Slashdot Mirror

http://www.google.com/nexus/#/buy

Also, are these "nexus" devices going to be cdma/gsm/evdo/hsdpa+/LTE + 8 Band units?

Sort of, they sell two models, one designed for GSM (AT&T and Tmobile) and one designed for Sprint/Verizon. The Verizon one is $199 on contract, the GSM unlocked one is $399 without contract.

I can't imagine where you would get a new one:

http://www.google.com/nexus/#/buy

http://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+the+best+search+engine%3F&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&client=firefox-a

Notice how Google neither inserted a joke nor a pitch for its own search engine? In fact, the first hit I get is to an About.com page, which puts Google at #10; then a page that lists a few different surveys; then Dogpile. Google does plenty of things that I would call evil, but in this case they did what I would expect: not try to alter their search results to promote their own product.

Not sure if it's still the case, but I used to play WoW on Ubuntu (which Mint is based on) using Wine /PlayonLinux and the Open GL renderer (launch time option -opengl) in a 2600x1024 window (spanned in the middle of three monitors) with full settings (as much as it let you enable w/ the Open GL renderer) and got great framerates. Tested in regular gameplay, PvP, and raids.

Though this was using a GT8600 and later a GTX 260. YMMV, etc.

I also know that Rift is pixel perfect now (as of a few Wine versions) though you do have a noticeable performance hit when you enable certain visual features.

Do a search on Google for "What is the best web browser" and guess what, you'll get a nice list of reviews, every single one of which lists Google Chrome as the best web browser. Oddly enough, if you do the same search in Bing, you get a few results that don't seem to show up near the top of the Google search.

Basically, never look for objective information from someone who has their own horse in the race. I would no more trust Apple with advice on computer or smartphone purchasing advice than I would trust Norton with advice on the best anti-virus software.

sell these to Sprint knowing they would be held up at customs and possibly not be able to sell them in the US?

Actually MILLIONS already entered the country and were sold by AT&T and independent retailers. Only when this phone started taking
serious sales away from Apple did they start complaining.

HTC has long ago removed the offending patent item. (And Apple ultimately lost on all other claims in this particular suit.) A single item in the '694 patent was upheld, namely having a url sent in a text message be treated as a real url and launching the browser when tapped. (My ancient Razr feature phone did that - sans the tapping part).

Best block google then https://encrypted.google.com/search?&q=pirate+bay+proxy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gl=uk

*sigh*

And GM's stated public partnership with Google, Google+ and Android has NOTHING to do with this. Right?

http://www.androidcentral.com/tags/gm

http://www.androidcentral.com/tags/chevrolet

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&sqi=2&ved=0CGoQtwIwCA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DhcbTw_dvPgY&ei=SMOzT8vLDIWm8QSphN3uCA&usg=AFQjCNFiOVx-KhoOtBzmZAehYIC1nc2MmQ&sig2=h-EnMGtOVXB7ukBpBKPoig

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&sqi=2&ved=0CHEQFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corvettenewsblog.com%2Ftag%2Fgm-and-android%2F&ei=SMOzT8vLDIWm8QSphN3uCA&usg=AFQjCNHVGF5QkdUkIzrKRroRwqLTbCQUkQ&sig2=dBPvLP-uWArg8lP5ANJWAw

Just another "Hmmmm" tinfoil hat thought for you. I wonder how much input the Feds have in GM making such an announcement just as Facebook is prepping for a IPO?
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/feds-freeze-gm-ceo-alan-akersons-salary-at-1-7-million-limit-other-top-exec-pay-in-the-process/

And GM's stated public partnership with Google, Google+ and Android has NOTHING to do with this. Right?

http://www.androidcentral.com/tags/gm

http://www.androidcentral.com/tags/chevrolet

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&sqi=2&ved=0CGoQtwIwCA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DhcbTw_dvPgY&ei=SMOzT8vLDIWm8QSphN3uCA&usg=AFQjCNFiOVx-KhoOtBzmZAehYIC1nc2MmQ&sig2=h-EnMGtOVXB7ukBpBKPoig

