Disable your extensions. At work, I've had 50+ tabs remaining open for weeks at a time, with no performance degradation.
At home, I have to restart Firefox every few days.
Difference? One has loads of extensions, and the other one doesn't.
I second this. Calibre has been great to me. I used to read all my news sitting at the computer. Now I have it download the news daily and package them as an epub, stripping away a lot of the pointless formatting on those sites. I can now read away from the computer.
However, if you need something "on the go" where you don't have access to your PC, then I can't help...
My apologies to those that were friends of his, but really, didn't you care enough about him to make him go see a doctor once in awhile? The man died at SIXTY FOUR for crying out loud! How much more good work could he have done if some of his friends had just convinced him to see a doctor now and again? Geez!
While I'd hardly qualify as a friend, I did live in the same town as he did for a while, met him only once in person, but communicated a few times over email. I had always planned to take him out to lunch, but alas, that'll never be.
You can either be a friend and respect him and his wishes, or you can just walk all over him and force him to do what your world view thinks is right. You can't be a friend if you do that.
That's not to say an occasional suggestion can't hurt.
I always find it sad that people don't realize that having someone else dictate aspects of your life is often worse than death. That they have their well being at heart doesn't make the situation any more tolerable. I do hope people like yourself weren't badgering him when he was ill.
I've had far more emails "lost" to spam filters than lost by the USPS. In fact, in the last 13 years, USPS has never lost a single package letter (that I know of) - sent to/by me.
The largest size Sony should do it for you - although perhaps only barely...
It's not cheap.
There are a few that stand out in any of the areas, but in general, a bit more cooperation probably would help more than hinder.
The assumption that there isn't enough cooperation is likely a poor one. Standards do exist, and they do play relatively well with one another. No matter how much they cooperate, there will still be some difference to quibble over, and people are going to see that which makes noise (the quibbling) and not see that which works due to cooperation.
Who will win in the market? Whoever can get Angry Birds out in two months, even though it crashes now and then, or those who take six months to deliver the same functionality with fewer (but never no) crashes? You know the answer to that as well as I do. As far as insight goes, I tend to value Dick Gabriel's "Worse is Better" paper over anything that "Uncle Bob" has written.
Not sure if you're criticizing your parent, because you just made his point. Making Angry Bird with bugs quicker means the manager didn't pick all three.
Out of curiosity, which countries are you referring to? Do you have a strong case that countries plagued by worse terrorism are better off by not going to war?
Faulty categorization. Why focus only on countries suffering from terrorism? How about when one country routinely screws another causing loss of life?
But focusing on terrorism, Cuba was plagued by terrorists (although perhaps not as bad as 9/11), some of whom found harbor in the US. The US is refusing to turn over suspects, and is also refusing to prosecute - which is an even worse stance than the Taliban took over Bin Laden.
So you're suggesting Cuba going to war would have been better for its people?
I think India, for instance, should have crushed Pakistan years ago. They had plenty of opportunities.
(Sarcasm) Yes, just like their previous 2-3 wars solved that problem. (End sarcasm)
They didn't, and so Pakistan is launching terrorist attacks against India to this day.
To minimal effect on 99.9% of the population. They're more likely to be hurt by antiterrorism policies than actual terrorism.
Even putting aside nuclear weapons, one or two assaults by the Pakistani army can kill far more than the terrorists dream about.
And speaking of India, suicides by farmers due to questionable policies kill more than the terrorists from Pakistan do. Internal strife (various riots, massacres, conflicts) kill more than the terrorists from Pakistan do.
But that's OK: India's more concerned with deflecting attention from those problems to someone else than actually, you know, solving problems.
Because we must follow the rules of war, our costs/losses are going to be exponentially higher.
I don't recall those rules stating that you must go to war.
Many countries go through worse and choose not to go to war.
Perhaps Bin Laden didn't cost the US trillions. Perhaps the ego and vanity of a nation did.
Only if you use a disposable computer. IP addresses are not the only way to identify someone.
Slashdot is closer to an aggregator than a news site.
But if it makes you feel better:
Open and unmoderated comments to news stories almost always have brought out the worst in people in every news site I've seen. There's almost never anything informative in them, and even if there is a comment that makes a valid point, it is lost in the crowd of other comments.
Actually, when it became public, they confronted him and threatened him with all kinds of legal action if he didn't return the device.
Too lazy to find the news articles. Just Google it.
Oh, let's dispense with the silly sensationalism.
Free speech was never meant to defend acts of libel.
If reasonable acts of libel took place, and the site knows the IP address of the posters, then it is ridiculous to use the shield law. That's like saying that I can set up a newspaper where I don't disclose the identity of any of my journalists, and where they can freely malign any individual through it while appealing to the shield law. That is ridiculous.
What wasn't clear from a cursory reading is whether the news outlets will be required to store the information. That's a bit overstepping, if it's the case. It's like saying that if I have a bulletin board in my supermarket, then I should be required to get the identity of anyone who posts there.
While not germane to the point of the story, I've not seen one instance of a news site allowing comments improving the quality of the site, or the discourse.
Not once.
Open comments to news stories almost always have brought out the worst in people in every news site I've seen. There's almost never anything informative in them, and even if there is a comment that makes a valid point, it is lost in the crowd of other comments.
"It's the best thing since professional golfers on 'ludes." -- Rick Obidiah
