I think the basic problem is that getting rid of them would require an act of Congress. That's a place filled with old guys who fondly remember using pennies to pay for bottled cokes back in the '50's.
Hey, as recently as the 80's when I was a kid, you could still buy penny candy in the literal sense (e.g. $0.01 = 1 Swedish Fish). I don't know if that's true anywhere anymore though.
And a little advice to Valve, next time have developers familiar with Linux working on your Linux client. That
A competent Windows developer would probably just write:
if exist "%STEAMROOT%" rmdir
no dangerous glob needed.
It kind of floors me that they aren't doing some kind of check that the directory tree they are about to delete actually looks like a Steam install before deleting it. e.g. check that ClientRegistry.blob file or SteamApps directory exists under $STEAMHOME.
How does the FDA draw the line between 'must be approved' and 'not our problem' for devices that connect to a greater or lesser degree to other equipment?
I can only speak to IT software since I am a software developer, but I worked for many years in the field writing both practice management (scheduling, claims processing, etc) and clinical (IHEs, patient records, RX) software. The way it worked at the time is that you basically told the FDA if you wanted to be regulated. i.e. it was up to the company to say: yes, this software constitutes a medical device and should be regulated.
See user name.
I can't believe anyone can be stupid enough to think cannabis is dangerous enough to merit criminalization.
What you can or cannot believe isn't important, the truth is that cannabis can have a devastating effect on the developing teenage mind. Even if you don't consider that enough to warrant criminalization, that does not justify insulting those of us who do.
By that measure, so is alcohol, or any number of other drugs that are sold over the counter. Yes it should be age restricted, but the point is that it is not any more dangerous than plenty of other substances that are legal. It's certainly less dangerous than cigarettes.
We regret the inconvenience. The move that was to replace the move that has been yanked, has been yanked. Those responsible for sacking the ones responsible for yanking the movie to replace the yanked movie wish you to know that they have been sacked.
SSL is not secure either. It is only allunsion.
And so are spell-checkers.
Just what are you allusioning to?
It is now cost effective for governments to micromanage EVERYONE'S life.
The cameras may be next-to-free, but the cost to review their video and type up laborious transcripts isn't...yet.
Yes, but if they have hundreds of hours of tape on everyone, then whenever a government official wants to compel you to do something, all they have to do is threaten to laboriously review your tapes.
Don't challenge this eminent domain taking, or else we'll review your tapes. Don't fight this speeding ticket, don't attend that protest, don't report that dirty cop, etc.
Government forcing medical procedures on anyone is really not something we want, especially since government won't take responsibility for the (admittedly unlikely) consequences of a bad result.
You mean take responsibility by compensating (the very few) people who are legitimately harmed by a vaccine reaction: National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
If you are a US citizen, I don't think you could get out of producing a document the court ordered you to supply by airmailing it to a confederate in another country. Similarly, if the data in question are related to Microsoft's US operations, then MS, being a corporation incorporated in the US, should be required to produce them.
Why would Sony have employee medical records? Not likely legal if in the USA.
It's not unheard of for employers to be self-insured, in which case the employer is itself a HIPAA covered entity. This might be true even if a third party like Blue Cross administers the plan.
fair enough, I should have been more specific. Anything with pseudoephrine has been behind the counter for years. I'm talking about a lot of stores now have a blanket policy on any cold medicine regardless of ingredients
but I stand my my point regardless if you can make meth with it. How about instead of regulating things that could potentially be used to make bad things, we simply go after people who actually DO bad things. Stop inconveniencing the majority because of a very VERY small minority
Many cough formulas contain dextromethorphan, a mild dissociative that can be abused recreationally. When they check IDs for over-the-counter stuff, they're probably trying to screen out robotripping teenagers, not people cooking meth.
+1
Actually naming the project here would help draw attention to it
It also might get them fired. It sounds like the author still works for the company. Posting negatively about your employer in a public forum is a good way to draw unwanted attention to yourself as well.
Can we please stop comparing Ebola to the flu?
For starters, Ebola apparently has a 70% mortality rate. Additionally, Ebola kills people who are otherwise perfectly healthy. The flu does not.
Some flus are absolutely more deadly for healthy people. Part of what made the 1918 flu pandemic so deadly was that it could induce a cytokine storm resulting in multiple organ failure. Since the release of cytokines is an inflammatory immune response, the better your immune system the worse off you are. Thus a young, fit person with a healthy immune system is more at risk than an infant with a undeveloped immune system, or an elderly person with a failing one.
In fact were there any modern plane crashes where "brace for impact" was given or could have been given? I can't think of any.
Not quite a crash, but the emergency landing on the Hudson is a likely candidate. No idea if the order was given or not.
"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."
