I can imagine that this wouldn't be perfectly smooth. It may be automated but it may not be completely bumpless and I don't think a company would be happy if users see a "scheduled maintenance" sign for 15 min or however long it takes every week.
Depends if you can virtualise then you can over provision. I'd love having multiple people pay rent for the same system.
And yet there are still some reporters who do investigations.
Yes. Some. Dare I say a vast minority. Given how we're constantly hearing about some blunder in the industry about popular media outlets running with a false story because they don't check their sources it's a real problem. It's beyond the general stupid masses. Even some of the smarter people will typically have some media outlets who they think are "trustworthy" and then take stories on face value. It doesn't take much for a slip-up to screw someone's life.
Heck the general public has gone bat shit crazy only last week on revelations that Snowden has compromised national security because the Russians and the Chinese now have American secrets. Or so pretty much every major news outlet has repeated based on some anonymous source that talked to a single paper.
What silliness. The three months applies to individual users, not individual artists.
If Apple want to offer a free start-up then IT SHOULD BE APPLE'S COST. That is really the end of it. Have you ever heard of a shop having a sale and then deciding that they will simply not pass on the money to vendors as a result?
This is an incredibly dick move by Apple especially since they are sitting on stupid amounts of cash. In no way are the terms Apple negotiated conscionable.
If I were accused, anonymously, of pedophilia, I would not try to use the courts to find my accuser. Instead I would ignore the accusation unless it was repeated by an identifiable person, such as a reporter asking if it were true. I would answer the reporter by saying it was not, and offering to cooperate with the reporter's investigation into whether or not I was a podophile if he felt the accusation was credible enough to be worth the effort.
Reporter investigation? What's that?
No seriously for the most part investigations are a thing of the past. We live in a world where everyone is a live reporter themselves. An accusation gets made and moments later it hits twitter, Facebook etc, and millions of people know you as a paedophile. Then you come out through a reputable news agency and millions of people will think "Of course he says that, he's trying to hid the fact he's a paedophile!". When things go REALLY south you may even find reputable news agencies pick up what's making the round on twitter as fact, and then your Wikipedia page will have that listed as well complete with references to the media.
Anonymous Cowards can do a lot of damage in the modern media because the masses in general are stupid. Heck last week someone took a selfie of themselves against some poster, and some white knight though he was taking a snap of a child sitting further away, took his photo and it was shared several 10s of thousands of times on Facebook until someone AT HIS WORK mentioned it.
So of course an anonymous comment is no reason to believe someone is a pedophile, unless corroborated by further evidence.
Indeed. The Slashdot crowd knows this as I believe we are in general on the upper scale of intelligence and know what "logic" means.
However in this world an anonymous comment with no evidence can be quite damaging if someone decides to run with it and repeat it. Your reputation can be destroyed in an hour because people don't sit down and research what the news outlets may say.
That is a reflection of your common sense more than anything, something the world at large lacks. While the candidate's name may not have been tainted for your eyes there are waaaay too many people who will take an anonymous and baseless claim as gospel. I agree with you that this shouldn't affect him. But I agree with him that since it does the perpetrator should be identified, and the court is the way to do that.
Jury is out.
It looks like to get a Windows certification OEMs *must* ship with UEFI 2.3.1 and with Secure Boot enabled by default. It also looks like they've removed the requirement that Secure Boot must be selectable on x86 architectures (which is a backtrack and potentially a problem for Linux). Also it appears that this requirement will only be enforced after 1 year from the Windows 10 release. This is based on replies on the Microsoft Forums.
Currently the technical preview has no problem running under Legacy BIOS (actually people are having more problems installing it on UEFI BIOSes based on forum complaints.
That said some of the media sites are reporting that UEFI is not optional, but I can't find anything on the Microsoft site to say that.
If your PC runs Windows 7 it'll run Windows 10. There have been no increase in performance requirements in the past 3 versions of windows. In fact Windows 8, 8.1 and 10 are working on ever increasing memory and CPU efficiency.
Point is the same regardless of branding. A company selling something locally should be forced to stand behind it's product in some form of consumer protection. Our laws didn't just appear they were an extension of the "fit-for-purpose" clauses and I would expect even an unbranded piece of garbage to last a year.
Remembering warranty typically covers manufacturing / design defects, not abuse. Is it unreasonable that we buy a product that actually does what it says on the box for only 1 year?
Ok call the feature "dongs" does it change anything if you RTFM for "dongs"? Does the specific name of the feature change the way you RTFM or did you not RTFM because you made some assumption on what it was supposed to do and then complained because you didn't RTFM?
I agree with the latter part though. We do need a decent way of searching, but as far as the verbatim search goes it works exactly as it says it does if you look it up. It searches for words or phrases in the exact order.
Congratulations. For the routes I typically fly frequently they have quartered in price. For routes I typically fly infrequently they have halved in price but given how they were more expensive to begin with this too is a massive win for me.
In fact the only time I have seen an increase was when the fuel cost sky-rocketed. They added that increase as a fuel surcharge on the ticket. When the price dropped the government forced them to adjust the surcharge accordingly.
What is with the latest trends to require such massive jumps in new standards? Didn't we have a similar problem with 4G and then companies not being able to meet the standard?
This is wireless. More speed in the same bandwidth is a really difficult problem to solve. More bandwidth is a really expensive problem to solve in existing frequencies. Different frequencies is a really difficult problem to solve.
Why not have 5G be twice 4G, or even 4x 4G? Why the huge jump?
A simple magstripe card would have provided the same information, and it's unlikely that it would be used anywhere else.
Why is the solution to identity theft using biometric data, identify theft using something orders of magnitude easier to replicate?
I don't follow your argument at all. If you're worried about a company using this data then surely you'd want to pick the hardest metric to duplicate.
Snowden exposed data collection for tracking purposes. So does that mean by putting quotes around 'tracking purposes' we are no longer actually using them for tracking and are just using them to deliver lunch?
Think about it grammatically for a second. When you put scare quotes around a scary word, does it mean it's not being used for scary purposes? This has nothing to do with Snowden and everything to do with piss poor choice of text.
"The four building blocks of the universe are fire, water, gravel and vinyl." -- Dave Barry
