Well, if you have ever operated certain models of older mowers, you would know how much of a pain in the ass it is to get it started using that cord. Most older mowers had a setting called "idle" that would stop the blades from rotating. I always used a stick to clean out the gunk, but I'll never forget the time when that thing started spinning around when I tapped it just right. Someone in our town lost a hand doing just that a year or two later. Now most mowers have a safety bar and warnings. Still, lots of people get hurt. Every year, nearly 80,000 Americans go to the hospital for injuries caused by lawn mowers, according to http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/features_healthbl og/2006/04/summers_almost_.html .
The underlying reason why businesses and corporations hate and despise warning labels is that they dislike the fact that they can be held liable under the law for injuries and damages NOT CAUSED BY NEGLIGENCE, but simply by putting a product out on the market.
Why is this so? Because the manufacturer of a product is in a better position than the consumer to know of its particular dangers. Therefore it is more reasonable to impose the burden of finding and correcting such dangers upon the manufacturer than imposing the burden of finding and avoiding unsafe products upon the consumer.
For every bad example of warning labels you can pull out of your hat, I can name ten good examples of warning labels that are absolutely necessary. For example, "Don't try to remove grass clogging lawn mower before turning off" and "buckle your seat belt" and "do not step on top step of ladder" and "do not use hair dryer in bathtub". These are all things that ordinary prudent people think are safe to do, but really aren't.
"Never use a lit match or open flame to check fuel level" seems pretty silly, but I have seen a number of people do this, seemingly unaware that gas fumes can ignite.
The whole point of allowing people to recover in strict liability for the failure to warn of a danger is that both parties are at fault, and someone has to pay for the injuries and damages. Our society has decided that it should be the corporation or business with big pockets, not the consumer. Maybe we could change this policy choice by making the State pay for all of our medical expenses instead...but of course, no one wants that. Or do they? Either way, we all pay the cost for stupid people, stupid designs, and defective products. The real question is who pays. Corporations want the consumers to pay. Consumers want anyone but them to pay. So, whats the solution? Making fun of warning labels isn't the answer.
"The executive branch shall construe subsection 404(c) of title 39, as enacted by subsection 1010(e) of the Act, which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection, in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances, such as to protect human life and safety against hazardous materials, and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."
I call Bullshit with the "BSG ratings are falling" crowd
From http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/search/article_display .jsp?vnu_content_id=1003223846 : -Respectable Start for Sci Fi's Battlestar Galactica: The two-hour, third-season premiere of Sci Fi Channel's Battlestar Galactica was the top-rated cable series on Friday, Oct. 6, with a 1.8 household rating and 2.2 million viewers. Comparatively, however, that was still down by 900,000 viewers from the season two opener in July 2005 (3.1 million).
So, they lost almost a million viewers...and they are still on top. I think that they are gambling that a move to Sunday night might help. I think that the long gaps between seasons helped to kill ratings...not the day of the week.
I, for one, would love to have a usb port on my dashboard, so I could monitor my computers vitals, diagnose those annoying dashboard lights when they pop up, play mp3s, hook up a webcam to record a traffic stop, etc.
BanjoBob is astute in noting that businesses do not want to upgrade to Vista because their computers work just fine now for doing word processing, data entry and reporting.
However, I work in an office where both WinXP and Win2000 are both used, and I can tell you from experience that I get much more work accomplished on a WinXP box, than a Win2000 box. Word Processing is faster, database crunching is faster, and doing work over the web is faster. It saves lots of time and money.
As we all know, Companies are notoriously shortsited in their computer needs. What isn't needed now, doesn't need to be bought now, but will be needed in the future. Instead of spending $500 now, spend $10,000 in getting everything right in 2 years. At least it won't show up in this years budget...
IANAFL - I am not a French Lawyer - but your rationale is misguided. General pricipals of justice are fairly consistant from one country to another. There is no "pushing" in this case. They put a deer at the side of the road where it is unlawful to hunt. Then someone shoots a rifle, from their car, which is also unlawful. Then they are arrested. So, they are guilty of firing a firearm from a vehicle and hunting without a licence.
You do have a point though that they could not be charged with an actual "poaching" charge, since they did kill an animal. However, they could be found guilty of "attempting to poach" the animal. Just because a person is mistaken as to the fact that the animal was not alive, does not make the crime of "attempting to poach" disappear. Similarly, you could be found guilty of "attempted murder" if you stab a dead body, believing that person to be alive.
