84 karma · joined April 21, 2011
In my case I wanted to ask about replacement parts because it seemed like a power surge might've knocked out the box controlling the desk - didn't get a single response despite reaching out via email and their contact form, not even a "We don't sell replacement parts and you're on your own" reply.
At times like this I think it's good to remember Knoll's law, that other pieces you've read on Eurogamer are similarly flawed and inaccurate.
Maybe it just means old players like us are no longer the target and it's to the long-term benefit of the game to tell us to pound sand as they have for years.
Donald Tsang was released earlier this year [0]
It would not surprise me if the suspension were quietly lifted in the future when the world has moved on from the protests.
That would be great for you of course by why should ISPs get to determine whose packets are more important especially if the entry criterion to being important is basically "pay up"? What if the reverse were true and other users' packets were prioritized over your work ones simply because Netflix, YouTube, Valve, etc. could afford it and your company decided not to?
It's not at all far-fetched for scenarios where apps automatically send messages to current/previous contacts without the user's consent (in fact we've seen this time and time again). Should the immediate response really be to jail the offender, especially if the process for proving intention one way or another can be long and arduous? Because if that's the case, what we're really asking is for people with restraining orders to become technology-shunning luddites since they can't guarantee the apps they use won't have mined their connections in the past, or that apps they've stopped using after the restraining order don't send messages on their behalf.
How much proof would have to be provided that the Google+ invitation was sent deliberately by the user? Sworn testimony from a Google employee? There can of course exist bugs that send invites erroneously that nobody knows about. Revealing of the source code and analysis by experts? Unknown bugs can still exist, especially in systems as large as Google's.
Stepping back from this particular case, what about apps that scan your contact list and automatically send invites and/or messages?
These situations aside, it's far too easy to accidentally send an invitation. Hell, I don't doubt that many people reflexively agree to prompts on websites they think they're familiar with. Of course the argument can be made that people with restraining orders must be more careful, but it just doesn't seem sane to me that people can get jail time for clicking a button on a prompt that most people wouldn't think twice about.
Really I think the new start menu is meant to be easier for people who don't just type in the name of the program they're interested in, allowing them to put all the apps and programs they use onto their start menu and arrange them however they want, not unlike an extended "favourites" menu.
Preferred language is tied to regions, not purchasing power. What I mean is that it's not something like "the rich learn Traditional and the poor learn Simplified", it's kind of like whether a person grew up learning the English spelling of a word or the American one. Except the differences aren't as subtle as they are in English.
If you're not sure which geographic group you're trying to reach, you should translate the site into both Traditional and Simplified. However, don't expect the same translated site to reach both groups, especially if you're going to be using tech vocabulary since that varies even more from place to place.