Slashdot Mirror

http://hanzismatter.blogspot.com/
A blog that collects and translates (if possible) the tattoos of mostly Chinese/Japanese/Gibberish characters on people who aren't sure what they really mean.

Some of them aren't that bad, but others make you want to cringe.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ZstFRFe2w0g/SZ6c7WMGbaI/AAAAAAAAAFU/jfBktydtzCM/s400/7_proxies_verbose.jpg We win in the end

I run Windows 7 on my my new Revo box 64-bit 2core, 4GB, Nvidia, 500GB Hard Drive. Runs so slow. I spent £300 on it because of lies like yours.

Alrighty. I run Windows 7 on my old Dell Inspiron 1520 with 64 bit dual core, 4GB (aftermarket), Nvidia and 120GB Hard Drive. Bought it in Feb 08 with XP on it. This was during the reign of Vista and this was the only laptop Dell still sold with XP on it.

Got hit by a virus (damn AVG Free did not protect me; even though I scanned the suspect file thoroughly before trying to use it. Switched to Avira, we'll see how that does ;D) and had to re-install. I had already tried Win7 during RC and decided it is marginally better than XP, just not better enough to switch unless you're rolling a new OS anyway.. and now I was. So I switched from 32 bit XP to 64 bit 7.

Now it seems to run every bit as fast as XP did, with Aero turned on. It eats more RAM (900MB used at startup instead of 350MB, overhead appears constant after days of uptime) and this is after applying most of Black Viper's recommended service tweaks to both OSen. I find win+tab is handy when you've got a ton of browser windows open (each with tabs; I generally run one window per distinct project) and want to quickly get to one which is visually distinct.

so tuppe, does my counter-example anecdote mean that you're the liar now? Or perhaps we should yeild the predictive power of all of our personal one-off experiences in favor of actual research?

ZDnet's benchmarks maintain that Windows 7 is faster than XP for standard use, although XP remains more capable for devices with limited memory and outdated graphics.

Maximum PC's benchmarks claim that Win7 simply feels faster than XP on the hardware they tested.

Tom's Hardware's netbook benchmarks show that Windows 7 does not beat XP on the netbook but that it is quite responsive, and would probably surpass XP with better driver support.

TechRadar's benchmark includes many plusses and minuses for Windows 7 with a net plus, but clearly states that it provides "better performance than XP can deliver on today's hardware."

I'm not picking up on any benchmarks that have the same trouble you've had, so unfortunately I have no way to confirm you did not just misconfigure your machine.

Chrome beta does this by default now if you disable all plugins. And the Windows task manager is defaulted high priority. Get with the times! (Joking.)

I wrote an article about this exact subject. http://popcopy.blogspot.com/2010/07/how-to-get-what-we-want-done-in.html

He's a known troll who sides with whoever he thinks will throw money his way one way or another. Witness his use of the "broken windows" argument to say that RedHat "destroys value"

I explained further above that the political perspective on this is focused on what works for the economy at large. Replacing $50 billion of proprietary software revenues with $5 billion of Red Hat revenues would be theoretically fine if Red Hat's business model were scalable and could serve as a role model for many other companies. But it's a uniquely parasitic model that can't be replicated. The only company for which it works on such a scale is Red Hat itself.

Venture capitalists used to be much more enthusiastic about open source years ago. But since Sun acquired MySQL and Red Hat acquired JBoss, there haven't really been any significant "exits" (IPOs or trade sales) of open source companies. Venture investment in open source startups has cooled off and, compared to previous levels, slowed down to a trickle.

So if I were a political decision-maker concerned with innovation policy, Red Hat would clearly not be a company for me to support. Instead, I would view its financials as an indication that proprietary software developers may very well have a point when requesting strong legal protection for the fruits of their R&D efforts.

From a pragmatic if not utilitarian perspective, it doesn't really matter if there are a few "trolls" taking advantage of the system, or if there's a problem with trivial patents, as long as patent protection favors a sustainable approach to innovation while patent abolition would simply be grist to the mills of a company like Red Hat.

The only "troll" here is Muller.

You're such an ass-wipe. Too bad nobody takes you seriously any more.

I suspect that Florian is now a Microsoft lobbyist. "fosspatents" is a very misleading name for his blog (he actually advocates RAND), and he's used up any credibility he might have had from the nosoftwarepatents campaign. He's a marketer, and I'm sure he's worth every penny. Too bad he isn't more selective about his clients, or more ethical about letting people know which side he's on.

Behold: http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/08/microsofts-use-of-patents.html. Not one mention of the "over 200 patents", and "linux is a cancer" was a long time ago, right? I cannot believe anybody consumes this apologist's effluvium, but apparently it's working splendidly.

Of course, I could be totally paranoid. But I challenge anybody (who is not a .net fanboi) to read his blog, or his comment history on /., and not reach the same conclusion.

Comparing with a Prius is not really saying much. They're only slightly more efficient than any other normal car. The real alternative is quite different.

no windows mobile on Motorola

I think I read something about Motorola not intending to support Windows Phone 7 anyway. In that case, they have nothing to lose in terms of a customer.

Keeping in mind software patents are meaningless in Europe.

They exist in Europe (some examples here) and they are upheld by national high courts such as the German Bundesgerichtshof.

There's too much going on there with several major patents asserting patents. They can't all be wrong at the same time, and we're talking about a notorious patent minefield. I don't say quick surrender -- but a solution must be found.

In terms of the patents concerned, I'll take a closer look at them. I've updated my blog posting with a link to an article that shows the complaints filed with the district court and the US International Trade Commission.

Unless free from prejudice and narrow-mindedness, i.e. liberal,

Like when conservatives get shouted down whenever they are to speak at college campuses? Like how brown^H^H^H purple shirted SEIU thugs lock out anyone with an opposing view, sometimes using violence? that kind of "free from prejudice and narrow-mindedness"?

Sorry, but liberals are no longer the ones with open minds, willing to listen to all opinions and give them a fair shot and even consider foreign ideas in their own minds. Those true liberals got shouted down and mashed under the thumb of "progressive" liberals long ago. Even other progressives who stray too far from the group think gets silenced.

You should have seen the way Democrats treated each other at the local Democratic caucuses required by Democrats in Texas to elect a candidate. It was held in my local town at City Hall. I was there. It was a sight to see:
Manuella: "Excuse me, every one of you up there is an Obama supporter. Wouldn't it be fair if we had some Clinton supporters up there?'
Person in charge: "Denied"
Manuella: "Well, shouldn't there at least be one Clinton supporter there to oversee everything?"
Person in charge: "Who would you recommend?"
Manuella: "Well, I could do it."
Person in charge: "OK. What's your name? OK, Manuella. Anyone else? John? OK. All in favor of Manuella?"
Group: "Aye"
Person in charge: "OK, all in favor of John?"
Group: "Aye"
Person in charge: "John is the Clinton monitor"
Manuella: "But John has an Obama button on..."

Google saw my post and has announced almost 40 more countries added, Android Developer's Blog.

The US space industry is at a critical juncture right now. The best crop of private space firms we've ever seen is out there now; from a funding standpoint, a technical maturity standpoint, and from a drive to make space routine & affordable standpoint. That being said, the government has the power to either foster them or chill the environment they are operating in and potentially kill them off (as has happened more than once in the past). For this industry to really take root and get strong enough to achieve routine & affordable space they need to get through this juncture where most people have difficulty seeing a future that is different from massive, expensive, apollo style nasa and to a place where they can see there is a realistic chance space can be more like the aircraft/airline industry. Investors don't invest significant money in long time horizon ventures that will pay back *if* the government doesn't compete with you *and* a market happens to materialize as expected. They want to see that someone else is already making money before the cash floodgates truly will open. These first few companies are crucial to demonstrating the business case for the rest.

Unfortunately, this means it is critical for the government to not directly compete with the fledgling industry (for things that industry can reasonably be expected to do) (the Ares and Orion programs for example) and for certain restrictions (like ITAR), which prevent the this industry from being competitive and being able to self fund things in the future, to be removed as impediments. If the government can also serve as an early anchor customer until the market demand for lower cost access to space kicks in, that is a bonus which helps to accelerate things. The president has already signalled his willingness to make sensible changes to ITAR, so now the other half of the equation needed for success is to kill the massive pork ridden constellation program and refocus nasa on doing real science and exploration again (and at the same time making it a customer for off the shelf industry provided products and services).

