Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 219
since when is "easier to hold" prioritized over "easier to view" ?
Since you used it as a telephone, not a television.
since when is "easier to hold" prioritized over "easier to view" ?
Since you used it as a telephone, not a television.
TV Shows now include Twitter names and hashtags quite regularly as watermark bugs
I've stopped watching some TV programs because the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) has started displaying hashtags during the programs. The ABC is supposed to be non-commercial, and I refuse to watch anything that includes these advertisements. (For what it's worth, I also wrote to them and told them I was switching off. Now if only a few million other people would do likewise...)
Only in theory. In practice, they'll reverse your edits if you're anonymous.
"They" will revert vandalism and other inappropriate edits regardless of whether you are logged in or not. Likewise "they" often keep good edits from editors who are not logged in. Feel free to provide links here to reasonable edits (as diffs) that were reverted just because you were "anonymous", and I'll probably be able to tell you exactly why they were reverted. (Disclosure: I am a frequent editor of Wikipedia - registered with a different name there to what I use here.)
Slashdot is practically the only place left on the web where you can do anything (such as posting a comment) without an account.
Wikipedia allows editing of most articles without requiring an account.
.... A share of stock is ownership in a company, making a bet that the value of the company will increase - over the long term - faster than inflation will.
Remember the good old days when a share of stock was ownership in a company, making a bet that the company would make a profit and pay a dividend
I'll presume that you're a troll but you drag out the age old "If you've got nothing to hide... argument" Here are a couple of issues with this argument. 1. Retroactive violation of new laws: Let's imagine that you're a smoker and that you smoke in your house. The government could pass a law saying "Smoking is not allowed inside any building. Anyone caught must pay a $500 fine." They can now either go back and look at their surveillance data and retroactively charge you for smoking in your house in the past
The problem there is not the surveillance, it's the retroactive law. It's fundamentally wrong that I can do something legal today, and then tomorrow the law might change retroactively so that I can be prosecuted for doing something that was legal at the time that I did it. It's irrelevant whether the evidence is from surveillance (covert or otherwise) or from witnesses who saw me (in public or in private), or by my own admission. If I can't travel back in time to change my behaviour, nobody should be able to change the legality of my past behaviour.
The proper format is YYYY-MM-DD, not YYYY/MM/DD.
By "proper", of course, you mean international standard ISO 8601.
Where are you getting 16 years from? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly_1880-2010_(Fig.A).gif The trend in temperature is clearly 'up' and has been for many years.
Obviously that's due to the decreasing number of pirates.
not if you need singed paper work
Good point. No matter how much heat you apply, you can't get a good char on a softcopy.
I can get plenty of chars on my softcopies.
Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!
.gif){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}