iPad Next Gen.


Sue me.

1) Depends on how many people you fire every day.
2) It's dangerous to believe everything your enemies tell you.

Could anyone explain this a bit more? Are there any possible problems or unexpected side effects from this? What are the Skype's motivations for doing so? Thanks.

Loaning a CD or DVD to a friend is not a violation of copyright. Copyright is the monopoly right to make copies which is reserved to the copyright owner.

Indeed. But a compilation is done by copying music from various sources and putting them on a new medium. Distributing music in this form is then a copyright violation, unless you also distribute all the sources you used (presumably legally owned by you).

NFC is usually deployed for small payments only. If your phone was stolen, someone spending a few dollars on a ticket is going to be the least of your worries. In fact, it might even help police catch the thief.

A bot can't keep a list of checked passwords, because it's impossible to tell whether the password failed because of the static part or the part which is changing with every attempt (the captcha). Therefore there's no guarantee that your bruteforce will succeed in a certain time, that is after a certain number of attempts.

Skype has beaten ICQ for me, because Skype does so much more: voice, video, etc. Facebook has beaten LiveJournal for me, because Facebook does so much more: faster/easier sharing of interesting links, photos, organizing events, etc. The same for CDs, VCRs, etc. And the same applies to Guild Wars 2 - it can beat World of Warcraft, if it manages to offer more.

I went back to school and now I'm in the medical field, hopefully they don't start giving visas out to doctors...

You should have chosen a law school. Since the US law system is quite unique to, well, US, there's a much lower chance to be replaced by a foreigner. Doctors, on the other hand, deal with human body, which is mostly the same for different countries.

No. While the risk is being taken by them, it is you, in the end, who is paying for the risk. It's not about being cheaper or more expensive. It's about the investment being stable and predictable as opposed to risky and unpredictable.

It's because the card is issued to the customer, while the the cost of transaction is paid by the merchant. The customer has no benefit in moving from one credit card company to another. So the credit card companies have no benefit in decreasing the fees either.

It's not like one can't manage them. But rather they are extra things that you need to think about. And the more things you have to think about, the harder it is to concentrate on the important bits.

So you're saying that whatever you do, no one can verify any of that? None of the actions you do are ever going to be observable? In other words, for all intents and purposes, you did exactly NOTHING.

I don't see the point. Why would a company pay someone to bring to everyone's attention its failure to deliver an innovative product that many people were genuinely interested in?

Facebook allows you to "untag" yourself from any photo, regardless of who tagged you. That's already halfway there.

Going any further than that is too complex, as it would require proof that indeed you are on the photo (and that you are who you say you are), which is far from being automated. Furthermore, other people on the photo might want it to stay.

I'd take it a level further. Improper behavior on the forums should result in a ban on the forums. Improper behavior in-game should result in a ban from the game. This is how many online games are handling the issue. When you're dealing with paying customers (as opposed to anonymous users in free games, for example), any counter-measure should be "just enough" to prevent further misconduct and not a step more.