One of the reasons why big business loves Windows and isn't that interested in Linux other than maybe Red Hat is because if things go horribly wrong, there's somebody with deep pockets to sue.
Yup, that's why the London Stock Exchange sued MS after the entire fscking exchange went down in flames, right?
Oh, wait - no they didn't. They licked their wounds and switched to Linux.
Methinks your premise is flawed.
So a company with no history in the industry is annoyed because IMDB won't list their pre-production film.
No.
A company with a long history in the industry is annoyed because IMDB won't list their pre-production film.
How is their problem different from any other production company without a history of releases behind them?
It's different because they *do* have a history of releases behind them.
Your problem is that you're parroting the IMDB's response, and ignoring reality.
I am a lucky person.
Or maybe you're just really good at what you do, and other people recognize it.
Linkedin are just a bunch of spammers anyway.
I got an email from them, claiming that someone I knew wanted me to join. It was a spammer - the "custom message" that was included was a single link to a spam site in China.
The email had a "if this is spam..." report button, so I used it, and noted to linkedin that I didn't know the person, and it was *obviously* spam (the link was to a spam site.) Their automated system thanked me for reporting the abuse, and I thought that was the end of it.
Two weeks later, I receive a "helpful reminder" from Linkedin, telling me that I hadn't confirmed or rejected the invitation. Not only had they not taken any action, they helpfully included the spam link, and seemed blissfully unaware that I had reported this spammer's account two weeks prior.
Linkedin are just a bunch of scummy spammers. I blocked all email from their domain since.
When you're aware of a trademark issue you have to defend it or you loose it.
OK, everybody start submitting DMCA reports. They'll be out of subscribers in no time flat.
Wonder how many false accusations will result from this operation.
LOTS. Considering how trivial it is to forge an IP address on a peer to peer network, and how simple it is to find which IP addresses are french, they are one 4chan meme away from the whole country going dark.
If someone has the IP addresses of the French parliament members, that would be a good place to start, IMHO.
This has happened before - they have a problem with their DNS servers, and the entire site becomes unreachable.
I gotta wonder who in their right mind sets the TTL of 25 seconds on a major site? What a great way to overload your DNS servers and make your site unreachable when they go down!
I believe this particular one will be called the "hefnersaurus"
That reminds me of when they started rolling out those club cards around here. The assertion was that they'd save you money if you allowed them to track your purchases. As it turned out virtually overnight the price on pretty much everything jumped drastically in price, leaving the club price suspiciously similar to the previous normal price.
It's pretty simple:
It costs money to maintain the "club". That money has to come from somewhere. At the beginning of the "club" it's paid for by non-members (sale items only apply to members.) As time passes, everybody who shops regularly becomes a member, which means that 99% of their customers get the "sale" price, which means that there's not enough non-members to cover the costs of the data collection.
The end result? Prices rise for everybody.
Where I live, there is one local grocer who doesn't have such a program. Their prices are less than all the stores which have the programs (usually, a "club card" sale price at another store is the same as the local grocer's regular price.)
They regularly get asked "when are you going to have a club card?"
People are such fucking morons.
It doesn't have any impact on the case, but it does have an impact on the readers.
Think about it - this is a site filled with pasty white guys who live in their parents basement. You mention one of the parties is a cheerleader, we're all gonna click the link to see if there's a picture.
We still won't read the article, but we'll go looking for the pic, and so the submitter will get a few more ad impressions.
The first thing I focused on was the ingredient that was most pervasive--corn syrup.
That's extremely unlikely. The most pervasive ingredient is high fructose corn syrup, not corn syrup (they are *extremely* different things.) Corn syrup (which is nearly impossible to find - even in bottles labeled "Corn Syrup") is 100% glucose, whereas HFCS is a solution of fructose and glucose (at least 42% fructose, usually 55%, but sometimes as much as 95% fructose.)
I now avoid it like the plague. Within a month of removing it from my diet (as much as possible, the shit is in everything), the heartburn stopped entirely.
You should check to see if it's a sensitivity to corn, or if it's the fructose. To test: go to a brewer's supply and buy a bottle of glucose (this is 100% corn syrup.) From a health food store, buy a jar of brown rice syrup (70% maltodextrin, 30% glucose). Try each one for a few days and see the result. If both cause heartburn, it's a sensitivity to glucose. If the corn syrup does but the rice syrup doesn't, it's a sensitivity to corn. If neither one does, it's probably a sensitivity to high fructose corn syrup.
The only logical conclusion I can come to, considering the stuff (corn syrup) has been in HEAVY use for decades now, is that the medical "industry" knows, but cannot monetize the solution--removing corn syrup from ones diet. Telling people to stop eating it would actually cut into their business. Corn syrup makes them money in the form of direct medical symptoms that need to be treated and the inherent medical problems associated with obesity. LOTS of money.
If this was true, how is it that the medical industry says to cut out saturated fat and sodium for other ailments?
The actual reason is much simpler: the research on high fructose corn syrup is just beginning, and there is a *lot* of effort from the corn industry to block or obscure it. For some interesting viewing (it's quite long, and relatively heavy on the biochem) you should watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
fewer people would go into the music business if they had no way of providing for their loved ones if they died an untimely death.
Yup, just like fewer people would go into the janitorial business if they had no way of providing for their loved ones if they died an untimely death.
Or fewer people would go into the plumbing business if they had no way of providing for their loved ones if they died an untimely death.
Or fewer people would go into the lawyer business if they had no way of providing for their loved ones if they died an untimely death.
So - if people won't go into "X" business unless they can guarantee they'll get paid for years after they're dead, how does anything get done?
Is this control of them being able to speak to the media, or control of what they say once they can speak ?
Both. Before being allowed to speak, the scientists must submit the reporter's questions, along with their supplied answers. The Harper government vets both before giving permission.
No, it doesn't have interchangeable lenses, but with its built in zoom range there is not really that much need.
Unless you want decent image quality, the ability to take a wide-angle shot, use shallow depth of field, take macro shots, or the many other things that interchangeable lenses offer.
Hint: there is *MUCH* more to a lens than its longest focal length.
Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel
