Please show me where the site committed an actual crime. I can't seem to find that anywhere.
Yes, the author brought up Whack-a-mole and used the term correctly and in-context. You however, did not. Even after I pointed this out to you, you STILL do not seem to understand the context involved.
Maybe you should go back to Sparkle Lanes and see if its your turn to roll your rock down the lane. I am not sure you are ready for another reading comprehension lesson.
A good compromise might be to allow me to say that all mail is encrypted with my local key when I tell it to "archive" message.
This would cause issues with searching as some have mentioned, but as part of the compromise you might store a local cache of your archived messages for searching. Google USED to do desktop search as I remember.
What I mean is that, while this would be disallowed on Microsoft's own store, they are not locking down a PC running windows 8. So you should be able to install Steam and get it that way, or install it directly from dvd media right?
I know that they want to lock down the tablet RT platform, but isn't this a non-issue for the rest of the machines?
And if they are telling you things that are not true? Or are slanting a candidates political position on something? Without the chance for a dissenting opinion and in news, it becomes much like a "company town" mentality.
On a typical day...
57% of Americans watch TV news
54% watch their local news
34% watch cable news channels
28% watch the nightly network news
23% watch the morning news programs (The Today Show, Good Morning America, etc.)
40% of Americans read a newspaper
36% of Americans listen to news on the radio
23 % of Americans get news online
18% visit news aggregators (Google News, Yahoo! News, AOL News, etc.)
14% visit national TV networks' sites (CNN.com, MSNBC.com, ABCnews.com, etc.)
14% visit newspaper Web sites
4% visit news blogs
3% visit online news magazines (Slate.com, Salon.com, etc.)
I admit that these stats are a little old (2006), but it bears repeating: We (online news readers) are NOT the majority.
The reason it seems like a problem to me:
If one company owns all the local (and possible a majority of national) news outlets (tv, radio, newspaper, etc) they get to decide what gets covered. Nothing that makes THEM look bad of course. Nothing that goes against their owners views. No political ads for the guy they don't like that might be running for senate. If they OWN all the local media, that seems like an AWFUL lot of undue influence.
Do we really want fox news to own ALL the local news outlets for example?
I think we should step back and realize that the number of people who get their news online is tiny compared to the number who get news via major media. This is a VERY real problem.
Re: Re: Re: anon coward
Please show me where the site committed an actual crime. I can't seem to find that anywhere.
Yes, the author brought up Whack-a-mole and used the term correctly and in-context. You however, did not. Even after I pointed this out to you, you STILL do not seem to understand the context involved.
Maybe you should go back to Sparkle Lanes and see if its your turn to roll your rock down the lane. I am not sure you are ready for another reading comprehension lesson.
Re: anon coward
First, there is no crime involved here.
Second, the Whack-a-mole references the stupid attempt to censor them via a single dns action.
It's interesting that you seem to equate all those actual crimes with a site that commits no crime at all.
Obvious shill is obvious.
Perjury charges?
If they are claiming “irreparable damages”, I think someone should file perjury charges since these “irreparable damages” seem to be nowhere in sight.
“irreparable damages” must be very loosely defined?
(untitled comment)
I would also make the point that the game is less than 1.5 years old.
This is obviously not a "years old" game, and in MMO terms, it is still fairly young.
One of the faces looked like this
https://github.com/dmnd/illusion
I can't see how the hell that could be considered copyrightable.
Book links broken?
Why do all the links next to the books refer to themselves?
Is that a whoops maybe?
A good compromise might be
A good compromise might be to allow me to say that all mail is encrypted with my local key when I tell it to "archive" message.
This would cause issues with searching as some have mentioned, but as part of the compromise you might store a local cache of your archived messages for searching. Google USED to do desktop search as I remember.
This might be a good solution.
Re: Re: Re: Brat kid
Agreed, in this case they are ALL different. Even if only in small ways, it seems obvious that they were re-drawn.
I don't see ANY that are exact copies.
Re: Pince and the nebbadution
Congrats on inventing a new word! lol
I was wondering what nebbadution meant so i had to look it up.
Turns out, you are the ONLY one on the web to ever use that phrase: nebbadution
As i understand it this is all OPTIONAL
What I mean is that, while this would be disallowed on Microsoft's own store, they are not locking down a PC running windows 8. So you should be able to install Steam and get it that way, or install it directly from dvd media right?
I know that they want to lock down the tablet RT platform, but isn't this a non-issue for the rest of the machines?
Damn Terrorists!
Ice cream terrorists I tells ya!
Re: Kismet
Exactly!
It is really a moot point anyway. They were collecting UNENCRYPTED data that anyone can STILL collect.
This has been blown WAY out of proportion!
Re:
And if they are telling you things that are not true? Or are slanting a candidates political position on something? Without the chance for a dissenting opinion and in news, it becomes much like a "company town" mentality.
Does that make sense?
Re: Re: Re: Re: I could not dis-agree more
Exactly my thought
Re: Re: I could not dis-agree more
From a Frontline piece on media:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newswar/part3/stats.html
On a typical day...
57% of Americans watch TV news
54% watch their local news
34% watch cable news channels
28% watch the nightly network news
23% watch the morning news programs (The Today Show, Good Morning America, etc.)
40% of Americans read a newspaper
36% of Americans listen to news on the radio
23 % of Americans get news online
18% visit news aggregators (Google News, Yahoo! News, AOL News, etc.)
14% visit national TV networks' sites (CNN.com, MSNBC.com, ABCnews.com, etc.)
14% visit newspaper Web sites
4% visit news blogs
3% visit online news magazines (Slate.com, Salon.com, etc.)
I admit that these stats are a little old (2006), but it bears repeating: We (online news readers) are NOT the majority.
The reason it seems like a problem to me:
If one company owns all the local (and possible a majority of national) news outlets (tv, radio, newspaper, etc) they get to decide what gets covered. Nothing that makes THEM look bad of course. Nothing that goes against their owners views. No political ads for the guy they don't like that might be running for senate. If they OWN all the local media, that seems like an AWFUL lot of undue influence.
Do we really want fox news to own ALL the local news outlets for example?
Am I really missing something here?
Does this not seem like a bad thing?
I could not dis-agree more
I think we should step back and realize that the number of people who get their news online is tiny compared to the number who get news via major media. This is a VERY real problem.
Re: Overvalued (as beernutz)
I find it funny that some of the "award" badges don't load properly (are corrupted?), and those that DO look like they are from 1992 as well!
Re: (sigh) (as beernutz)
What?
What the hell does "leftist" have to do with this?
How about Clipmarks? (as beernutz)
They use clips.
http://www.clipmarks.com
At least in this case it is actually something useful!