This bill does that. It's most significant contribution to a brighter future isn't what it funds (the Commercial Crew initiative for example) but what it does not fund (Constellation). Killing the most egregious pork siphon the NASA budget has ever seen is the first step in saner NASA budgets in future years. Did this budget do everything that should have been done to refocus NASA productively? Not by a long shot. You can read more about the downsides here:

http://restorethevision.blogspot.com/search/label/Not%20So%20Great%20Compromise

But it does do the one thing that sets the stage for a healthier trajectory going forward...it kills Constellation and clears the decks for a healthier trajectory to be set over the next few years. That much pork was not something congress wanted to part with lightly and had it managed to hang on to a significant portion of constellation, we may have been looking at another 30 years of nothing much happening just like the last 30, only in this case the impending budget crisis over social security would eventually squeeze the space program down to nothing.

So when evaluating this budget, look at it for what it will enable long term, not what the specific line items mean in the next year.

They'd also sue the Graveyard and the coffin maker for Making Available the burial plot and the coffin.

Your comment, and several of the others, reminded me of the actual Michigan case, where the RIAA was suing a man in his 50's who died during the litigation. After the poor man passed away, the RIAA asked the judge to stay the proceedings for 60 days to allow the defendant's family enough time to grieve and then to allow them to start taking depositions of the deceased man's children.

You can't make this stuff up.

I have an entire set of blog articles about the flaws of artificial scarcity:
http://yuhongbao.blogspot.com/2010/06/artificial-scarcity-intro.html

...declaw, descent, groom, paint, microchip, shock-collar, train to do embarrassing tricks, forget to clean the box, etc...

Greets from Germany.

There aren't any gold vending machines in Germany. The company did install 1 (in word one) machine at the Frankfurt airport and even that was for a testing period only. So AFAIK there is just one single machine installed in Germany, in Geisslers gold shop in Reutlingen. Try finding one on their website: http://www.gold-to-go.com/ .

Of course there should be gazillions (=480 ;-) ) of gold vending machines in Germany by now, at least that's what he planned when installed the test machine at Frankfurt airport in spring 2009.

This Thomas Geissler guy is quite clever at spinning the PR wheel. But 100 gold vending machines? ILMAO ...

One at his gold shop in Reutlingen and (presumably) one in Dubai.

GOLD AUS DEM AUTOMATEN! (Sorry, in German only).

See also: http://ktetch.blogspot.com/2010/09/acs-treated-like-criminals-by.html when the glove is on the other hand.

When half the teenagers in shopping malls adopt your investment strategy, it is time to sell.

It's OK though, because if we prevent teenagers from gathering in the malls, the bubble will never burst.

You want evidence that Obama is not using the FISA court? How about evidence that he is? Feel free to find something newer than this:

http://utdocuments.blogspot.com/2008/07/obamas-new-statement-on-fisa.html

Obama's statement only addressed the objections to the telecom immunity provisions of the bill, while ignoring the objections to the (at least) equally pernicious new warrantless eavesdropping powers the bill authorizes.

The new FISA bill that Obama supports vests new categories of warrantless eavesdropping powers in the President (.pdf), and allows the Government, for the first time, to tap physically into U.S. telecommunications networks inside our country with no individual warrant requirement. To claim that this new bill creates "an independent monitor [to] watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people" is truly misleading, since the new FISA bill actually does the opposite -- it frees the Government from exactly that monitoring in all sorts of broad categories.

I have seen somewhere botnets on routers here in slashdot. What's the next device to be infected? Network printers? SSDs with that little ARM to perform GC? NICs?

Yes, NICs. And network printers have been targets of attack for a long time given that they're full-fledged computers with a Wince or Unix OS and the same SMB/wireless/spooler vulnerabilities of those systems, just more often running on a non-Intel CPU so the x86 bytecode won't work.

- Perpetual Newbie (I still haven't created a slashdot account)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4s5pmFL_ZlQ/R8oOJBdFI1I/AAAAAAAAAC8/1LD15q92N4I/s1600-h/BLIND+FAITH+ALTERNATIVE+MOTIVATIONAL+POSTERS.jpg

I second that site, and offer up this one as well:

http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2010/09/holy-shit.html

Well, to be fair, it was a couple years before the Wright Brothers actually got heavier-than-air working.

Of course, there were already naysayers in 1906.

Well, you can see some of the predictions made for the year 2000 in the year 1900 here.

The reaction would probably be along the lines of "so why the hell haven't you guys exterminated mosquitoes yet?"

I just did a blog post after hitting this problem.

http://johnsokol.blogspot.com/2010/09/converting-qif-to-text.html

I just want my data in something really simple format such as comma delimited.
I can copy and paste off the HTML and it's a mess. Or get my data in several formats that all require some Windows GUI based applications that you must pay for. Maybe there is something open source, but I just want a comma delimited file or just plain text even.

In my post I show a simple shell script that uses sed to flatten out a QIF file so i can use grep and awk to extract and sum data, such as how much I spent at Mc Donalds for the past year.

The major problem now is that 99% of all good edits submitted to wikipedia are reverted anyways as false positives.

The reason for this is that corrupt administrators do nothing to stop it, and corrupt idiots wanting to become admins just sit all day on the semi-automated tools like "Twinkle" or "Huggle" reverting anything in sight to get their edit counts up.

The real issue is disinformation, which is vastly more subtle. The only defense is fact-checking or seeking out references.

While true, the larger problem with wikipedia is, and has always been, cadres of editors who carry around administrator support to ban any opposing viewpoint, picking off anyone who comes to their "owned" articles one at a time so as to prevent a consensus change. I spent a good amount of time analyzing the writings of a former wikipedia administrator who gave up on the whole thing, as well as the old writings of another one who, after being part of the corrupt system a long while, somehow stepped on the wrong toes and got finally tossed out. Comparing them to wikipedia behavior today, it's apparent that nothing has changed and the whole system, especially the "administrators", "bureaucrats", and "arbitration committee", are completely corrupt.

You can dig up all the sources you want; all they have to do is scream how it's not a "real" source, or simply revert-war you as a group and then accuse you of "breaking 3RR", and you're toast. Have the temerity to reveal an organized campaign by these groups in an unblock request, and they'll send along one of the Wiki-Assassins like Sandstein, FisherQueen, Barek, or the various other "unblock patrollers" to abuse you, harass you, and finally just hound you into something they can use to push for an indefinite ban. Often, they'll just out-and-out lie, claiming someone ran "checkuser" (a tool that NEVER comes up with a response other than guilty) and that you are a "sockpuppet" of someone else.

If your'e on Google Apps for your Domain (or wait a few months), you can use 2-step verification. Anyone logging in from a computer you have not previously authorized would be prompted for an one time password (which can be generated through an application on your phone, or sent as a txt-message). http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2010/09/more-secure-cloud-for-millions-of.html

This is similar to the recent IRS action against USB, the big Swiss based bank. USB was actively involved in smuggling assets out of the US, including telling people how to get diamonds and then putting them in toothpaste tubes to get around customs. http://gswlaw.com/irsblog/2009/08/31/ubs-whistle-blower-gets-40-month-sentence/

These tax cheats are scum sucking pigs. The high end ones have huge amounts of money and they still cheat. Can you afford to buy diamonds to smuggle out of the country? Remember, people with six figure incomes pay less then the rest of us because they get taxed at capital gains rates, which can be as low as 15%. Real working people pay around %30 or more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_gains_tax#United_States

When these greedheads duck out on taxes, the rest of us have to pay a lot more. This is on top of all the custom tax breaks that big corrupt corporate players have put in the law by buying legislation. The ballooning deficit in the US is due to tax cuts for the ultra rich, not because taxes are too high for the remaining 99% of the population. The right wingers who say otherwise are lying weasels, and if you believe them then you are weak minded and like having your pocket picked by the rich.

Well there's two-step verification via phone for Google Apps, coupled with the Google Authenticator app.

June 6, 2007 Congressional Testimony of Laszlo Bock: "Google's hiring process is rigorous, and we make great efforts to uncover the most talented employees we can find."

September 24, 2010 Justice Department Press Release: "Beginning no later than 2006, Apple and Google executives agreed not to cold call each other's employees...Beginning no later than September 2007, Google and Intel executives agreed not to cold call each other's employees...In June 2007, Google and Intuit executives agreed that Google would not cold call any Intuit employee."

I believe a bitgrid chip would cost $10k or so for the first samples. If I'm right about this, it should be capable of scaling into the Exaflop range if you slapped enough of them together, at a cost of $10,000,000.

I don't see a problem so long as Verizon charges per kilobyte.

Go find a graph of government spending under all the different presidents since 1980. Tell me who out-spent who.

I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I believe both are wrong. And, from where I sit, they are exactly the same for growing the government as big as possible. The only difference is in where the growth of government happens, not how much.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Revenue_and_Expense_to_GDP_Chart_1993_-_2008.png Do you really see a difference in spending that correlates well with the party in power? If there's any, it's the opposite of what you assert.
http://rondam.blogspot.com/2006/10/why-i-bash-republicans.html
http://www.kowaldesign.com/budget/
Both of those are debt-only, and they show who has grown the debt, and it wasn't Democrats. So show me, with numbers, not your personal feelings, why I should believe Republicans are the small government party.

Since a number of activists from the anti-software-patent movement joined the Pirate Party, including its first MEP (Christian Engström), I've been following its development closely and at some point even lent them a signature to support their participation in an election in my country (Germany), even though I ultimately didn't vote for them.

I've commented on the Pirate Party's failure to evolve into a serious political force. The EUobserver, an independent website covering European politics, published a streamlined version of my analysis. The original version goes into some more detail and appeared on my blog.

I'm not convinced it's anywhere near that simple. Stories can produce a range of emotions in the same person at different times, let alone in different people, and I don't think that those differences are solely down to "conditioning". See Chomsky's famous rant at Skinner about a "reinforcing" explanation of how people respond to art. - the agent experiencing the emotion - or even the comprehension - has to be active in deciding which aspects of the story to respond to.

http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/

from someone doing it.

From this guy's experience it seems the publishing industry is doing a pretty shitty job of it too -> http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/

He's doing it on his own and doing FAR better. His return rates are low, he stays on the "shelf" forever, and he doesn't have to work his ass off promoting like he used to. He gets a greater cut of the profits and makes more money doing it himself too. the publishing industry had better wake up quick, folks like myself who see ebooks at prices nearly as high and sometimes HIGHER than print books aren't happy. A 9meg torrent can contain an entire author's library but honestly I'd rather buy and support authors - and I used to! That changed when you guys jacked prices to the Moon....

You are right. Just as organizations use Facebook to reach out to members and customers, people with a fatal disease are using Facebook to unite and organize "> to spread awareness, change their advocacy model, and call in assistance during emergency situations.

Bullshit. You can sell ebooks for less than $3 and make a profit. The overhead is WAY lower. Authors are starting to realize this and publish on their own and it scares the crap out of the publishing industry which is so stupid they actually use the cost of PRINTING paper books as an excuse to inflate ebook pricing!

Read this: http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/ completely to see how far up their ass the publishers have placed their heads
and this: http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/ to see what smart authors are starting to realize!

When E-books cost MORE than some hardcovers of course they don't sell. Put them back under $9.99 and I'll stop torrenting and begin purchasing again! The publishers are trying to use E-Books to support their print overhead - and have said as much. MacMillan and others are thieves so far as I'm concerned. As soon as they began setting prices vs Amazon the cost of E-books went through the roof. that they try to make them sound like a bargain because they cost less than LIST hardcover even though they cannot be traded, shared, or sold is a sad sham. some authors are starting to go it on their own and skip the publishers altogether - I wish some of the authors *I* like would do that. You know it's sad when a published author makes MORE money going through Amazon direct and selling for a pittance than they do going through a publisher!

Some reading:

http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/
http://hauntedcomputer.blogspot.com/
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/01/amazon-macmillan-an-outsiders.html
http://www.teleread.com/drm/macmillan-ceo-tells-his-side-of-amazon-spat/
http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/ Make sure to read ALL of the entries in this one - there are some truly stunning doozies! I wonder what planet this moron comes from?