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&sqi=2&ved=0CHEQFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corvettenewsblog.com%2Ftag%2Fgm-and-android%2F&ei=SMOzT8vLDIWm8QSphN3uCA&usg=AFQjCNHVGF5QkdUkIzrKRroRwqLTbCQUkQ&sig2=dBPvLP-uWArg8lP5ANJWAw

Just another "Hmmmm" tinfoil hat thought for you. I wonder how much input the Feds have in GM making such an announcement just as Facebook is prepping for a IPO?
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/feds-freeze-gm-ceo-alan-akersons-salary-at-1-7-million-limit-other-top-exec-pay-in-the-process/

You can get json support using the PLV8 extension http://code.google.com/p/plv8js/wiki/PLV8

or altenatively you can use the hstore data type.

MathScript is pretty damn good https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.funmath.mathscript don't know if it can do everything you list, but it can do a lot (and theoretically you could program anything you want in python). There's also a free trial version which has all the features (I think), but nags after a while https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.funmath.mathscriptlite

MathScript is pretty damn good https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.funmath.mathscript don't know if it can do everything you list, but it can do a lot (and theoretically you could program anything you want in python). There's also a free trial version which has all the features (I think), but nags after a while https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.funmath.mathscriptlite

There is already Addi: http://code.google.com/p/addi/

But gamers are, for the most part, gonna use a discrete rather than an APU and the consumers frankly don't know DDR 4 from a grilled cheese sandwich so other than a few benches I just don't see it making that big a deal. Sure the higher scores will make a nice bullet point but I have one of the E350 APUs and with 1200Mb of DDR 3 1333MHz RAM dedicated to video movies are buttery smooth and the games I play don't jerk and isn't that what matters?

I've been selling AMDs in my shop pretty exclusively since the Intel bribery and compiler scandals came out and while i thought killing AM3 was a stupid move frankly i haven't had ANY trouble selling the APUs and the reason couldn't be more simple. The simple fact is just about every APU that AMD has, even the lowly C and E series bobcats are frankly overkill for most of the jobs folks have. Hell I even sold my 17 inch laptop for one of the 12 inch AMD EEEs because i found when i'm mobile i liked having the battery life and ease of carry over the big screen and you know what? i honestly don't miss that more powerful CPU.

So while i'm sure the extra speed will do nothing but help AMD I just don't see what DDR speeds they have now hurting AMD with actual consumers. BTW for those that have C and E series APUs I recommend Brazos Tweaker which will help you drop voltages and get even greater battery life. they have settings that will work on most of the C and E series posted as well as step by step instructions. I added about an hour to mine by using it and honestly I can't "feel" any difference in performance, I just get more time.

Have you tried updating to Android 4.0/Ice Cream Sandwich? the ICS Browser has many enhancements that seems to have been taken from the Android version of Chrome, like tabs. Its been fast and stable for me. If there isn't an OTA update for your tablet, there should be a good rom to use on xda-developers.

I use ICS Browser+ a browser built on the stock ICS Browser, with added functionality, like the ability to remove the normal menu and use a semi-circular "quick-controls" menu that pops up when you slide your finger in from the left or right side of the screen.

I think you meant this one.

This one's available in the Market (Screw you "Play Store"). It means it's an actual Beta, no side-loading required.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mozilla.firefox

Cheating the system to get elected...

While it hasn't been talked up outside the Ron Paul forums, there's an interesting phenomena that happened in a number of state primaries this year. A large number of precincts have seen a consistent drift in votes from the earlier reports to the final count (that is, votes aren't counted all at once for most elections so locations often report votes when say 10% of the votes have been counted).

