His food will be cheaper than Sally's food!
His food will be cheaper than Sally's food!
Welcome our new robotic food overlords!
I think most people prefer the accuracy of dealing with a well designed machine rather than try and translate your food order to Spanglish. "Welcome to Yack in the box"?!?!
How many here would wait in line for an ATM transaction rather than go to a live teller at your local bank?
On the other hand, the local auto mechanic probably has a dozen wrenches and a parts truck that comes around every other day that can bring a new one in for nearly zero overhead. So she might be willing to accept a higher failure rate.
Using male gendered pronouns for overwhelmingly male-dominated professions isn't sexism. If you threw a rock into a crowd, you'd hit more male teachers than female mechanics. It's okay to assume a mechanic is a "he" and a teacher is a "she".
Or, alternately, go whole hog. Instead of someone working in aerospace or other sensitive area, say a woman working in aerospace or other sensitive area.
Your last paragraph suggests that your pronoun gendering may have been intentional and part of a larger issue you wished to promote. If so, bravo! I award you one Internet point for being aggressively subtle.
This is one of those things that SXSW doesn't want to burn a lot of calories on trying to wrangle. SXSW is still mostly focussed on music and movies. Nerds fighting over video game politics are not in the wheelhouse.
Put another way, you go to SXSW to have a great time. You do not go there because you want to fight over ideology. Nobody from the alt-rock music scene is making angry Tweets because the alt-country guys have a venue, nor vice versa. As far as SXSW is concerned, both factions are music fans who might find common ground, but otherwise are not interested in open warfare.
Activists on games, they're not so chill. (They'll become chill, after gaming has passed through the "Fonzie Barrier," where rebellion and fear mellow and become folksy humor.)
TL;DR: SXSW isn't interested in burning resources on your gay slapfight over who's right on the Internet.
The funny (tragic) part is that the kind of people who tend to be strongly pro-gun, also tend to be strong against social programs that could prevent a great deal of the violence typically associated with guns.
Ain't that the truth...
It's not really the truth. If you doubt it, go to the neighborhoods in your city most thoroughly covered by "social programs."
I wouldn't go there unarmed, but that's up to you.
All of those violent neighborhoods would benefit from more of the law-abiding residents being armed to the teeth. The old saying goes "an armed society is a polite society," as nothing deters assholery so much as the sudden onset of room temperature-ness.
No need to go anywhere!
It's very likely google knows how much it really costs to get videos and music streamed to consumers and has made a streaming rights offer that lets them stay in business rather than launch and then crash ALA MP3.com.
I use the google music streaming service at $8 a month, but would easily pay $16 if it encompassed all artists (glaring holes like Led Zepplin and the Beatles leave it incomplete) yet I discover new stuff all the time using the "I'm Feeling Lucky" feature.
If you don't have the URL but you have the name of the site and what the page is about " an article on CNN about blah blah" , how would you find it? SEARCH! And perhaps you'd encounter a useful advertisement for blah blah on your way to CNN.
Nice move. No more links, only Google.
you start rusting.
It realy goes back to the strategy of vendor lock in, Microsoft just can't pull it off like they used to because open source is so readily available and more viable than it's ever been.
The Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt propogated by Microsoft spans generations, and also can't make as strong a case as it used to because people know that there are alrternatives available.
Not so much about having a monooly on the desktop or bundling a browser, so much as it was about trying to leverage that to alter standards and control the source such that other browsers can't render what was made for IE 6, other office suites can't quite display a
Nothing has changed, MS just can't sell their FUD like they used to, and there's enough good open source alternatives that trying to extend something to control it just makes users loose interest. What's really sad is they still try to use this strategy even though it will no longer work, and this is why windows phone can gain no traction.
Best thing to do is use opensource, and let MS continue their downward decline into insignificance.
I see about 19% on a US based tourism related site.
"Rockstar produces no products and practices no patents. Instead, Rockstar employs a staff of engineers in Ontario, Canada, who examine other companies’ successful products to find anything that Rockstar might use to demand and extract licenses to its patents under threat of litigation." this statement sums up nicely how patent trolls are a stain on our modern patent laws and actually hinder innovations rather than promote innovation as patents are supposed to do.
If you don't make a product using your patent, you really shouldn't have the right to tell others not to. To have an idea is one thing, but to actually bring it to market is something else entirely. To have an idea that could enhance the lives of everyone but do nothing but sit on it is counterproductive to the advancement of society as a whole. One good idea pompts many more good ideas, if all these patent trolls had actually been producing products instead we'd be much further ahead in terms of product innovations. Just in user interface design alone, there's stupid patents like "pinch zoom" for touch screens, How many other concepts never hit the market because of royalty fees or patent lawsuits?
It boils down to the basic idea that information wants to be free, anything else is an un-natural restriction on the life force of the universe!
I think the reason many websites haven't updated is that they're too invested in a platform to just scrap the design and start over. So much goes into first getting a system for a site setup, to start over or create a second system is no small ordeal.
Seperation of content and layout is good design but seldom exists in the real world.
One site that is a pet peeve of mine for this is androidheadlines.com. Click a news article link from facebok or G+ to go to a news site about mobile platform and you're presented with a desktop site that you need to zoom to read. I don't know where they'd put all the as though if they did re-format for mobile which leads me to the other reason - lack of advertising revenue on mobile sites... sure you can have ads, just not great big tower and banner ads. Then when Mobile sites try those full screen ads that pop up when you go from page to page or first hit a site they loose audience.
And Mobile is still NEW, no-one wants to build out a site and then find out that flash no longer exisits on mobile, things need to be around for some time before big companies will want to spend the money to support all the bells and whistles.
on a related note, where I work we're finally taking the mobile plunge, and sunbuggy.com wil soon look like sunbuggy.org (the
Once open source software is pervasive, where else are NSA back doors going to hide? The Hardware.
Happiness is a hard disk.