When E-books cost MORE than some hardcovers of course they don't sell. Put them back under $9.99 and I'll stop torrenting and begin purchasing again! The publishers are trying to use E-Books to support their print overhead - and have said as much. MacMillan and others are thieves so far as I'm concerned. As soon as they began setting prices vs Amazon the cost of E-books went through the roof. that they try to make them sound like a bargain because they cost less than LIST hardcover even though they cannot be traded, shared, or sold is a sad sham. some authors are starting to go it on their own and skip the publishers altogether - I wish some of the authors *I* like would do that. You know it's sad when a published author makes MORE money going through Amazon direct and selling for a pittance than they do going through a publisher!

Some reading:

http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/
http://hauntedcomputer.blogspot.com/
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/01/amazon-macmillan-an-outsiders.html
http://www.teleread.com/drm/macmillan-ceo-tells-his-side-of-amazon-spat/
http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/ Make sure to read ALL of the entries in this one - there are some truly stunning doozies! I wonder what planet this moron comes from?

It's good to hear about 9/11. Now, how many Muslims denounce death penalty for apostasy?

Pretty much all of them. - I mean have you ever asked a muslim what he thought about it?
Really, the only ones who do care are the fundos and the politicians who pander to them.
The koran has just two passages that deal with the issue and in each case the death penalty is only applicable to apostates who then commit treason.
Just in case you've forgotten, we still have the death penalty for treason in the US.
Hell, the only reason we still have the death penalty for anything in the US is because the politicians who pander to american fundos.
No other western country has the death penalty. Even Russia abolished it.

But if you have to have big names say it - lets start with Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi - Grand Mufti of the leading islamic university, Al-Azhar. If islam were anywhere near as monolithic as the catholic church then the grand mufti of Al-Azhar would be the closest thing islam has to a pope. And it wasn't something new that he brought with him when the took office in 1996 - the previous Grand Mufti al-Shaltut held to similar doctrine.

But I'm sure you've never even heard of them. So how about Daisy Khan and her husband Imam Feisal Rauf - the people building the Park51 mosque.

Or if you aren't satisfied with people who are famous among muslims or people who are famous among non-muslims, how about over a hundred regular muslims from all over the planet?

Have you watched more than a couple episodes?

About 4 years running.

I think you're gonna need some serious evidence to back that up.

Sadly, most of Stewart's interviews don't make it to "transcript" and I don't own a copy of the Daily Show DVDs, or I would get plenty of examples for you (especially leading up to the presidential election last year). But I can at least give you an idea of what I'm talking about. Look here: http://therebeller.blogspot.com/2009/03/jon-stewart-pummels-jim-cramer.html

You'll see Cramer making a comment "We have 17 hours of live TV a day to do. But I--" and then Jon comes in and interrupts him with a gag "STEWART: Maybe you could cut down on that." followed by audience laughter and a Stewart segway into a particularly damning video where Cramer is then forced to backpedal to defend himself. Stewart only does it once in this particular interview, but with other guests I've seen this persist throughout the _entire_ dialogue. They're not allowed to get a coherent thought out and are instead constantly put on the defensive by being forced to address things that _Jon_ wants to speak about. For instance, when the guest brings up government spending and then Jon brings up the Iraq War and _aggressively_ pushes the subject to force the guest to talk about the war instead of the budget. Yet if a Dem is on and brings up spending, does Jon bring up the runaway Social Security budget? Or Medicare? Never.

Compare the tone and topic choice of the Cramer interview to...say the Kerry interview: http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blkerrydailyshow.htm where Stewart <sarcasm>beats up on him</sarcasm> with such tough questions/issues as "Now how-- how are you holding up?" and "is it hard not to take it personally?" and "Are you the number one most liberal senator in the Senate? JOHN KERRY: No. JON STEWART: Okay." When he asks him if he's ever flip-flopped, where's the prepared video ready to embarrass him? Instead Jon plays the whole issue off as some kind of joke. Then he launches into attacking the Republicans again: " I don't know what compassionate conservative means. Does it mean cutting kids out of after-school programs? Does it mean drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge? Does it mean sending kids to Iraq without body armor that's state of the art?"
etc etc
I hope you see my point -- guests he doesn't agree with he grills, ambushes, cuts off, and throws under the bus -- others that share his viewpoints he merrily converses with, tossing in anti-Republican jibes wherever he gets a chance.