These seem to have a number of things in common. First, Romney always benefits. Second, most of these elections have exact one rival candidate which loses those votes, Paul, Gingrich, and Santorum have all been on the other side at one time or another. Finally, this effect is only seen in precincts above a certain threshold which is unique to each state in which the effect has been seen. This has been seen in a number of states, including all the early primary states, such as Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, Maine, and Nevada.

A diffuse and rather incoherent analysis can be seen here (which is an informal dump of forum discussion and posting of relevant charts). But bottom line is that so far a good explanation is vote fraud (perhaps targeting the tabulation software), a transfer of votes from a competitor in each precinct above a certain size to Romney (called "vote flipping" in the above document). After all, why would voters early in the day vote differently than those later in the day (and in such a way that Romney usually benefits at the expense of exactly one other candidate)? And there's some very peculiar statistics that show up in 2012 that aren't seen in elections before 2008 (except apparently in Louisiana where known vote fraud went on under a crooked Election Commissioner to 1998).

For example, Polk County, Iowa started with 30% of the vote going to Paul and about 18% to Romney and finished that night with Romney getting over 30% and Paul getting barely over 20% (see graph on page 11 of the above link). Most of the other candidates (with the exception of Perry) show no significant drift. Although I haven't been able to find it quoted, there are supposed to be adjacent South Carolina counties that had vote flipping to Romney from Paul in one and Gingrich in the other.

To me, this looks like blatant vote fraud, probably by someone in the GOP though not necessarily anyone associated with Romney. So sure, we can fume at Paul's actions here, but my take is that he wouldn't be able to get such traction in these caucuses and primaries unless he already had the votes.

Broken link, I apologize.
It seems Google can go to it just fine.

Stop claiming that you 'buy' a software product - you don't.

I'll stop "claiming" that I buy copies of software when the vendors stop telling me that I do. Google for "buy windows 7" and see that the first links are to "Buy Windows 7 or upgrade to another edition", "Buying Windows 7: top questions", "Find great prices & selection on Microsoft Windows software; shop & buy Windows 7 Home Premium, Windows 7 Professional, & more." with a banner ad reading "Buy Windows® 7 Now - Fast, Easy Download. Official Site.". You're awfully certain of your specious hypothesis given that Microsoft themselves contradict you.

Try the same experiment with "buy autocad", "buy photoshop", and... wait for it... "buy os x". None of those companies say "buy a limited, EULA-bound license to use $foo as we see fit!"

I had an old HTC Touch Pro 2 that I wasn't using anymore, but it had a good camera on it. So I installed a webcam software that allowed me to broadcast over the web or to an iPad/Android tablet. I just used a basic car mount and placed on the dresser, worked like a charm. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.pas.webcam&hl=en

Chromium is the project from which Google draws the source code for Chrome. You can get Chromium builds for various platforms, and they do not contain any Google tracking code (which is added to Chrome by Google).

AdBlock and NotScripts are both available, and I find them to work well.

I've been using Firefox for years, when it was still called Phoenix (actually, when it was called Netscape Navigator), but about two years ago I got finally fed up for a variety of reasons.

I installed Chromium and haven't looked back. It's lightweight and fast, the interface looks slick and stays out of the way, and the daily builds run stable on Macs and under Linux.

Chromium is the project from which Google draws the source code for Chrome. You can get Chromium builds for various platforms, and they do not contain any Google tracking code (which is added to Chrome by Google).

AdBlock and NotScripts are both available, and I find them to work well.

I've been using Firefox for years, when it was still called Phoenix (actually, when it was called Netscape Navigator), but about two years ago I got finally fed up for a variety of reasons.

I installed Chromium and haven't looked back. It's lightweight and fast, the interface looks slick and stays out of the way, and the daily builds run stable on Macs and under Linux.

