Contact the Department of Redundancy Department.
On the 8 track of the Allman Brothers Idewild South, they padded the last "program" so there wasn't so much empty space by repeating the section of "In Memory of Elizabeth Reed" from the drum break until the end.
The 6PT0SS37 (model ST3160023AS) was purchased in December. Granted, I can't be sure when the older drive was purchased, but I do remember buying it for the 5 year warranty. I am quite troubled that my brand new drive will appear to be out of warranty in just over a year. Seagate's solution requires that I open my system and attach a receipt to every drive I have installed, including the 30+ drives in several RAID arrays. I hope that the receipt doesn't get sucked into a cooling fan.With regards to your query, we would like to inform you that all internal drives that are shipped out of Seagate on or after 01 JUNE 2004 will be covered under 5 year warranty and as you have mentioned that you have purchased the drive with the serial number 3KA14P5V in 2003, the drive is not covered under 5 year warranty and for the unit with the serial number 6PT0SS37, Seagate will definitely honor 5 year warranty, please preserve the proof of purchase and provide the same when you require warranty replacement.
We apologize for the inconvenience caused.
So you might be asking why this isn't bigger news. Well, Google has since fixed this problem and turned this issue into a non-issue. One must wonder whether this form of bug discovery is more sensible or 'correct' than the constant Microsoft bugs published online. Perhaps if Google continues to handle low key notices seriously, they'll never find themselves in the same position as Microsoft?"How did an anti-phishing plugin wind up exposing user names and passwords to the general public? Google's software used a public blacklist, available from Google's servers, which listed sites that were fraudulently pretending to be banking or other financial institutions. Unfortunately, some of these sites embedded usernames and passwords directly into the URL — obviously phishing sites didn't have concerns about security — and were thus viewable by anyone.
Per Kaarup, a good friend of mine who has been running a Danish WordPress blog about his two dogs received an letter from Krak.dk stating that they were going to charge him 5625 DKK (about 940 USD) because he linked to their site.
Per, for the last two years, has had a link in the footer of his web page, and on his contact page, to a page on Krak.dk which displayed his home. This page has a small copyright notice on the map section of the page itself stating in Danish that it is copyright and you can’t use it.
Per was not using the map, he was directly linking to the page on which it is displayed, and the page itself is much more than just the map.
When it is not necessary to make a decision, it is necessary not to make a decision.