> I can't play WMA encoded files on my iPod.
Actually, that's because Apple didn't pay to license WMA.
That said, the whole thing is pretty much BS. But oh well. At least all the lawyers are staying employed.
The whole engine gets hot if you drive long enough. You can tuck things (on older V8s with roomier engines) on top of the intake under the air cleaner housing and it will get warm enough to cook some things. You're right, putting things on top of the decorative heat shield of a modern car won't do as much -- but still, you could wrap some hot dogs in foil and they'd cook enough after a while, even in a modern car.
The canonical tome on the matter was first written 25 years ago and has been revised twice since.
I've had the opposite experience. I just get basic APC UPSs and I've never had one cause me a moment's trouble. I can't say I WOULD have lost data if I HADN'T had them, but it HAS saved me the bother of having all my machines unexpectedly do a hard shutoff when the power dips for a second. You just have to test on occasion and replace batteries as needed because they WILL fail silently -- if the battery is dead, you won't know until the power goes out and your machine goes down.
Yahoo had their own search engine when they launched in the mid-90s. Back then, Yahoo generally gave too few results and altavista gave too many.
> Note the specific language being used.
> "Yahoo will support the Do Not Track
> technology for Firefox users..."
I did note the language. What stuck out to me was that they will support DNT for Firefox users, which I presume means for Firefox users only.
Quit being so lazy. It's easy to find the answer to your question. Just type "yahoo search engine" into google to find out about it.
> You heard it here first, folks.
Actually, this guy posted 30 minutes before you did.
Expecting a sentence and seeing only fragments, not having a proper subject and verb.
Slashdot by now has OBVIOUSLY seen how much we don't like this guy. The fact that they keep posting him means they're just trolling us, or going for pageviews, or both. Or maybe Bennett has some kind of deal with the site, or has something on one of the editors. Whatever. I don't care. From now on, NO ONE post any comments on one of his stories. Not even to say how much you hate his stories. This will be my last comment on one of his stories. Hope this takes!
Your sample size is the least of my problems.
FOR FUCK'S SAKE SLASHDOT, MAKE IT STOP!
That pic is amazing. And I still get my ass kicked by Lunar Lander at anything but the easiest settings.
... for the google product graveyard.
How would everyone feel if every carton of a dozen eggs at the grocery store only contained 7 eggs? And the grocery store manager said that the farmer was not paying the store, so it was OK to not provide all 12 eggs as written on the carton?
Now, I am the customer of my ISP. They advertize speed tiers, and I choose to pay for one of them. I am paying for that speed grade to access the internet at large. This is an INTERNET Service Provider, after all, not an INSERT_BRANDNAME_HERE Service Provider.
I expect to be provided the speed grade that I pay for, under contract, for anything within my ISP's boundaries. I understand that my destination may pay for a different speed at their end. But I do expect to receive what I pay for on my end.
Some cray situation where everyone at my ISP downloads something very large at the same time might have some impact, but this should be a statistical rarity, with my ISP building enough infrastructure to have a very high statistic of meeting its side of my contract with them. If they cannot, or do not plan to do this, then they should reconsider their advertizing and what speeds they offer.
To make i ta matter of policy to not deliver on their side of our contract is problematic. If they offer in their advertizement a 50Mbit/s speed tier, then they should do their utmost to deliver on that. To artificially degrade that is counter to their advertizement of 50Mbits/s speed that their customer signed up and contracted for. To do that for the reason of "because I said so", just isn't right. I paid for a dozen eggs, yet you feel no expectation to give me more than 7 in this example.
I just don't see how that can continue in the long run. Eventually, more and more people are going to notice some eggs missing, and start wondering why they are paying the price of a full dozen eggs to get that. Once the masses realize the problem, there's going to be a huge outcry and demand for things to be made right as they seek out an honest grocer. I truly wish the dishonest one would be held accountable, but surely they have planned for a fine someday and are making sure that this future business expense is already being passed on to their customers today, yesterday, and the day before that.
I think the Half Fast advertizements going on right now are somewhat ironic...
Sorry all, I thought I was in a different window for a different article...
How would everyone feel if every carton of a dozen eggs at the grocery store only contained 7 eggs? And the grocery store manager said that the farmer was not paying the store, so it was OK to not provide all 12 eggs as written on the carton?
Now, I am the customer of my ISP. They advertize speed tiers, and I choose to pay for one of them. I am paying for that speed grade to access the internet at large. This is an INTERNET Service Provider, after all, not an INSERT_BRANDNAME_HERE Service Provider.
I expect to be provided the speed grade that I pay for, under contract, for anything within my ISP's boundaries. I understand that my destination may pay for a different speed at their end. But I do expect to receive what I pay for on my end.
Some cray situation where everyone at my ISP downloads something very large at the same time might have some impact, but this should be a statistical rarity, with my ISP building enough infrastructure to have a very high statistic of meeting its side of my contract with them. If they cannot, or do not plan to do this, then they should reconsider their advertizing and what speeds they offer.
To make i ta matter of policy to not deliver on their side of our contract is problematic. If they offer in their advertizement a 50Mbit/s speed tier, then they should do their utmost to deliver on that. To artificially degrade that is counter to their advertizement of 50Mbits/s speed that their customer signed up and contracted for. To do that for the reason of "because I said so", just isn't right. I paid for a dozen eggs, yet you feel no expectation to give me more than 7 in this example.
I just don't see how that can continue in the long run. Eventually, more and more people are going to notice some eggs missing, and start wondering why they are paying the price of a full dozen eggs to get that. Once the masses realize the problem, there's going to be a huge outcry and demand for things to be made right as they seek out an honest grocer. I truly wish the dishonest one would be held accountable, but surely they have planned for a fine someday and are making sure that this future business expense is already being passed on to their customers today, yesterday, and the day before that.
I think the Half Fast advertizements going on right now are somewhat ironic...
We are not a clone.