Also, note that under French law, a judge could admit evidence unlawfully obtained by entrapment, at least according to some reading I did online. Americans take a suspicious view of such evidence, but Europeans generally do not.
Compensation for a taking under the 5th Amendment must be "just compensation". That is usually the fair market value of the property. Forgetting the cost of litigating this issue with a drug company, *shudder*, do you have any idea how much money drug companies make from a drug??? Something like 40 Billion dollars a year. Is our government going to put up, lets say 5 Billion dollars for a drug? So that the rest of the world can 'free ride' on the US taxpayer? Should other countries have to pony up a few million too? I say yes, yes, and yes. I think that the morally correct thing to do is to keep people from dying from preventable diseases.
Are you kidding? This author's name is Dr. Larry Silverberg. I somehow doubt that Silverberg's Jewish mother would have even allowed him near a Santa or a Christmas Tree. If anything, it is because his parents wouldn't let him participate in the Holiday Season that he feels a need to explain it scientifically. Or, he is just being a wiseass and trying to teach a little physics to the good Christian boys and girls:-)
Literacy has very little correlation to how well someone researches on the internet. People are bad at research, no matter what the medium or time period or level of education. Even professionals research poorly, in my experience. Researching is a skill that is not taught properly in schools, where it should be taught.
And taught early. My mother brought me to the local junior college library when I was in 5th grade and taught me how to use the microfiche machine to search back issues of the New York Times. And how to use a card catalog...one with index cards. She also taught me how to hunt for books in a library. (The key is to look by location on the bookshelf, not solely by the numbers). And once you get the material, you have to find the information you need, in the book, quickly and accurately, separating the bunk from the important information.
Here is my advice if you are doing any sort of research: First, search wikipedia about the topic. Second, actually read the entry so that you understand the material. Third, look at the footnotes and sources to discover the primary sources. If they are online, download and read them, and track down their primary sources. Repeat. Read everything you can on a topic that you can get your hands on. 90% of the really good stuff isn't available online...or at least without a subscription.
I don't know about you, but I like reading paper books and e-books. It depends on the topic, my location, and how I feel.
Waiting 10 minutes at the library for a 'paper book', rather than hunting for hours online or spending my own money would be nice.
But, hasn't anyone thought through the practical aspects of this technology? With limited space at a library, where do you keep all of the books you've printed once they are read and returned? Or do you get to keep the book at taxpayer expense? And if you keep it, should the library have to print it out again at taxpayer expense when the next patron wants the same book? And does the library have room to store this huge machine? And why spend $50,000 on this machine when you can get these books in electronic format in the first place?
IMHO, I have little faith in this technology, or this company. Check out their website: http://www.ondemandbooks.com/ -- its sorta pathetic. And the videos of the product in action...are in.mov format!!!! WTF? This makes me question their whole business decision making process and openness to the copyleft movement.
The main complaint of the article is that GNOME has no vision. I disagree. GNOME is supposed to be a Free, Usable, Accessible, International, Developer-friendly, Organized, Supported community desktop environment. GNOME also has very detailed Human Interface Guidelines: http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/2.0/ . If this is not a vision, I don't know what one is!!
Check out http://finance.google.com/finance?q=ERTS and look at EA's financials. This is the real scandal here. They brought in about $3 Billion, yes, Billion with a B, dollars in 2006. $3,000,000,000. That is a cool pile of cash. And then they spent just under half of that to make their product. Thats a lot of dough!
This is a link to the new Rule 26 electronic discovery rules. The Cornell link is the outdated 2005 version of the rules. Yet another reason to always hire a lawyer to do your legal work:-)
I found the responses to my original parent post to be very interesting and educational. The responses are supportive of my original hypothesis that many OSS programmers are not concerned with features that end-users desire.
The first objection to the hypothesis is that since OSS programmers do not get paid, they don't have to respond or "cater to" customers. I believe that this attitude is patently false, foolish, and shortsighted. Any freshman taking economics 101 will tell you that people who "work for free" are still an important part of the market and aren't truly working for free, but for other motivating reasons. This objection also takes the form of "I code for fun, so why should I give a flying duck about anyone?" The answer is simply stated: your reputation and OSS's reputation ride upon good quality software with features that end-users want.
