It's just a joke.
Funny.. I've had a sore neck and within 15 minutes I'd been seen by a doctor and was being wheeled in for a CT scan. Maybe call an ambulance next time you're in Australia and have a medical emergency?
On my debit card I get the regular VISA protection which I've had to call on a couple of times to get fraudulent charges removed. My partner has had the bank call her to ask if her debit card was really being used in Manilla. Generally I guess the protection you get varies between banks and providers, but I've been happy with the service I've received. One of the limitations of a debit card is that you can't perform "I got the service I paid for but decided I didn't like it so want my money back" charge-backs.
Rewards, now there's the first real reason I've heard that it can be useful to have a credit card.
The opposite tends to be true.
If you have money to pay off the CC, then the credit card is unnecessary and stupid. Why would you need to maintain a line of credit just to pay it off with cash you already have? This is where a debit card's perfect. It's a credit card you can use everywhere and costs you less to run. While most online vendors may charge you a credit card fee even for using a debit card, almost no retailer ever will. To them, it's just an EFTPOS card. You gain the convenience of a credit card with the general fee-freeness of an EFTPOS card.
Where the evil comes in is that the whole premise of the credit card is the financial institutions hope that you *can't* pay it off by its due date, at which stage they get to start charging you interest.
If you have the cash to pay off a credit card, then I can't see any good reason to have a credit card instead of a debit card. To pay more fees? How's that a bonus for you?
Right, but it's only just gained keyboard support, so up until now it was a fairly boring text-demo.
> perhaps short of every participating computer having a quantum component that stops working as soon as you observe it.
Shh.. don't give them any ideas.
Nonsense.. not only does it never mention 9 or 5, it splits the day into 6 even segments of 4 hours. If what you mean is "it *presumes everybody works consistent hours", that's not necessarily true either. Who says when you're working is when your "peak" productivity occurs? Note - it doesn't ask which time period you're most productive over, just at which point productivity peaks. If you can't work out an average for this, then just go with one of the joke options.
They don't even need to do that - in most devices the CMOS is a square and it's simply software which dictates whether the output is portrait or landscape. You could simply force it to capture widescreen even when held in portrait mode. Probably the reason they don't do this is it would confuse the folks who.. don't understand this stuff. "I'm holding it vertically, why isn't it recording vertically?" Actually - it's really just usability, but perhaps there should be an option on most of these devices "Always capture widescreen video".
Now.. some devices do have slightly wider than tall CMOS sensors, such as the iPhone 5s slightly landscape sensor, but a minor down-sampling of video resolution (since, if it's in portrait mode, the sensor is portrait so not quite as wide) would have little effect - especially on the majority of camera phones which don't record 1080p in the first place, so a "full-width" 720p widescreen video could be captured in portrait mode anyhow.
Open source programs have their code exposed to everyone, including those with malicious intent, and are therefor "battle hardened" for security.
While this would the expected situation, the evidence demonstrates that it isn't.
You can search this on your own. The general consensus is that the "many eyes" theory is flawed, and outside a few exceptions where a particular product has been security hardened beyond usual standards, most experts agree open source software in general tends to be no more or less secure than proprietary software. On the flip-side however, it is true that when the source code for a closed-source product does get compromised, we do generally get a new flood of exploits.
Apologies for typos - done in a hurry while juggling phone calls.
"While its nonsense that one form of English should be considered correct"
"that the majority of English speakers"
As opposed to? All widely spoken languages are derived, and this isn't in dispute. It's not really necessary to prove something that nobody's arguing with. Nobody thinks "The Queen's English" originated with the Queen. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find someone you needed to "prove" your case to. And I think it's because you're looking at the wrong pretentious argument.
Rather, the claim is that only certain forms of "English" should be considered English and that certain sub-cultural groups use of the language is a travesty, etc, blah blah. While it's nonsense that no one form of English should be considered correct, as it is constantly evolving as most languages are, it's also true that once a language derives sufficiently that the majority of speakers English speakers can no longer decipher it, it should clearly no longer be considered "English".
Sure - if the majority of the speakers moved the language that way, fine - that's just the evolution of language. But if a particular cultural sub-group moves their use of the language beyond the point of recognition, nobody should have any hesitation to point out that they can't speak English - because they're not doing so.
While that's true, the stats would likely show something in the region of 95% of XBMC users never installing any plugins or make any display changes, just using it as a DLNA streamer.
Well, "stolen" is a bit harsh, considering SOLEIL themselves simply appropriated it and have no ownership to the public domain work produced by NASA.
To be fair, you could Google a lot of other "Blue Glowing Sphere" images and get closer matches.
Talking about the likelihood of a manned mission to Europa, in a story about a manned mission to Europa, replying to a post about whether we should send people to Europa, is on topic, whether I decide it is or not. The irony of your statement, while you're changing topics, is delicious.
You clearly have nothing productive to add to the discussion if you don't want to talk about the the possibility of a manned mission to Europa. You're speculating down an endless path of "what-ifs" and examples that have nothing to do with the mission in question. Don't bother replying - won't be reading. The chances of you contributing anything useful are.. about the same as the chances of humans being sent on a one-way scientific mission to Europa. Not going to happen.
No, I don't believe they're going to send old or terminally ill people to Europa either. Nor to establish a permanent colony there, although if they were going to, that would fall within "continued survivability". You're getting further and further off-topic. I've never spoken about the likelihood of putting manned bases on Mars, or unrecoverable colonization trips to deep space, or whatever else you can conjure up. You're arguing for the sake of it - bringing up the fact that people die eventually as a counterpoint to a suicide mission being unlikely?
My original post was only ever pointing out that they will not send people on a one-way scientific mission to Europa. It's not going to happen. If you want to argue, structure your argument around that statement, not around other unrelated concepts you've imagined. You're saying "why send people?" - I'm saying "They're not going to send people - at least not one way, which means, not likely at all." You should be taking comfort in that fact, not trying to make up abstract arguments which have nothing to do with any of my posts on the subject.