Gosh, here's one today. China forbids Philippines from fishing in international waters, citation here and about a million other places on the net. I really have to question your education here...do we not follow the news? It's been splashed all over the net. Your "understanding" is dated, if it ever were true in the first place. Please, go out and get some book learnin' in you, boy. Either that, or stop interrupting when adults are talking.

http://current.com/news-and-politics/89142818_bush-to-attack-iran-suspend-elections-and-declare-martial-law.htm supposedly quotes a named congress critter. That one source was referenced by a fair number of sources. That's a cut above an unamed DHS whistleblower. Frankly, I find all such claims place the person making the claim dangerously close to timecube guy. I've been hearing wingnut/moonbat claims to that sort of thing about every president since I started paying attention to politics.

Try ScriptNo for Chrome/Chromium. Not quite as comprehensive as NoScript, but has a better user interface, IMHO.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/oiigbmnaadbkfbmpbfijlflahbdbdgdf

No they're not. That is the delusion of conceited assholes who like to pretend they're better than other people.

Conceited assholes like you. Practically every post you make is an ad hominem attack. Does it make you feel better about yourself to put down other people? Maybe you weren't hugged enough as a child. Nah, you're probably just a conceited asshole.

The term idiolect is a well-known, well established term used in linguistics when discussing exactly this issue.

You mean the issue you made up a few posts back?

Perhaps you meant "hole" vice "whole" in the first sentence?

Perhaps you meant "instead of" instead of "vice" in the first sentence?

The use is technically correct

is a meaningless junk phrase in linguistics. If speakers of the language do not understand it, it is not correct.

"Meaningless junk phrase" is not a technical term in linguistics. It was just your pathetic attempt to put down the poster, who was correct, but throwing around impressive sounding terms, like linguistics. The particular thread was discussing the use of the word "vice" in lieu of "instead of". Vice; preposition: "as a substitute for"; synonyms: "instead of - in place of - in lieu of - for". Of course, since you couldn't counter the correctness of his statement, you instead attacked his phrasing by invoking linguistics. Ooh, big word, now we're all so scared.

A phrase is either understood or not. If it is not, then it is either incorrect in the speaker & listener's shared dialect (I are fast) or it is not part of their shared dialect (Marunong ka bang mag-Tagalog?).

If a phrase is not understood, it's also possible that the listener/reader simply hasn't encountered the phrase. Language fluency isn't a binary choice, it's a range of proficiency. Yes, you could be a pedant and be strict about the intersections of shared dialect. That wasn't the point. The point was that the use of the word vice was correct, but you, conceited asshole that you are, just had to interject so you could pretend to be better than other people.

There is no such thing as "technically correct" because languages are not constructed in anything resembling a technical fashion.

The most commonly used human languages weren't constructed, but there are many languages that are. However, just because a language wasn't "constructed in anything resembling a technical fashion" doesn't mean one can't have technically correct usage. Languages do have formal, or "technical", components, particularly grammar and syntax, and words do have formal definitions. The grammar, syntax and vocabulary may evolve, but at any particular time, one can come up with a formal description of the language which represents correct usage at that time.

The irony of your effort to cast my using a technical term with a technical, specific, and appropriate meaning as somehow not being useful in a post claiming that artificial, technical, specific language is superior to natural language is not lost on me. It'd be amusing if I thought you'd done it on purpose. Nice try though.

Sadly, that post never claimed that artificial, technical, specific language is superior to natural language, so there really is no irony there, except in your rather limited imagination. It'd be amusing if I thought you'd done it on purpose.

Nice try though.

No they're not. That is the delusion of conceited assholes who like to pretend they're better than other people.

Conceited assholes like you. Practically every post you make is an ad hominem attack. Does it make you feel better about yourself to put down other people? Maybe you weren't hugged enough as a child. Nah, you're probably just a conceited asshole.

The term idiolect is a well-known, well established term used in linguistics when discussing exactly this issue.

You mean the issue you made up a few posts back?

Perhaps you meant "hole" vice "whole" in the first sentence?

Perhaps you meant "instead of" instead of "vice" in the first sentence?

The use is technically correct

is a meaningless junk phrase in linguistics. If speakers of the language do not understand it, it is not correct.

