I've heard of having a heart attack over a misbehaving computer program, but up til now I thought it was just a metaphor.
But until someone has the balls to take the issue to court, the UW will carry on dribbling this BS and making a fast break with it. The fact that someone has blown the whistle on how the reporter has fouled out, has blocked their cause. That reporter should get a player of the game award from UW for assisting so much.
FTFY
I can only imagine that notice on slide #5 is where the presenter says, "Those evil, conniving terrorists! They lure people to crowd around their taco truck with televised sporting events and blow them up!"
Obviously this only applies to food trucks with large numbers of customers. Most food trucks don't have nearly the same level of popularity, so connecting shrapnel with fans could never have the same level of terroristic success.
And by Colonel Klink, I of course meant Sergeant Schultz. *facepalm*
Funny, my impression of GEMA sounds more like Colonel Klink:
"I know NOTHING!"
Ok, so what's the alternative? What is the best, open, free service for public communication and disseminating opinion and information?
Facebook and Twitter have had their issues blocking content. Blogs/websites? We've seen instances where blogs have been taken down by an over-anxious host faced with a legal threat (even resulting in large numbers of unrelated blogs that happen to reside on the same servers being taken down as collateral damage). Email? Targeted, rather than open and public; doesn't tend well to public discussion. Cell phones/text messaging? Not when governments can arbitrarily order service shut down.
Is there a service that is so open and free, and also so ubiquitous to be truly useful, that can *not* be subject to influence by some powerful party to censor or shut down?
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+
If the trespass is illegal, wouldn't that negate any evidence collected during that illegal act?
And if the evidence isn't thrown out, doesn't that imply the trespass wasn't illegal?
Seems it would've been easier just to get a drone to fly over the property. You can get those remote-controlled quadcopters for under $50 nowadays; slap a webcam on one and you're done.
The number of TechDirt posts we've seen about new tech legislation that reveals very little understanding about how tech works (e.g., SOPA/PIPA) shows that this is more widespread across industries.
It makes sense, though. How can you expect someone to effectively regulate an industry (business, tech, energy, farming, you name it) if they don't have any experience in that industry?
Ideally, they should rely on industry experts for advice. That does have its own issues (politicians listening to the "experts" that pay the most, or have their own interests/agenda at heart; not necessarily those with the most sound advice).
Windows 8 RT = tablet
Windows 8/Windows 8 Pro = desktop & laptop
These rules only apply to apps that are released through the app store, which are those that run on the tablets (Windows 8 RT) and the "metro" side of Windows 8 (Windows 8 and Windows 8 Pro).
However, Windows 8 (non-tablet) devices are not restricted to applications from the app store. You can buy, download, and install anything that you can on Windows 7 through all the same, traditional retail channels, and it runs exactly the same (in my completely non-scientific experience, even a little better). I even have Steam installed on my laptop running Windows 8.
Microsoft is not (yet) getting rid of the desktop and the freedom to install on it what you please.
Anytime someone responds to criticism with no more content than "it's all lies, ignore it!", it makes me want to pay more attention.
If you have a real argument, make some real points. If the critiques are invalid, explain why. I'm not going to stick my head in the sand and pretend there's no opposition.
You may want to take a look at DH's platform before you volunteer to be in his cabinet....
Is that REALLY what you want in a President?!!?!?
I remember a comment I heard on TV many years ago:
It used to be that you voted for the candidate you liked the most. Then it became voting for the candidate you disliked the least. Now, you vote against the candidate you hate the most.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CAabuy-x3wg
Makes pretty much the same point.
My nephew came to stay with us while he went to college. He had his own Xbox. If we had a game he wanted to borrow (or vice-versa), as long as it was on a disc, there was no problem. Not so much for any DLC or other digital downloads ("Xbox Live Arcade" titles). At best, he could log in to our console with his account to play things he'd purchased.
For that matter, when my Xbox stopped reading discs and I bought a replacement console, my kids could play every single one of the disc-based games on the new console without any issue. Since I could move the hard drive from the old to the new console, all their accounts and saved games came over without any problems. For all the digital downloads I've purchased, though, even though the exact same file was on the hard drive, I had to log on to the Xbox website, use the "license transfer tool" to transfer the console license to the new one, and then re-download every piece of content on the new console.**
Now, the times I have seen it work like it's supposed to, like when I've gone to a friend's house, downloaded content, played it, and left; and my friend doesn't automatically get the content for "free". And I suppose that's where the problem is -- how do you know when Console 2 is really in the same household as Console 1, and allow content on both systems?
**This "re-download" doesn't download the entire file, just updates the license already downloaded, so it only takes about a second. You still have to go through your download history to find the files and initiate the downloads one-by-one, though, which is the most annoying part.
Can they do at the same time, together, with the same license in different machines? No.
Non sequitur, Tim
You lost me when you used "relies on integrity" in an article describing a TV newscast.