With all the unadulterated crazy we see from the Tea Party people, and from Republicans trying to harness them, it's obviously going to be a prime target.

And that's the exact argument _always_ used to describe the imbalance of jibes in the Daily Show. And frankly, I think it's complete bullshit. BOTH sides have nutty individuals. For instance, where's all the unadultered crazy from the Green Party? During the "Gore fad" when global warming was a hot button issue, NONE of the loudmouthed loons from that movement got put on TV (it is _just_ as "cult like/extreme" as the Tea Party). And there's plenty of them. Heck, where's the Gore mockery? That guy is damn close to a total fruitcake -- even South Park mocks him.

In other examples, McCain shooting a buddy by accident in the woods gets a hell of alot more screentime and constant replay value than Obama's nutty childhood pastor (which is just as gag worthy), which got maybe 5 minutes of screen time and never mentioned again -- Edward's affair might get a few minutes of on-time gags before getting back to the usual staple ridicules of McCain's age or Bush's laugh or some other BS that. Democrat jabs

... please do some editing! There is no need to link to another website when you can go directly to the source!

UFO's and Military all the way back to 1952

Have you played any of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games? Unlike Fallout 3, they're more towards the FPS end of the spectrum rather than RPG, but they're also a lot more realistic than the wacky 50s sci-fi feel of the Fallout games and a hell of a lot more bleak. GSC Game World is based in Kiev and they've made multiple trips into the exclusion zone, the maps and the layout of places like Pripyat and the entire Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant are very faithfully reproduced in-game, they did an amazing job.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_RDiKxVBLJZo/SxIu6zDfuFI/AAAAAAAAANE/lnC7nXgLZxs/s1600/stalker-Shadow-of-Chernobyl_03.jpg
http://www.legitreviews.com/images/reviews/490/stalker.jpg
http://www.tweakguides.com/images/STALKER_13.jpg

I think they capture the atmosphere really well, the environment is feral and hostile and you really have to be on the lookout for radiation and anomalies. Shadow Of Chernobyl was the first game, the prequel Clear Sky was a bit of a letdown, but Call Of Pripyat is by far one of the best and most atmospheric games I've ever played.

The 3rd planet is only in pre-planning. If the game is still viable 1 year after launch, sports fans can enjoy Planet North American Major Baseball League Association.

Planet North American Major Baseball League Association? Hmm...

On the other hand, Steve Jobs was right. This is a bigger problem for Adobe. Let them admit thet they need some help wit Flash...maybe Linus hackers can help out.

Bottom line: Flash sucks on Android big time.

Actually, flash doesn't suck on android - at least on my N1 running cyanogen's CM6. Even in the article you link they admit "When Flash 10.1 for Android is good, it’s great, but when it’s bad, ...". Then they go on claiming that only videos optimised for mobile phones are smooth on the android, but that hasn't been my experience. I didn't set out to test exactly the same sites as on that article, but on regular usage (Portuguese, Italian and UK news sites, youtube [directly with the browser claiming it is a desktop pc], atdhe, etc.) I never had any of the symptoms described in that article. Some jerkiness from time to time, yes, but that was mostly due to slow net connections or overloaded sources. The games I didn't try - I was never a fan of flash games - but I assume most games make assumptions that won't work on touch screens. I don't see exactly how that is a failure with flash, though.

All in all, I never got the bugs and inconveniences reported in that article. And judging from the comments section there, I wasn't the only one. I know flash bashing is fashionable here at slashdot, but the article you quote is too much against mine and other users real life experience to be trusted. And don't take just my work for it, check this article, for another example of flash working on android, or this one for a take from a iphone user on the same "problem".

Bottom line: Flash doesn't suck on my android phone, or of any of my friends; and I'd rather have it available than having a "benevolent dictator" deciding I can't use it on my phone just because.