"Meaningless junk phrase" is not a technical term in linguistics. It was just your pathetic attempt to put down the poster, who was correct, but throwing around impressive sounding terms, like linguistics. The particular thread was discussing the use of the word "vice" in lieu of "instead of". Vice; preposition: "as a substitute for"; synonyms: "instead of - in place of - in lieu of - for". Of course, since you couldn't counter the correctness of his statement, you instead attacked his phrasing by invoking linguistics. Ooh, big word, now we're all so scared.

A phrase is either understood or not. If it is not, then it is either incorrect in the speaker & listener's shared dialect (I are fast) or it is not part of their shared dialect (Marunong ka bang mag-Tagalog?).

If a phrase is not understood, it's also possible that the listener/reader simply hasn't encountered the phrase. Language fluency isn't a binary choice, it's a range of proficiency. Yes, you could be a pedant and be strict about the intersections of shared dialect. That wasn't the point. The point was that the use of the word vice was correct, but you, conceited asshole that you are, just had to interject so you could pretend to be better than other people.

There is no such thing as "technically correct" because languages are not constructed in anything resembling a technical fashion.

The most commonly used human languages weren't constructed, but there are many languages that are. However, just because a language wasn't "constructed in anything resembling a technical fashion" doesn't mean one can't have technically correct usage. Languages do have formal, or "technical", components, particularly grammar and syntax, and words do have formal definitions. The grammar, syntax and vocabulary may evolve, but at any particular time, one can come up with a formal description of the language which represents correct usage at that time.

The irony of your effort to cast my using a technical term with a technical, specific, and appropriate meaning as somehow not being useful in a post claiming that artificial, technical, specific language is superior to natural language is not lost on me. It'd be amusing if I thought you'd done it on purpose. Nice try though.

Sadly, that post never claimed that artificial, technical, specific language is superior to natural language, so there really is no irony there, except in your rather limited imagination. It'd be amusing if I thought you'd done it on purpose.

Nice try though.

Ah, but proper, intelligent communication, both written and spoken, are.

No they're not. That is the delusion of conceited assholes who like to pretend they're better than other people.

Did your calendar list "idiolect" as your word for the day and made it so that you had to find any way at all to inject it into a conversation?

The term idiolect is a well-known, well established

term used in linguistics when discussing exactly this issue.

To quote one of my parent posters

The fact that so many are uneducated and ignorant does not invalidate the use of the term.

The irony of your effort to cast my using a technical term with a technical, specific, and appropriate meaning as somehow not being useful in a post claiming that artificial, technical, specific language is superior to natural language is not lost on me. It'd be amusing if I thought you'd done it on purpose.

Nice try though.

TL;DR: Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak! Whoosh!

Ah, but proper, intelligent communication, both written and spoken, are.

No they're not. That is the delusion of conceited assholes who like to pretend they're better than other people.

Did your calendar list "idiolect" as your word for the day and made it so that you had to find any way at all to inject it into a conversation?

The term idiolect is a well-known, well established

term used in linguistics when discussing exactly this issue.

To quote one of my parent posters

The fact that so many are uneducated and ignorant does not invalidate the use of the term.

The irony of your effort to cast my using a technical term with a technical, specific, and appropriate meaning as somehow not being useful in a post claiming that artificial, technical, specific language is superior to natural language is not lost on me. It'd be amusing if I thought you'd done it on purpose.

Nice try though.

People forget that dictionaries are descriptive, not proscriptive.

I for one have never had a dictionary that forbade anything.

You're using the common definition, not the legal one.

"Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation; decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person."

If it merely meant "saying bad things" it would also include mere insults and vulgar abuse, which are not legally defamatory.

As to why Scotland has a separate system, your guess is as good as mine. Maybe vested interests prevented them being merged along with the Parliaments back when Jimmy took over from Liz. Maybe they forgot.