A second objection runs along the lines of "Why should developers work on boring features developers don't want?" So-called boring features are essential to many users and if they are ignored, they will migrate to paid solutions. Furthermore, if OSS developers write code that end-users don't wish to use, then the software being developed will eventually hit an evolutionary dead end, since other end-users and potential developers will dismiss the project out of hand. Of course, most end-users of OSS software can't contribute code to the project because they aren't programmers...so asking them to "put up or shut up" is not only insulting, it is meaningless.
A third objection, is a tirade against end-users, who are a "bunch of clusterfucks they deal with everyday during the dayjob". Understandably, OSS developers don't find the complaints of this group very motivational and feel that they don't owe them anything at all. This objection is perhaps the most important objection, since this form of unprofessional laziness is the most difficult to manage in an OSS project.
To put it mildly, we all have to do things which we find boring, stupid, and silly...but these mundane everyday frustrating tasks are necessary to OSS's well-being and must be done. If these unfulfilling tasks are left to rot, OSS as a philosophy will fail, plain and simple.
If the end goal is to provide free and open software to all, then these barriers must be overcome. Otherwise, OSS will remain a bunch of unorganized, second rate, unusable tools for geeks only.
One of the huge problems that OSS faces is the attitude that if a user (non-developer) wants a feature, then he should work on it himself. OSS developers only seem to want to work on "pet projects" that are "fun" to code, not projects that are "boring" or seen as "difficult" or "of no interest to the developers". OSS programmers must take the time to provide features which the market, which primarily consists of non-developers, wants.
This is basic economics: provide the market with the goods it wants, or get run out of business.
From what I have been able to gather, Web 3.0 is some sort of additional layer on top of the web which utilizes artificial intelligence. According to the article, "Web 3.0 will be characterized and fueled by the successful marraige of artificial intelligence and the web....It will do so by shunting out the parts of the problem that require a human being to human beings with the help of the web"
I hope that Web 3.0 will have a built-in spell checking function before a post is made to a website. (Perhaps the writer could have used Firefox 2.0:-) )
The writer seems to be envisioning some sort of http://www.qunu.com/ system where users ask live humans for help over jabber chat? I am not so sure a system like this would work so well...I've found it to excel in some areas and lack in others...but it is hardly the stuff of Web 3.0.
So,/.'s, what do we geeks think web 3.0 should be? Personally, I see it as the triumph of open source/free/libre software and operating systems over the corporate behemoths. A place where ordinary folks, like auto mechanics and grandmothers, can write or find their own custom software with no technical no-how or cost. This is my vision of web 3.0 .
The book teaches the principles of Python programming by letting the reader create simple games. I found this method to be more concrete and rewarding than other books whose examples were very abstract. My one complaint is that the last three chapters on object oriented programing and gui graphic programing are a little confusing and use a watered down version of PyGames and LiveWires modules.
However, it provided me, a self-proclaimed programming idiot, a good solid foundation in the basics of programing.
I am a proud lifelong Democrat who has voted a straight party line ticket all of my life. I read up on the issues and I am well informed. I occassionally flirt with other party's platforms, but they don't do it for me. I don't like the Republicans, I dislike the idealism of the Libertarians, and I dispise the La Rouchies.
I take issue with the statement that "If someone doesn't care enough about the process to know who stands for what and to take the time to go vote without being harangued by some celebrity, then that person should have just stayed home". You have a right to choose who will represent you in Congress regardless of whether you know where he stands on the issues. It might be silly to vote for someone who doesn't have your best interests at heart, but each individual has to shoulder that responsibility himself. And if a celeberty tries to educate someone on an issue and encourages them to vote, more power to them.
In short, your lack of faith in this country and in the electorate is sickening, and is the prime reason why this country is in the shithole that it is in today.
The site claims that "Intel's quad-core QX6700 CPU offers stunning computing power. At the same clockspeed it runs anywhere between 25% and 70% faster than the already lightning-fast dual-core E6700."
After reading this review and the other reviews posted on Slashdot, I think that Intel bombed this launch bigtime. Perhaps AMD's true quadcore chip will trounce Intel's new offering. Only time will tell.
Doubtful. The lawyer would probably be able to collect attorney's fees, and perhaps argue for a punitive damage award, and make a sophisticated argument based on state law/common law/case law, and not just statutes.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you have ever operated certain models of older mowers, you would know how much of a pain in the ass it is to get it started using that cord. Most older mowers had a setting called "idle" that would stop the blades from rotating. I always used a stick to clean out the gunk, but I'll never forget the time when that thing started spinning around when I tapped it just right. Someone in our town lost a hand doing just that a year or two later. Now most mowers have a safety bar and warnings. Still, lots of people get hurt. Every year, nearly 80,000 Americans go to the hospital for injuries caused by lawn mowers, according to http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/features_healthbl og/2006/04/summers_almost_.html .
