I just got back from Canada, and as soon as I landed at Toronto Pearson I got a text message: Welcome to Canada, roaming charges are $1/minute for calls and $15.36/MB for data (along with a link for 'International Data Plans' which run $30/120MB, $60/300MB or $120/800MB). Needless to say, I turned data roaming off.
It's nice to be able to design one app and compile it against many target platforms.
Didn't Java once promise 'write once, compile many', too? Look how that ended up.
Back to the 90s indeed.
According to the Small Army Survey in 2007, the Icelandic ownership rate was about 30 guns per 100 people. The United States was 89 guns per 100 people. Big difference.
- The Small Arms Survey, 2007 and the Annex showing the summary by country.
- Wikipedia page summarizing the report's statistics by nation
And that definition's authority derives from Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 where Congress can "make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces". The Founders didn't have to make that defintion; Congress gets to decide what the militia is, and can change it. That it was set to that definition in 10 USC 311 is not accidental, it was what Congress intended.
Safari is used as the default on the 18 kajillion iPhones and iPads out there.
Amazon only pulled it temporarily. It's back now, with a note:
Important Note on "SimCity"
Some customers may experience delays when connecting to SimCity servers. EA is actively working to resolve these issues. Please visit https://help.ea.com/en/simcity/simcity for more information. For your trouble, every SimCity player who has logged in and activated their game will receive a free PC download game from the EA portfolio, provided by EA. This offer extends to all digital download and physical disc SimCity customers. On March 18, SimCity players who have activated their game will receive an email from EA telling them how to redeem their free game.
Clearly, the increased CO2 in the atmosphere is helping close the ozone hole! Suck it, Al Gore!
(That's how it works, right?)
The summary is misleading. Ebert is talking about why box office revenues are dropping in TFA, not the movie industry as a whole.
Greenpeace is complaining that the Internet:
a) Allows people to research far more information than the limited amount they prefer to give to people, thus letting people be swayed by other, more -- or less! -- rational environmental groups;
b) Emits more hot air than they do.
But seriously folks: this claim that the IT industry uses "dirty energy" can be leveled at any industry in the modern world. That is to say, an industry that uses electricity. They take any industry in the US (which they do in the article) and then say, 'It uses enough energy to power country (x)!' (In the article's case, the UK.) For example:
"The health industry doesn't do enough to reduce its reliance on 'dirty energy'. If you took the entire US's health industry and pharmaceutical firms' energy use, it could power Spain!'
'The media industry doesn't do enough to reduce it's reliance on 'dirty energy'. If you took the entire US's newspapers, magazines, and television news' energy use, it could power South Korea!'
'The government industry doesn't do enough to reduce its reliance on 'dirty energy'. If you took the energy use by all levels of government in the US, it could power Italy!'
Repeat ad nauseum.
The real question is, 'Why does the industry matter?' The energy used by ALL industries in the nation will aggregate to... guess what, the types of energy the country has! The solution is move the whole country to use cleaner energy, which would necessarily mean that all industries in that country would be 'cleaner' in their energy use.
This is Greenpeace using the Apple Strawman scheme all over again.
As a Bay Area resident who's seen Newsom's "management" of San Francisco, I don't know that I'd be so quick to follow Newsom's lead. Not to mention that he has a history of making big annoucements... and failing to follow through.
This isn't even a policy agenda that can be argued from a moral or social perspective -- it's based on erroneous beliefs with no scientific backing whatsoever. Not to mention that there are already agencies who test every damn cell phone when it comes out. Sounds to me like there's already legislation (albeit at the federal level) to handle this should cell phones prove to be brain cookers.
I got 93/100 on Firefox 3.5.5
Apple could also use it as a tool to keep 3rd party software from advertising on their OS, too. So even if Apple didn't mean to use it themselves within OS X, they could use it to prevent others from doing so with other software on OS X.
It's the 'I'm taking it so nobody else can have it, either" principle.
A lot of shows will be free for the first episode on iTunes, a sort of 'loss-leader' to suck people into buying the whole season if they think it looks interesting. It's usually temporary (the first couple of weeks of the season) before it becomes a pay episode again.
Yet another reason not to use the thing.
I don't get it. Don't use twitter because you might be served injunctions? How about 'don't be an asshat' so you don't get served injunctions? There's nothing inherent about Twitter that makes one of its users more likely to get roped into legal entanglements. That's entirely the actions of the user.
I think a 'Windows party' more along the lines of the Boston Tea Party would be the slashdot thing.