Oversimplification: Windows Firefox Download is 22.9MB and the SeaMonkey download is 23.3MB. And SeaMonkey has better default configuration options. And tries to maintain a normal semblance of configurable preferences without the go away shoo tactics of the about:config area 51. And has a suite of a few other programs. And doesn't have that nasty google smell. But OMG it must be so bloated!
My take is that SeaMonkey is a breath of fresh air. A reminder that you are using a real computer instead of a wannabe tablet.
so they don't even have to pretend to appoint fair judges
Fair Judges? Those same fair judges that the Chamber of Commerce chooses for us? Or those fair judges that get kicked out once called "activist judges" for making otherwise perfectly normal decisions that some member of the "business" community hates? Tell me again who the highest bidder is? This stuff isn't trying to read tea leaves...
(Didn't post this yesterday because offtopic...)
Oh and lots and lots of doctors aren't taking Obamacare, same for hospoitals. So much so that there is already talk of legislation forcing doctors to take it.
Why couldn't they have such legislation? There is already this legislation in place forcing the plebs to buy this thing from companies.
Anyone who pays for tax software is probably an idiot.
Or doesn't know how to program. Not saying I'm one of those, but there is a place in this world for nurses and cooks and carpenters who know their trades quite well but not how to construct an algorithm in a computer.
Or were you trolling?
You know, employing skills that software doesn't do well..
I'm not following this. Software (I use TaxAct) is quite good at making sure to ask you a lot of detailed questions about your life events and situation. Software can make sure to ask these questions and not forget one like a human can. If you, the end-user, neglect to check a box that says (for example), "I donated a car this year", then that's your fault not the software's. If you're trying to say the accountant would ask "Hey, are you sure you didn't donate a car?" and you respond "Oh yeah...you're right, I did," then OK, the human is better at coaxing info out of you (or inducing you to lie.) Personally, I'll stick to software.
It's not even correct for the other 4%. On Mac OS X, Silverlight absolutely alerts the user that their version is out of date and a single "OK" click will download the new version for them.
while the summary is laudatory, fawning, even, it is not central to the decision
Funny, I had the same reaction when I read it. He seemed like a salesman for Google or something.
I would like to retain your services in this matter. Please list your bank account information so that I may transfer a retainer payment to you. Thank you. Sincerely, Prince Bernard Koffi Austine Nigeria
Dear Prince Bernard,
If you're talking about my bank account, you're barking up the wrong tree
So, if this stands does this mean it's lawful for Google to make the full text available of these books, or not?
Fair use cases are very fact specific. If you start monkeying with the facts, Judge Chin might not feel the same way about it.
If google can legally copy books (even when profit is involved) then why can't I do the same?
Wouldn't I get hammered with copyright infringement problems if I scanned in books I did not author myself?
I don't know but please hire me as your lawyer when you do.
"Spock, did you see the looks on their faces?" "Yes, Captain, a sort of vacant contentment."