congratulations on your promotion to captain.
I have demoted my self to lifeboat operator so I'll be off...
3040 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
If that's how Lastpass works why are people saying it's down? Unless it's responding with garbage that prevents it from using the local copy. There should only be a handful of people who changed the password on one device and then tried to use it on another device.
"Why do you think it would not be able to join a domain?"
Because it's the cheap/home/basic version of windows so no joining a domain, and no global policy, it's been like that since XP. You need Pro or better to join a domain.
I expect they will let you upgrade to the pro version for a pile of cash, but that defeats the purpose.
It needs more study but it appears that cat videos may be an automatic response to excessive bullshit posted to the net. along with Gartner it appears that Fox News, and most CEO speeches to share holders are linked to the problem.
In order to return the proper cat video balance to the web we need to work to reduce the amount of bullshit posted every day.
"Early versions of Lurk spread through an HTML iFrame on compromised websites that relied on a Flash-based exploit (CVE-2013-5330) in order to infect the computers of passing surfers."
How do current versions install? The stenography stuff is just for updates and commands after it's already installed.
The local cable monopoly Rogers uses crappy* cisco routers that provide both a secure(ish) and a wide open guest network that requires you to open a browser and enter a password to get any place. Of course that makes your traffic open to sniffing too.
*The two people I know that have them have to reboot them a few times a week.
"what-about-a-selfie-the-answer-is-not-what-you-would-expect"
So, under this particular law, the ape owns the copyright.
Unless Slater paid the ape (in Bananas?) to commission the photos.
Can a monkey own something? If no is there something in the law that gives the camera owner second dibs over the general public. If yes who is the monkey's agent?
So if I take your photos, and transfer the images to a computer, select the best ones, crop them appropriately choosing suitable proportions to frame the image, did any post-work on the photo to make it look its best, and then submitted it online to the world itself. Then they are mine now?
Sorry don't think so.
I remember a chimp on a national geographic special that used a polaroid camera to take photos. The chimp picked the subject, aimed the camera, and took the photo, then waited for it to develop. No different then teaching a child to take a photo.
Not the same as an automatic wildlife camera at all.
So clearly the copyright belongs to the ape.
Unless the law states that copyright can only be held by humans. Or the ape is property and like a slave all the apes property is the owners property.
I don't see anyway the copyright can belong to the owner of the camera.
"Beyond that, abstract consideration, however, our economic interest does not have a practical or direct impact.”"
This request came from a hotmail address. Reject.
This request came from a lawyer... might cost us money. Approved
This request came from a lawyer for a guy we don't like. Approved, make sure the press find out.
This request came from some ass that thinks their important. Approved, massively overblock.
I disagree. As long as it's clear and predictable it's ok. At least if you have a choice. My cell provider gives me just what you call plain wrong.
I get 5 GB data, if I go over I might be throttled. But I will not have to pay extra.
The big three in Canada are still back in the days of small cap, stupid per MB charge if you go over.
What is plain wrong is saying they will throttle you based on unknown criteria so that they might as well say "if we feel like it".
There is no defence. It's just do you have picture? Yes, guilty. Of course if your important they can decide that it's not in the public interest to proceed with charges.
I expect they were told that if they didn't plead guilty they were going to jail.
I expect they were doing something the cops didn't like, maybe taking part in a protest, or worse taking photos of cops breaking up a protest. Now they have nice two year conditional discharge so they better not do anything else important people don't like for the next while. It would be interesting to know what the unrelated matters were.
I have an iPod touch 2nd gen that I use in my car as a music player. That was my last iDevice. The iPod touch Gen3 was released a couple months after I got it and it was not very long before app updates were not available.
On the other hand my 20 year old speakers (with wires!) still work fine.
Maybe Apple should just buy Sonos, it sounds like they fit well together.
We got them in Toronto some time ago. The real use is so they could charge us more then double during peak period of the day so we will do our wash at night or the weekend. But once people switched to save money they started increasing the off peak rates faster then the peak rates so it's now less then double.
If you save money they just raise the rates to make up the loss.
Google is not creating a profile of someone. They don't have special access to data like a credit agency.
They don't know if you pay your bills on time, or have a mortgage, or how much you owe on your car loan, they will not know you bounced a cheque unless it went to court and became a public record. A credit agency has very specific types of data from specific known sources. Google has millions of bits of random crap, that's why you need a search engine in the first place. Your comparing apples and rocks.
Only famous people will get anything like a profile because there is so much public info available on them, but you still will not know how much they owe on there credit cards.
If you google my name there is nothing that is actually me until page 17, and you would still have a hard time telling it was me if you didn't know me. On page 19 there is a story about a guy that streaked a football game, wrong city and a few years too young but might be bad if someone thought it was me... can I request that it be removed? How would google know it is/not me?
"Google should remove links that are old, out of date or irrelevant and - significantly - found not to be in the public interest."
What is old?
Do you want Google, Microsoft and friends to decide what is irrelevant or not in the public interest?
Is there some standard test for what is in the public interest?
However, the ruling continues to be a load of crap.
How is Google the polluter?
My dad used to pickup train cars loaded with new cars being shipped from Canada down to the US, cars going all the way to Florida or Texas still had sticker prices thousands less then the same car sold across the street from where it was assembled.
When the Canadian $ went down, book prices went up (even when printed in Canada), when the Canadian $ went back up, prices didn't drop at all, but they did stop printing both the US and Canadian price on the books.
They just charge as much as they think they can.