Comment But did they post about it on Twitter? (Score 1) 146
But did they post about it on Twitter? It's not a credible threat unless someone posted about it on Twitter. Everybody knows this.
But did they post about it on Twitter? It's not a credible threat unless someone posted about it on Twitter. Everybody knows this.
So this "credible" threat is some random post on fucking TWITTER?
Whoever thought this was a credible threat should be fired and forced to pay for all the expenses involved.
Ah, right, but we let this become an insane world. Where the above person will get a huge promotion and the 5-year old idiot posting to twatter will wind up locked away as some evil terrorist.
OK, a couple of questions TFA doesn't really detail enough:
When they talk about a different rendering engine, they make it sound like a completely seperate program. Historically MS has just tacked on compatiblity layers as a sort of "personality" to their existing rendering engine, and TFA indicates they are not doing this here. But how then? Which are they really doing? What is it based on?
They make it sound like they aren't even going to keep the Internet Explorer brand. Is that actually what is happening? I would find that very hard to believe. On the one hand TFA is probably just spewing BS speculation, on the other hand this is the modern Microsoft that REMOVED THE FUCKING START MENU!
Not that it impacts me any, of course. But I can imagine these changes creating customer, developer, and support confusion at many levels. Well, perhaps not as much as they did with Windows 8.
Isn't this already the business model for most "apps" these days? The only thing surprising here is they aren't sugar coating it with pleasant sounding euphemisms.
Yea, some of us used computers with only 4K of RAM and remember a day when this kind of shit would have been unthinkable even if it were possible.
But it isn't expressly illegal, so expect more of this. Don't buy something that does this? Sure, enjoy that option while it lasts.
If this is part of the crap they changed a couple days ago, it also messed up viewing in some other browsers. I wish they would just go back to simple HTML 3, which used to view fine in everything.
They couldn't get rid of enough of us with that awful "beta", so instead now they are breaking it one bit at a time.
So now he gets to watch the whole thing stuffed between a couple of robotic instruments...
"it just dawned on me how weird this movie is"
A pile of just games, really? Not even manuals?
Archive.org seems like the kind of place that should have the resources to scan and host all kinds of serious material. There are many, many, "boring" vintage applications, application manuals, and other computer system manuals, that have not yet been archived.
Give me R:Base 4000, UCSD p-system for IBM PC, the Kaypro 2000 utility disk (with color utility), Digital Research DR Logo for IBM PC, or how how about the impossible to Google for 1980s telecommunications program from Microsoft called "Access". Given time I could list hundreds more that need archiving. And even when some messy partial copy surfaces, many of these are useless without their manuals.
Chances are archive.org are just up for the attention grab, and I do hope that in the long run perhaps it benefits all media that needs archiving.
Why bother trying to create an open home brew environment around a closed platform?
I suspect the so-called leaker is really working for Microsoft.
BTW, "leaking" is something you do in to a toilet.
You know that you don't have to just add useless and uninteresting words to something that already had substance, right? At least borrow some quotes from Socrates' Dialogues to spice things up: There is admirable truth in that. That is not to be denied. That appears to be true. All this seems to flow necessarily out of our previous admissions. I think that what you say is entirely true. That, replied Cebes, is quite my notion. To that we are quite agreed. By all means. I entirely agree and go along with you in that. I quite understand you. I shall still say that you are the Daedalus who sets arguments in motion; not I, certainly, but you make them move or go round, for they would never have stirred, as far as I am concerned. If you're going to say _nothing_, at least be interesting about it, post anonymously, or risk looking more clueless / foolish. This is why the moderation system is in place, and mods typically don't listen to inanities like "Well said" when deciding on what to spend their points.
1. I'm too busy to sit around thinking up additional words to throw in so I can score "mod" points
2. The people I like on Slashdot are too busy to read a bunch of additional words I only threw in so I can score "mod" points
3. It's not in my nature to waste words, or to waste time
If other posts here on Slashdot are any indication, "Mr. Councilman" is just as likely to lose political points by supporting the poor.
Actually this particular councilman represents an extremely high-rent district--Manhattan's upper east side. I doubt there are many wealthier neighborhoods in the world. He's not doing this to 'score points', he's doing it to do the right thing.
It is my opinion that poverty is partially systemic. Our economic system depends on there being a pool of available workers (unemployed and underemployed). So as long as there is capitalism and a functioning free market, there will always be poor people. That being the case, we have a responsibility to make sure the basic needs of everyone are met. Increasingly in order to succeed in school and in life, Internet access isn't really a luxury.
Well said
Time and again, history has shown a healthy middle class is the best road to alleviate poverty on a grand scale.
Let me fix that for you:
Time and again history has shown the way to have a healthy middle class is to alleviate poverty on a grand scale.
shutup. just shut the fuck up. you neither know you are talking about, nor have any valid point to make. its not about solving the digital divide any more than the housing thing is about solving poverty. its been widely and clearly shown that there is an increase in opportunity and outcomes between homes with and home without internet access. you're essentially complaining about improving someones potential opportunities to enrich themselves and make their life better and maybe even get out of that housing you mock. but again, you have no valid point, so therefore theres little sense in talking sense, like pointing out to you that without subsidized housing many of these people would be on street, homeless, increasing both crime rates and homeless and deaths among the impoverished. Theoretically we are a civilized nation. But a civilized nation doesnt advocate intentionally making it harder if not impossible for those most disadvantaged to improve themselves, nor advocate for them to die quickly and get out of the way.
Well spoken, bro
The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin
