Interesting. Hopefully Stardock can release an update for SKS/WB that allows it to work with the taskbar buttons in 10.
Kevin_Walter
[quote who="2of3" reply="23" id="3533000"] Waiting for you to send it to me for testing on 8.1 [e digicons]O:)[/e] [/quote] You know, I completely forgot about that PM. I read it, and then went to bed thinking "I'll do that tomorrow", and then just forgot about it entirely. [e digicons]:blush:[/e] Sorry to leave you hanging on it.
Ahhhh global warming. Lump me in with the other skeptics. I don't believe humans have much impact on global climate. That being said, I do believe in "green" energy and conservation. Not because Al Gore thinks my Ford is destroying the environment, but because pollution is something that affects everyone directly. I live in a rural part of the US, so it's not as bad as if I lived in a large city like New York or LA. "Smog" isn't really an issue here. But as
Well, I'm almost finished with the icon package. Or at least, as much of it as I'm willing to spend time completing. I'm not all that great at making icons anyway. I have the folders, the main categories of the control panel, the drives, and desktop icons finished. All that's really left is to make icons for the most common file types you might encounter. With the icons so close to completion, I decided to go ahead and upload the blind. Hopefully it is approved for
Yeah, the loss of wallbase was a tragedy. Wallhaven doesn't have the selection that wallbase had yet, but it's growing as more people find out about it.
www.wallhaven.cc It's a recreation of a site called Wallbase that was what I considered the best wallpaper site out there. The admin/owner of the site disappeared and the other admins couldn't access anything to keep it going, so they created wallhaven instead.
Space has always interested me. Though it also makes me sad. Interesting because the possibilities are literally endless. Sad because I know that I live in a time period (most likely all of us do), in which we won't even begin to experience those possibilities. It's both an exciting and depressing reality for me. We see all of these fiction shows where people imagine humanity traveling to the furthest stars and encountering all kinds of strange and wonderful things. Bu
Yeah, I'm moving through the main interface and changing the icons of each category as I get them made, and then saving the package. The "Package Builder" seems counter-intuitive.
Interesting. I wonder if the shell32 icons are changeable with registry keys...
Has it really been 5 years since this application was updated? [e digicons]o_O[/e] I was actually under the impression that I was running an old version with 5.10, but it looks like that's the most recent version of the program. The copyright for the version that I'm running covers 1999-2010. That would mean there hasn't been an Icon Packager update since what, the implementation of live folders for Windows Vista and 7? Also, after poking arou
Well you could always use your real name... [e digicons]:-"[/e]
[quote] Again, on the former, incorrect.[/quote] Please elaborate. [quote]The latter? Not veiled at all: Completely up front. Read the TOS, specifically 3a.[/quote] Hmm... [quote] upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, pornographic, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise o
[quote who="DrJBHL" reply="56" id="3531601"]Be very careful about whom you accuse of dishonesty. Personal attacks are not tolerated here.[/quote] Please don't mistake my words for ad hominem remarks. I try to steer clear of logical fallacies in my arguments. Attacking a person's ideas, opinions, or words is [i]not[/i] a personal attack. And I'll go ahead and just disregard the veiled threat... [quote]The full quote, which you misrepresente
[quote who="starkers" reply="52" id="3531588"] @ Kevin_Walter... Given all your posts in this thread, it seems you just want to be argumentative: hence, though I have thoughts on how your replies disregarded the meaning of the comments in my previous post, I shall not respond directly to them. However, I will say this! If you think this kind of technology is 100% safe/harmless, put your money where your mouth is. Go ahead and have it in your home, then
[quote who="DrJBHL" reply="48" id="3531574"] Hopeless. Really is impossible to get through to you...do you really think your pov is the only right one? Is everyone else wrong? [/quote] Everyone is entitled to their own opinion... not their own facts. Posting biased assumptions as if they are fact is just as dishonest as you claim these companies to be. Hell, the very article you linked in your OP even admits it... " So while some of this hysteria o
[quote who="DrJBHL" reply="46" id="3531562"]From YOUR pov.[/quote] As opposed to your point of view? Confirmation bias is a thing, you know. [quote]Their product is their product and was planned to harvest information. What are your thoughts regarding cigarettes? That same logic apply to them? The cigarettes are manufactured innocently?[/quote] Ridiculous argument. Does your logic apply to everything else? Is WindowBlinds (a product marketed on t
And because Jafo is correct regarding the quote gymnastics... I regretfully double-post. [quote who="Jafo" reply="34" id="3531487"]Sorry, someone needs to re-evaluate what side of a moral superiority they want to park their bum.[/quote] Am I to reevaluate based on your morals or someone else's?
[quote who="DrJBHL" reply="43" id="3531555"] I believe DaveBax was referring to this, obliquely: http://www.devicemag.com/2010/10/25/facebook-games-and-security/ He was also referring to the adage "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch." [T.A.N.S.T.A.A.F.L. - Farnham's Freehold, R. A. Heinlein]. [/quote] That article requires you to leap a pretty significant logical gap.
[quote who="DaveBax" reply="41" id="3531539"]FaceBook people download and play all these free games. Not much if free people, especially when it comes to games.[/quote] Plenty of games are free. I'm going to assume that you don't play games, given your statements here. Continuing from that assumption, I pose a question. If you don't play games, who are you to imply that they're malicious in some way? "Especially when it comes to games." <b
[quote who="Jafo" reply="29" id="3531420"] And they suicide from online bullying all the time too.[/quote] Irrelevant. [quote]And they're groomed by paedophiles all the time too.[/quote] Irrelevant. [quote]Oh yes, the world really needs another mechanism for child monitoring/exploitation.... Like it needs a bullet in its collective head.[/quote] Hyperbole. [quote]It is a BAD technology...not all technology i
Well if you think about it, the uglier it is, the better for all of us. Maybe we should be hoping for buttugly...
[quote who="DrJBHL" reply="25" id="3531408"] Well, we'll agree to disagree, then. I maintain that it is an invasion of privacy that it isn't desirable. We won't convince each other.[/quote] You're probably right. [quote]I do hope you finish that skin...it looks really promising.[/quote] Thanks. The skin itself is actually finished. I'm just working on the Icon package at the moment. I'd like to release them at the same time. [e
I never said the Barbie wouldn't be collecting information. That's the stated purpose. I'm arguing against your assumption that A: This is an invasion of privacy. and B: That this is an inherently bad thing. I already explained why Stuxnet is not analogous... at all. Maybe you should do some reading on composition/division. And no, I'm not comparing apples to oranges. I'm using a reasonable analogy to bring to light the reason why your argu
[quote who="starkers" reply="21" id="3531387"] Frankly, if you're that feching lazy that you need voice regognition to replace your TV remote, then you deserve to be spied upon. As for the Barbie doll, I'd be kicking that to the refuse tip if a child or grandchild of mine was ever given one. Creepoy isn't the word... try downright illegal. Well if it isn't it feching should be. It exploits kids and has the potential for much worse. <
[quote who="DrJBHL" reply="19" id="3531378"]The Stuxnet worm and its relatives Duqu and Flame had modules to take pictures of the people using the computer and to listen/record and transmit voice conversations as well. Seriously.[/quote] Again, you're comparing consumer-level software in a smart tv to a virus that was designed with the sole purpose of destroying hardware. The fact that it had additional functionality that might be comparable to something else is i