Apr 11, 03:47 PM
I am still in the middle of setting everything up and the monitor for example is not even out of the box yet...just been really busy. Hopefully in about 1 month's time I can share. Sorry :(I look forward to seeing it.:o
kdarling
Oct 22, 04:26 PM
So you looked around and deemed them fixed or drove around and tested them?
Tested.
In my neighborhood, which is surrounded by hills and lots of state parks, there were several well known holes for all carriers.
Certain valleys, certain sections of road. Every local person knew exactly where they were, because cell service just disappeared in those places. That map was bang on.
Then a couple of years ago, several new towers finally got approved and built, and the dead spots disappeared. (Alas, the skyline isn't as pretty as it used to be, however.)
I can still see those old dead spots marked on that map. The website says it's been up since 2001. Looks like people often enter data, but don't take the time to go back and remove it, assuming there's a way to do that.
Tested.
In my neighborhood, which is surrounded by hills and lots of state parks, there were several well known holes for all carriers.
Certain valleys, certain sections of road. Every local person knew exactly where they were, because cell service just disappeared in those places. That map was bang on.
Then a couple of years ago, several new towers finally got approved and built, and the dead spots disappeared. (Alas, the skyline isn't as pretty as it used to be, however.)
I can still see those old dead spots marked on that map. The website says it's been up since 2001. Looks like people often enter data, but don't take the time to go back and remove it, assuming there's a way to do that.
fivepoint
May 4, 05:55 PM
Dude, you're clueless.
I have a severe congenital hearing loss and it's really amazing how parents don't really understand the long term consequences of poor hearing protection.
Just as in almost all other health matters, the more exposure to loud noises when young, the more likely a child is to end up with a hearing loss as he ages. Some parents do insist on hearing protection when using firearms, but I'm sure there are a lot that don't. Shooting guns without hearing protection is like taking a five year old to a Nascar race. Very, very irresponsible simply based on the noise level.
I'm sure Dr Choi was speaking of the danger of firearms being discharged by and around children with a lack of supervision, but your tunnel vision when it comes to the health and safety of children is appalling.
I think it's you who's clueless. You make it seem as if it's the role of government and physicians to eliminate risk in our lives. What's more risky, taking your kid to a NASCAR event without hearing protection, or raising them in a large city with lots of traffic and crime? What's more risky, raising your kids in a home with un-locked guns, or raising them with an ultra-protective disregard for a child's need to learn life lessons and experience the value of trust/responsibility first hand?
My dad had a rifle hanging on a gun-rack above his computer in his office for my entire life. The ammunition was directly below the gun in a drawer as part of the gun-rack. I was raised to respect the weapon and to never touch it unless I was given permission. I earned my parents' trust, and learned responsibility as a consequence. Was that wrong of my parents? Absolutely not, but I guess I'm just 'clueless.'
Where do you live? Cedar Rapids, where the nearest next physician is five or ten minutes away, at most? What if you were in Guttenberg, where the next physician is half an hour or more? Open-ended liberty to refuse to provide treatment at a whim is just plain irresponsible.
An unpopular physician creates the market demand for an alternative. Supply, unencumbered by any sort of rationing by the gov't subsidized higher-education system, would produce the complimentary supply.
In any event, do you seriously contend that this is a situation solveable by by big intrusive government controlling physicians and eliminating their ability to render services as they see fit?
I have a severe congenital hearing loss and it's really amazing how parents don't really understand the long term consequences of poor hearing protection.
Just as in almost all other health matters, the more exposure to loud noises when young, the more likely a child is to end up with a hearing loss as he ages. Some parents do insist on hearing protection when using firearms, but I'm sure there are a lot that don't. Shooting guns without hearing protection is like taking a five year old to a Nascar race. Very, very irresponsible simply based on the noise level.
I'm sure Dr Choi was speaking of the danger of firearms being discharged by and around children with a lack of supervision, but your tunnel vision when it comes to the health and safety of children is appalling.
I think it's you who's clueless. You make it seem as if it's the role of government and physicians to eliminate risk in our lives. What's more risky, taking your kid to a NASCAR event without hearing protection, or raising them in a large city with lots of traffic and crime? What's more risky, raising your kids in a home with un-locked guns, or raising them with an ultra-protective disregard for a child's need to learn life lessons and experience the value of trust/responsibility first hand?
My dad had a rifle hanging on a gun-rack above his computer in his office for my entire life. The ammunition was directly below the gun in a drawer as part of the gun-rack. I was raised to respect the weapon and to never touch it unless I was given permission. I earned my parents' trust, and learned responsibility as a consequence. Was that wrong of my parents? Absolutely not, but I guess I'm just 'clueless.'
Where do you live? Cedar Rapids, where the nearest next physician is five or ten minutes away, at most? What if you were in Guttenberg, where the next physician is half an hour or more? Open-ended liberty to refuse to provide treatment at a whim is just plain irresponsible.
An unpopular physician creates the market demand for an alternative. Supply, unencumbered by any sort of rationing by the gov't subsidized higher-education system, would produce the complimentary supply.
In any event, do you seriously contend that this is a situation solveable by by big intrusive government controlling physicians and eliminating their ability to render services as they see fit?
No comments:
Post a Comment