Comment Re:oblig (Score 1) 766
Also, it's only Microsoft that will stop supporting it. I still get support (insofar as it's possible) through the warranty/service plan I got from my hardware vendor.
- RG>
Also, it's only Microsoft that will stop supporting it. I still get support (insofar as it's possible) through the warranty/service plan I got from my hardware vendor.
- RG>
This is NOTHING but revenue generation.
Did it stop you from speeding?
- RG>
The government intentionally posts low speed limits so everyone is guilty.
Actually, it's the other way around. They build streets with a "design speed" 20 km/h (or whatever the equivalent is in miles) higher than the intended speed limit, ostensibly as a safety measure. This means wider lanes, shallower curves, more level roads, etc.
The end result is that people go a lot faster because they feel safer.
Unfortunately, in North America it's almost like they have to do this because the idiots on this continent don't realize that you *have* to go the speed limit (or faster) *all the time*. If there is poor visibility, or the roads are wet or icy, you should slow down.
BTW, the kids in that video could have insulated themselves from the angry drivers with a second row of cars behind the first one.
- RG>
The government intentionally posts low speed limits so everyone is guilty.
Actually, it's the other way around. They build streets with a "design speed" 20 km/h (or whatever the equivalent is in miles) higher than the intended speed limit, ostensibly as a safety measure. This means wider lanes, shallower curves, more level roads, etc.
The end result is that people go a lot faster because they feel safer.
Unfortunately, in North America it's almost like they have to do this because the idiots on this continent don't realize that you *have* to go the speed limit (or faster) *all the time*. If there is poor visibility, or the roads are wet or icy, you should slow down.
- RG>
It had Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. Remove any of those characters and you don't have a show anymore.
And Welshie! He was my favourite!
- RG>
Yes, but the quote cites recent prosecutions as a reason why the botnets have not reduced output entirely.
- RG>
Actually, Cartoon Wars would be a more germane example.
(I'm no longer watching South Park because the Comedy Network apparently lost its licensing rights to have the current and back episodes online in Canada, so I no longer have a legal way of watching them--and more importantly, linking to them. If I ever feel like watching South Park again, I'll have to find some illegal way to access them)
- RG>
Joke's on them; all the petrol in 2050 will be used by flying cars. I bet they forgot to ban those!
- RG>
I'm sure if that table were referenced in the poll question, the answers would be a lot more realistic (i.e. nobody choosing the first few options). I just assumed it was a nonsense question so I answered randomly. Only after selecting the option did I get to the comments where the reference was explained.
- RG>
The question isn't "How much radiation do you get in a day", the question is "How much radiation do you estimate you get in a day".
Oh, so if it was the first question, as soon as you clicked "submit" it would automatically correct it, because the poll (or your computer) somehow knows how much you actually get in a day?
- RG>
FTA (emphasis added):
Shortly after the news of the Rustock botnet takedown broke, Adam Wosotowsky, principal engineer at McAfee Labs told SecurityWeek: âoeWe have seen a decrease in Rustock levels, however it by no means has disappeared. This could be due to the botnet still running on old commands, or that lawsuits against botnet owners and associated hosting are proving successful. We are also expect the reseeding of botnets, such as McColo, as botnet operators rebuild their networks."
How do successful lawsuits against the botnet owners prevent the spam from disappearing?
- RG>
It never goes to the intended need anyways. If it is not lining someone's pocket it gets slapped with administrative costs, etc.
Yes, heaven forbid there might be administrative overhead to coordinating with foreign governments to send volunteers with supplies to disaster areas.
And you're right, it never goes to the intended need. Ever. All those rescuers, firefighters, people distributing goods to and providing temporary shelters in disaster-stricken areas, they're all sent by profit-hungry corporations.
The people you see on the news giving out aid or searching for survivors are all just paid actors to make you want to give them money.
(You'd better hope you're never in a situation where you need support from charities to recover from a natural/manmade/accidental/political/medical disaster.)
- RG>
The Ars article suggests that the domain would be restricted to adult websites. (How they can enforce this once it's been registered, I don't know)
- RG>
They already reported the earthquake; for it to still be at the top would require it to be posted multiple times.
Maybe the Japanese
- RG>
I bet the folks who hastily switched to nuclear-powered cars after the BP spill are kicking themselves now.
- RG>
Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"