The underlying reason why businesses and corporations hate and despise warning labels is that they dislike the fact that they can be held liable under the law for injuries and damages NOT CAUSED BY NEGLIGENCE, but simply by putting a product out on the market.
Why is this so? Because the manufacturer of a product is in a better position than the consumer to know of its particular dangers. Therefore it is more reasonable to impose the burden of finding and correcting such dangers upon the manufacturer than imposing the burden of finding and avoiding unsafe products upon the consumer.
For every bad example of warning labels you can pull out of your hat, I can name ten good examples of warning labels that are absolutely necessary. For example, "Don't try to remove grass clogging lawn mower before turning off" and "buckle your seat belt" and "do not step on top step of ladder" and "do not use hair dryer in bathtub". These are all things that ordinary prudent people think are safe to do, but really aren't.
"Never use a lit match or open flame to check fuel level" seems pretty silly, but I have seen a number of people do this, seemingly unaware that gas fumes can ignite.
The whole point of allowing people to recover in strict liability for the failure to warn of a danger is that both parties are at fault, and someone has to pay for the injuries and damages. Our society has decided that it should be the corporation or business with big pockets, not the consumer. Maybe we could change this policy choice by making the State pay for all of our medical expenses instead...but of course, no one wants that. Or do they? Either way, we all pay the cost for stupid people, stupid designs, and defective products. The real question is who pays. Corporations want the consumers to pay. Consumers want anyone but them to pay. So, whats the solution? Making fun of warning labels isn't the answer.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/12/20 061220-6.html
"The executive branch shall construe subsection 404(c) of title 39, as enacted by subsection 1010(e) of the Act, which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection, in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances, such as to protect human life and safety against hazardous materials, and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."
I call Bullshit with the "BSG ratings are falling" crowd
y .jsp?vnu_content_id=1003223846 :
From http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/search/article_displa
-Respectable Start for Sci Fi's Battlestar Galactica:
The two-hour, third-season premiere of Sci Fi Channel's Battlestar Galactica was the top-rated cable series on Friday, Oct. 6, with a 1.8 household rating and 2.2 million viewers. Comparatively, however, that was still down by 900,000 viewers from the season two opener in July 2005 (3.1 million).
So, they lost almost a million viewers...and they are still on top. I think that they are gambling that a move to Sunday night might help. I think that the long gaps between seasons helped to kill ratings...not the day of the week.
I, for one, would love to have a usb port on my dashboard, so I could monitor my computers vitals, diagnose those annoying dashboard lights when they pop up, play mp3s, hook up a webcam to record a traffic stop, etc.
BanjoBob is astute in noting that businesses do not want to upgrade to Vista because their computers work just fine now for doing word processing, data entry and reporting.
However, I work in an office where both WinXP and Win2000 are both used, and I can tell you from experience that I get much more work accomplished on a WinXP box, than a Win2000 box. Word Processing is faster, database crunching is faster, and doing work over the web is faster. It saves lots of time and money.
As we all know, Companies are notoriously shortsited in their computer needs. What isn't needed now, doesn't need to be bought now, but will be needed in the future. Instead of spending $500 now, spend $10,000 in getting everything right in 2 years. At least it won't show up in this years budget...
IANAFL - I am not a French Lawyer - but your rationale is misguided. General pricipals of justice are fairly consistant from one country to another. There is no "pushing" in this case. They put a deer at the side of the road where it is unlawful to hunt. Then someone shoots a rifle, from their car, which is also unlawful. Then they are arrested. So, they are guilty of firing a firearm from a vehicle and hunting without a licence.
You do have a point though that they could not be charged with an actual "poaching" charge, since they did kill an animal. However, they could be found guilty of "attempting to poach" the animal. Just because a person is mistaken as to the fact that the animal was not alive, does not make the crime of "attempting to poach" disappear. Similarly, you could be found guilty of "attempted murder" if you stab a dead body, believing that person to be alive.
Also, note that under French law, a judge could admit evidence unlawfully obtained by entrapment, at least according to some reading I did online. Americans take a suspicious view of such evidence, but Europeans generally do not.
Compensation for a taking under the 5th Amendment must be "just compensation". That is usually the fair market value of the property. Forgetting the cost of litigating this issue with a drug company, *shudder*, do you have any idea how much money drug companies make from a drug??? Something like 40 Billion dollars a year. Is our government going to put up, lets say 5 Billion dollars for a drug? So that the rest of the world can 'free ride' on the US taxpayer? Should other countries have to pony up a few million too? I say yes, yes, and yes. I think that the morally correct thing to do is to keep people from dying from preventable diseases.
Are you kidding? This author's name is Dr. Larry Silverberg. I somehow doubt that Silverberg's Jewish mother would have even allowed him near a Santa or a Christmas Tree. If anything, it is because his parents wouldn't let him participate in the Holiday Season that he feels a need to explain it scientifically. Or, he is just being a wiseass and trying to teach a little physics to the good Christian boys and girls :-)
Literacy has very little correlation to how well someone researches on the internet. People are bad at research, no matter what the medium or time period or level of education. Even professionals research poorly, in my experience. Researching is a skill that is not taught properly in schools, where it should be taught.
And taught early. My mother brought me to the local junior college library when I was in 5th grade and taught me how to use the microfiche machine to search back issues of the New York Times. And how to use a card catalog...one with index cards. She also taught me how to hunt for books in a library. (The key is to look by location on the bookshelf, not solely by the numbers). And once you get the material, you have to find the information you need, in the book, quickly and accurately, separating the bunk from the important information.
Here is my advice if you are doing any sort of research: First, search wikipedia about the topic. Second, actually read the entry so that you understand the material. Third, look at the footnotes and sources to discover the primary sources. If they are online, download and read them, and track down their primary sources. Repeat. Read everything you can on a topic that you can get your hands on. 90% of the really good stuff isn't available online...or at least without a subscription.
I don't know about you, but I like reading paper books and e-books. It depends on the topic, my location, and how I feel.
.mov format!!!! WTF? This makes me question their whole business decision making process and openness to the copyleft movement.
Waiting 10 minutes at the library for a 'paper book', rather than hunting for hours online or spending my own money would be nice.
But, hasn't anyone thought through the practical aspects of this technology? With limited space at a library, where do you keep all of the books you've printed once they are read and returned? Or do you get to keep the book at taxpayer expense? And if you keep it, should the library have to print it out again at taxpayer expense when the next patron wants the same book? And does the library have room to store this huge machine? And why spend $50,000 on this machine when you can get these books in electronic format in the first place?
IMHO, I have little faith in this technology, or this company. Check out their website: http://www.ondemandbooks.com/ -- its sorta pathetic. And the videos of the product in action...are in
The main complaint of the article is that GNOME has no vision. I disagree. GNOME is supposed to be a Free, Usable, Accessible, International, Developer-friendly, Organized, Supported community desktop environment. GNOME also has very detailed Human Interface Guidelines: http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/2.0/ . If this is not a vision, I don't know what one is!!
Check out http://finance.google.com/finance?q=ERTS and look at EA's financials. This is the real scandal here. They brought in about $3 Billion, yes, Billion with a B, dollars in 2006. $3,000,000,000. That is a cool pile of cash. And then they spent just under half of that to make their product. Thats a lot of dough!
http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/supct1105/CV_Clean.p df
:-)
This is a link to the new Rule 26 electronic discovery rules. The Cornell link is the outdated 2005 version of the rules. Yet another reason to always hire a lawyer to do your legal work
I found the responses to my original parent post to be very interesting and educational. The responses are supportive of my original hypothesis that many OSS programmers are not concerned with features that end-users desire.
The first objection to the hypothesis is that since OSS programmers do not get paid, they don't have to respond or "cater to" customers. I believe that this attitude is patently false, foolish, and shortsighted. Any freshman taking economics 101 will tell you that people who "work for free" are still an important part of the market and aren't truly working for free, but for other motivating reasons. This objection also takes the form of "I code for fun, so why should I give a flying duck about anyone?" The answer is simply stated: your reputation and OSS's reputation ride upon good quality software with features that end-users want.
A second objection runs along the lines of "Why should developers work on boring features developers don't want?" So-called boring features are essential to many users and if they are ignored, they will migrate to paid solutions. Furthermore, if OSS developers write code that end-users don't wish to use, then the software being developed will eventually hit an evolutionary dead end, since other end-users and potential developers will dismiss the project out of hand. Of course, most end-users of OSS software can't contribute code to the project because they aren't programmers...so asking them to "put up or shut up" is not only insulting, it is meaningless.
A third objection, is a tirade against end-users, who are a "bunch of clusterfucks they deal with everyday during the dayjob". Understandably, OSS developers don't find the complaints of this group very motivational and feel that they don't owe them anything at all. This objection is perhaps the most important objection, since this form of unprofessional laziness is the most difficult to manage in an OSS project.
To put it mildly, we all have to do things which we find boring, stupid, and silly...but these mundane everyday frustrating tasks are necessary to OSS's well-being and must be done. If these unfulfilling tasks are left to rot, OSS as a philosophy will fail, plain and simple.
If the end goal is to provide free and open software to all, then these barriers must be overcome. Otherwise, OSS will remain a bunch of unorganized, second rate, unusable tools for geeks only.
One of the huge problems that OSS faces is the attitude that if a user (non-developer) wants a feature, then he should work on it himself. OSS developers only seem to want to work on "pet projects" that are "fun" to code, not projects that are "boring" or seen as "difficult" or "of no interest to the developers". OSS programmers must take the time to provide features which the market, which primarily consists of non-developers, wants.
This is basic economics: provide the market with the goods it wants, or get run out of business.
From what I have been able to gather, Web 3.0 is some sort of additional layer on top of the web which utilizes artificial intelligence. According to the article, "Web 3.0 will be characterized and fueled by the successful marraige of artificial intelligence and the web....It will do so by shunting out the parts of the problem that require a human being to human beings with the help of the web"
:-) )
/.'s, what do we geeks think web 3.0 should be? Personally, I see it as the triumph of open source/free/libre software and operating systems over the corporate behemoths. A place where ordinary folks, like auto mechanics and grandmothers, can write or find their own custom software with no technical no-how or cost. This is my vision of web 3.0 .
I hope that Web 3.0 will have a built-in spell checking function before a post is made to a website. (Perhaps the writer could have used Firefox 2.0
The writer seems to be envisioning some sort of http://www.qunu.com/ system where users ask live humans for help over jabber chat? I am not so sure a system like this would work so well...I've found it to excel in some areas and lack in others...but it is hardly the stuff of Web 3.0.
So,
I for one welcome our boring brown colored ubuntu distro overlords...again.
Oh boy, I can't wait for the Adobe Acrobat Plug-in toolbars and such....*sigh*
Bank of America allows you to download .qif files for the past 9 months....
I carry a light and compact Canon Powershot SD500 series camera on my belt and it does 99% of what I want it to do.
I have owned a 35 SLR and it was the biggest waste of money because I never used it and I never had it when I needed it.
The best pictures are made not with the best or most expensive equipment, but when your in the right place at the right time WITH YOUR CAMERA!
The book teaches the principles of Python programming by letting the reader create simple games. I found this method to be more concrete and rewarding than other books whose examples were very abstract. My one complaint is that the last three chapters on object oriented programing and gui graphic programing are a little confusing and use a watered down version of PyGames and LiveWires modules.
However, it provided me, a self-proclaimed programming idiot, a good solid foundation in the basics of programing.
I am a proud lifelong Democrat who has voted a straight party line ticket all of my life. I read up on the issues and I am well informed. I occassionally flirt with other party's platforms, but they don't do it for me. I don't like the Republicans, I dislike the idealism of the Libertarians, and I dispise the La Rouchies.
I take issue with the statement that "If someone doesn't care enough about the process to know who stands for what and to take the time to go vote without being harangued by some celebrity, then that person should have just stayed home". You have a right to choose who will represent you in Congress regardless of whether you know where he stands on the issues. It might be silly to vote for someone who doesn't have your best interests at heart, but each individual has to shoulder that responsibility himself. And if a celeberty tries to educate someone on an issue and encourages them to vote, more power to them.
In short, your lack of faith in this country and in the electorate is sickening, and is the prime reason why this country is in the shithole that it is in today.
http://www.overclockers.com.au/article.php?id=5199 19
The site claims that "Intel's quad-core QX6700 CPU offers stunning computing power. At the same clockspeed it runs anywhere between 25% and 70% faster than the already lightning-fast dual-core E6700."
After reading this review and the other reviews posted on Slashdot, I think that Intel bombed this launch bigtime. Perhaps AMD's true quadcore chip will trounce Intel's new offering. Only time will tell.
Doubtful. The lawyer would probably be able to collect attorney's fees, and perhaps argue for a punitive damage award, and make a sophisticated argument based on state law/common law/case law, and not just statutes.