But the point still stands that when someone makes that mistake it's a good indicator that they don't know what they're talking about, and are probably more than a little overweight.

https://www.google.com/#q=recursion

https://www.google.com/voice

"Yes, I want a wrist phone, but I don't want to undergo surgery to have one."

Agreed, as they have been available for years now...

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1PRFA_enUS419US419&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=Wrist+GSM+phone#q=Wrist+GSM+phone&hl=en&rlz=1C1PRFA_enUS419US419&prmd=imvns&source=univ&tbm=shop&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=WDGxT7C9BMXc6QGdvtTLCQ&ved=0CNQBEK0E&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=c67682efa83391b3&biw=1680&bih=830

Hmm, let me make this nice and simple for you.

If it does something that is functional, such as an SLR making a shutter noise or a normal spoked bicycle wheel having spokes, then it is not skeumorphic.

If you have a camera that has no shutter making shutter noises, or molded decorative spokes on the side of an automobile tire that no longer needs them, simply because people expect new tech to behave like old tech, it's skeumorphic.

Is that so hard? If I say 'some A are B' this does not mean all A are B and you are terribly clever if you can come up with an example. It's implied.

Finally: Bike wheels without spokes: https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=spokeless+bicycle+wheel

    Actually, there have been many reports of someone "accidentally" walking off with someone elses stuff. Laptops are easy. Pick it up, slip it in your bag, and keep moving. A quick Google search shows all kinds of numbers being thrown around. It's more than 1, less than 1 million.

    When I refuse to go through the "microwave" (as the GP said), they pull me aside for the patdown. I keep an eye on my stuff until they're finally ready for me. I've had to ask security on multiple instances to secure *my* property, so no one else "accidentally" takes it. On very rare occasions did they guess what all of my property was.

    I think it's nuts. They pretend it's a high security environment, where anyone (and everyone) might be a terrorist. Yet, they go with the honor system for collecting your property from the x-ray conveyor belt, and at baggage claim. I've only been through a few airports (Las Vegas, and a few international destinations) that check the baggage claim ticket to the baggage you're taking. I don't even know if they do it as policy, or because someone was bored and wanted to harass travelers.

Spam, with a dubious download awaiting if you should happen to visit one of the many links to the site in the post. "MyCleanPC.com", along with sister site "DoubleMySpeed.com" were exposed ages ago as a scam, despite a veneer of legitimacy provided by some TV adverts. Just another one of those so called "security tools" which then proceeds to find a lot of problems with your PC and then requires you to "register" to fix the so called problems.

At the moment I write this there are 297 comments mostly debating the merits of LLVM/Clang vs. GCC. There is not one mention of EGCS.

Fifteen years ago GCC was forked. A group of people we're frustrated with GCC and its leadership because they had contributions to make and talent to offer that was not welcome. They called their fork EGCS.

Why are we doing this? It's become increasingly clear in the course of hacking events that the FSF's needs for gcc2 are at odds with the objectives of many in the community who have done lots of hacking and improvment [sic] over the years.

The GCC you use today is EGCS. A few years later EGCS was adopted as GCC 2.95 after the merits of EGCS became undeniable.

Looks like we've come full circle. The cool kids are off in the weeds making cool stuff. Better stuff, and the `Powers That Be' are not interested. The `needs' of the FSF today are no longer in sync with the `needs' of the developers of today.

The bottom line is that GCC as it is with it's leadership, code base and license agenda doesn't cut it for those who have the talent, motivation and capital to create a tool chain that does cut it. You don't get to impede that, however righteous you think you are.

Freedom. Deal with it.

...as would other programmers who have been changed from a Perl programmer to a "Pearl" programmer, COBOL program to "COBALT" programmer, etc. by a well-meaning, but tech-inept recruiter.

Yahoo! is targeted to mainstream, normal people, so perhaps you are not in that demographic. yahoo.com is easily in the top-10 of highest-traffic websites in the world.

