Of course he would. Their missiles and ours have self destructs that can be used mid-flight. Once russia sees the incoming mess, they know they must self-destruct theirs, and we supposedly will do the same.
Of course, if the missiles do hit us, well, then we have no way of self-destructing ours.
"Steam Play" doesn't mean that you should in theory be able to play the game on any machine you can install steam on. It means that you get a license to play the game on any OS they have a version for. Many games have a version of windows and mac, which would be available for steam play, even if there isn't a version for linux.
Also, steam runs on iOS, and can't install any games at all.
He is elected, just not directly by the public at large.
The judges simple pointed out that under current law taking these pictures is legal.
No, the judge pointed out that the law the guy was charged with did not apply in this case. Big difference. There may be one or more laws that he broke, but the one he was actually charged with was wrong.
Resorting to name calling because your argument is weak, is pretty typical. Apple has a procedure in place for this situation, it's codified in a giant set of books entitled "LAW". Follow them, and it works.
Pretty much what the family has already provided.
Try walking into a car dealership, demanding the keys to the car on the showroom floor, because you have a legal document that says your grandma died, and she left you her car and see how far that gets you.
More like.. Here at google, you don't need a court order to get access to accounts you don't own, we give that information away to anyone!
Want to do something and are qualified to do something are two different things.
The fact that you don't understand that logic and UI can be separated and modularized, or be responsive to different environments, leads me to believe... Just yeah. Where have you been for the past 5 years?
Probably the smart ones that want todo away with archaic file extensions. Does Mac have them, or Linux? Or unix? Just how do they get by without seeing them?
I still think that Metro was the right choice, however, people are reluctant to change. The metro start screen isn't BAD, but using metro apps as default wasn't the right thing to do. It was too much too quickly. Metro start FIRST in Windows 8. Metro apps available in Windows 8, but don't make them the default for anything, maybe by windows 9 they could have changed the default to metro apps, after refinements.
They also need to take things further. Making it easy to design, develop, and distribute
Microsoft needs to go back to their roots. Get Microsoft stuff on EVERYTHING. Integrate EVERYTHING. Make their stuff the easiest to put stuff in, and get stuff out. Stop trying to "lock in" users, and make them WANT to stay. Make the stuff so much better than the alternatives that people want it. Don't tie office to windows. Office is an office suite. Make it run on everything -- windows, mac, linux, tablets and phones regardless of OS.
Just my $0.02
* I see no reason to let Comcast profit additionally unless I get something in return like extra bandwidth or a discount on my bill.
Like access to wifi when you are away from home?
* The neighbor isn't paying for any any service calls that get made should the equipment fail.
This doesn't change anything.
* The neighbor may be involved in illegal activities I want no part of given that law enforcement is going to come to me first if there is a problem.
Why would you suspect that? Perhaps you should buy the house next to you, so that the feds don't step on your lawn as they bust down his door.
* There is a non-zero probability that the neighbor's use of spectrum may interfere with my use of that spectrum and I'd rather not facilitate that.
Yes, the alternative is that comcast lease space from the electric company and set up their own wifi hotspots on every pole. That will be much better for your spectrum as it degrades your signal at all times instead. Sounds like a better plan.
* It offends me that Comcast could provide extra bandwidth to me for close to zero marginal cost but instead chooses to charge me for it.
Are you suggesting that bandwidth capacity is free? Naive.
* I don't really care to give people any reason to hang around closer to my home than necessary
Don't worry, I don't think anyone wants to be closer to you than they need to be.
* It's unclear if my bandwidth is protected and given priority access (my guess is that it is not)
You appear to guess wrong a lot.
* Comcast charges absurd rental rates for their equipment so I should get full access to the capabilities of the equipment if I'm renting
Then buy your own.
I had a similar problem with comcast for about a year, and would call them on it. Eventually, one tech did something, and moved me to a different node in the neighborhood. It was awesome because he also messed up the config for it, and while people were typically getting 6 (or 10 with an upgrade) Mbps, I was getting 54Mbps... which I think was the full speed of the node at the time. They eventually caught it and fixed it about a year later when they were rolling out the newer speeds in the area though.
When the problem repeats a few times, they are eventually going to figure out that the user is breaking it.
Haven't dealt much with cable tech support much, have you? They couldn't figure out what is wrong with a line if you handed them a cable cut in half. They'd first ask you to try and reboot the computer to make sure it wasn't that.
Because it knows how it was connected. The same way when you hook up your computer, you won't get the xfinity login screen first, nor will you on your wifi, but a guest accessing it would.
The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine
