I used two IP addresses in a datacenter. Both were blocked after a few hundred videos, but the block expired after a day or so. It is not as hard as you make it sound.
171 karma · joined August 6, 2011
I used two IP addresses in a datacenter. Both were blocked after a few hundred videos, but the block expired after a day or so. It is not as hard as you make it sound.
IQ tests might be illegal under some circumstances, but I would point out that they are not a reliable measure of intelligence anyways, making this all a bit of a moot point.
Software was distributed offline as well. It seems like a long time ago now, but there was no shortage of AOL installation discs at the time.
(In fact, I believe both Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator were distributed on floppy disks at one point, although that would have been long before the antitrust case.)
I run my own mail server. When I send an email via the web interface, would you not agree the MUA is attempting to directly connect to the destination host?
Depending on different factors, it may be classified as spam by the recipient, but from a reputable IP address it shouldn’t normally be rejected outright. Of course there are other factors like SPF, greylisting, etc... but email can be directly delivered.
57,4.3209,"green","He calls himself""Waldo""",98,"Y"
This is a perfectly valid CSV file, but SSIS will choke. I ended up writing a custom script component to load these files anyways.
That said, I absolutely love SQL Server, and I think this guy is a little over the top in his religious hatred of it. In an Enterprise setting, it works really, really well.
If this ship had the capability to repeatedly leave planets without the rockets shown in the beginning, would they have been able to reveal that to the public? The rockets could have been used for the launch from earth to avoid making that disclosure to the public.
Also, it seems like another possibility is that it was simply done to conserve fuel. Maybe the small spacecraft was capable of holding enough fuel for the 3-5 launches shown, but no more? If it wasn’t capable of holding additional fuel that might be needed for the mission, the extra rockets for an initial launch seem like a fair idea, even if they were very expensive.
I don't know anything about this, so I could be very wrong, but to me it seems like there are some plausible explanations.
It sounds like ExpanDrive would probably solve this issue for me. (At least until Microsoft hopefully adds back support for using OneDrive with local accounts at some point.)
That seems like a stretch to me.
I'm not sure if you consider it reputable or not, but the source has been available, at least for recent versions. I'm not sure about the current version.
http://www.symantec.com/connect/downloads/symantec-pgp-deskt...
In any case, the ones you lost just increased the value of all the other bitcoins still in use. Since each unit is theoretically divisible into infinitely smaller units at some point in the future, people will just trade smaller amounts for larger values. That's a feature, not a bug!
A lot of people are claiming that deflation is a death sentence for a currency like this. Something they overlook is that new coins will continue to be created for many years still, and that all it takes is a new version of the protocol to 'fix' any fatal flaws in the current system. If the majority of users have a financial interest in defending the value of their coins, it seems logical to me that they are likely to act rationally to achieve that if a threat were to emerge.
But then, who knows.
I could understand them wanting to focus on Android, but if that's their plan, they should stop releasing crappy Windows tablets.
If USPS were allowed to make their own decisions, they wouldn't necessarily be in this mess.
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey#cat0
8.76% is much higher than 2.26%.
(Incidentally, I'm apparently not the only one who got that detail wrong, since the original post on Reddit was titled "My mistake sir...")
I agree the guy was a jerk, but it should be common sense for any employee that they can't expect to keep their job after revealing private customer information, publicly humiliating that customer, and in this case very likely damaging that customer's career. Duh?