• Ranked #3 by Google as of July 2011
• Ranked #4 by Alexa

In the land of Mordor, where the shadows lie.

To be fair, the Unity HUD thing is pretty nifty (the HUD, not the Dash- which is still not nifty). You hit Alt and you get a small text entry box. You type, and it returns every menu item in the programme you're using that matches the words. Surprisingly useful way of not having to deal with the drop-down menus.

that's still far, far away form the usability of drop down menus.
why? because you can see what the friggin commands are right there, you can even familiriaze yourself with the things the application can do by going through the menus.

that's the point of a gui, you don't need to know (all) the commands beforehand. when they're in standard locations you can at least save a work without knowing anything about the app. in many ways windows 3.11 era was pretty good when it came to just sitting on the machine not knowing shit about the os or programs and just being productive right away.

this is the most ridiculous use of floppy image ever though http://www.google.com/search?q=metro save icon&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi

not only on windows phones(so far on which it shipped on) do you not have a floppy drive.. you don't have any removable media! it's like it's just fucking with you.

"Growing trees does not make a difference"

Nope.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j2BAdNIG5Q2FJlEdac1l-KXiTSCA?docId=CNG.dfe97e07f144a2d29eb615412e0c12be.a81

Forests soak up third of fossil fuel emissions: study
By Marlowe Hood (AFP) – Jul 14, 2011
PARIS — Forests play a larger role in Earth's climate system than previously suspected for both the risks from deforestation and the potential gains from regrowth, a benchmark study released Thursday has shown.
The study, published in Science, provides the most accurate measure so far of the amount of greenhouse gases absorbed from the atmosphere by tropical, temperate and boreal forests, researchers said.
"This is the first complete and global evidence of the overwhelming role of forests in removing anthropogenic carbon dioxide," said co-author Josep Canadell, a scientist at CSIRO, Australia's national climate research centre in Canberra.
"If you were to stop deforestation tomorrow, the world's established and regrowing forests would remove half of fossil fuel emissions," he told AFP, describing the findings as both "incredible" and "unexpected".

If anyone wants an example of why RAID should always have a backup solution and not just and/or solution. Please check http://dslreports.com/ , as they just recovered from a powerloss at nac.net which took their entire array system with it, and fudged 2 years worth of data, which had to be sent off for recovery. That was on April16th, the site is just starting to come back up in the last two days.

Some info here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kll86bDn_MgWoo6Ja7oHo_yvI0SCqggEvNWwPWIcrHY/edit?pli=1

This seems like either the deeds of mighty Captain Pirk of Star Wreck fame, or the "invention" of transparant aluminum.

...so let them drill for it

If only. Canadian oil sands are processed by strip-mining the tar-rich sand and processing it with immense amounts of boiling water which is then flushed downstream along with tons of toxic by-products. All this is done in the middle of what was once pristine wilderness area, and upstream of many indigenous communities which are beginning to suffer severe health problems. The resulting toxic moonscapes make coal mining look positively inviting.

The downfall didn't start until the 80s, with its massive tax cuts, deregulation, explosion of Wall Street gambling, and culture of greed.

The middle class has always carried the majority of the tax burden, but they haven't been paid their fair share.

It started in the 70s when workers' productivity vs wages started to diverge.
It didn't help that Reagan decided to drastically cut tax rates, but the long term problem has not been lower taxes,
it's been that workers aren't being payed enough & therefore, the government's tax revenues haven't kept pace.

This wouldn't be an issue if the individuals who were accumulating 40 years worth of profits were paying the top tax rate.
But they didn't. For 40 years. So we're boned.

If you want to see all of the banners used by the Operation In Our Sites initiative, I have collected them here: DOJ Seized Domain Notices - Paul Nickerson - Picasa Web Albums

If that is the whole problem, why not rename the https protocol to "secure"?

I personally don't think it's a bad idea to make secure:// an alias of https://./ The only problem would be that just using https does not tell anything about the connections actual security.