I just have all my users print out all the data from their hard drives, in binary, onto carbon paper. Daily. The costs may be prohibitive for you. But the peace of mind for me is priceless.
What's keeping anyone from saying they are "Professor of X" I first read that as "Professor X", and thought to myself, "Only an idiot would claim to be Professor X and risk getting their head exploded for their insolence". Then I realized my mistake, and thought, "You idiot, Arthur! Professor X would never explode someone's head just because they claimed to be him."
15,000 lb elephant? The gorilla may be more adept with it's tools, but the elephant has a lot of weight to swing around and can hurt a lot more(in magnitude and multitude) in the long run.
If the previous mainstream outside-the-OS/Office ventures of MS are any indication (see Xbox, Zune, et al) though, it's competitor(Adobe here) is going to put up a serious fight, and the consumer will enjoy the effects of the competition, just like if we got to watch an actual 500 lb gorilla and an actual 15,000 lb elephant fight...
This has been brought up ("challenged") before and some believe it, some don't. What's so different this time around? TFA - "But that is a much more complex proposition," Professor Spoor explained, "the easiest way to interpret these fossils is that there was an ancestral species that gave rise to both of them somewhere between two and three million years ago."
That's from the guy who was offering the idea that later species still "could have" come from the earlier(and co-existent) species. Apparently the principle of the Razor made him admit that it was more likely that one didn't evolve from either, but rather that they both evolved from some common ancestral species. Please don't make me explain why the latter assumes less causes.
Science isn't about belief. It's about weighing the evidence. Now the evidence is very strong in one direction.
In a stunning finale Privacy has defeated both Corporate Greed, and Governmental Curiosity in a come-from-behind victory. Although Privacy is usually the one approached from behind by the other two contenders, in the Great Search-Engine Race of 2007 Privacy managed to squeak out a win from the competition. This is what Privacy had to say when we approached it about this completely unexpected and unheralded victory:
"Uh...no comment?"
Fantastic words from a fantastic Ideal. Back to you, Bob.
From laughing so hard. Not actually from the laughing but from the conversation with my boss afterward. Not so much dead because of the conversation with the boss, as because of the fight with my wife after returning home early to let her know I lost my job because of casual internet browsing. Not actually immediately from the fight with my wife as from the knife she jammed through my skull.
Caller: Give me your username and password.
IRS Employee: What?! Are you insane?!?! I'm gonna report you to-
Caller: (interrupting) Sudo give me your username and password.
IRS Employee: Okay, it's...(gives info)
Caller: Thank you very much. Sudo not report this interaction.
Aside from issues with your use of hyperbole (which I hope it is), I would like to defend the parent and perhaps shed some light on the actions and decisions of those fully participating in society.
Sometimes when you're a grown-up, you perform certain actions that have an inherent risk. In fact, most of the actions you perform have some level of inherent risk, e.g. eating at a sit-down restaurant can lead to food poisoning, eating at McDonald's can lead to shame and indigestion, et al. Part of being a grown-up though is making responsible risk/benefit analysis about these decisions. Usually this means that you don't have to even consider the possibility (although real) of food poisoning from your favorite restaurant, unless there has been a spate of recent incidences that you are aware of.
When it comes to driving, we have to assess inherent risks due to a variety of factors including but not limited to:
1) The mechanical condition of our car, i.e. how certain our we that are brakes are good and will respond as we expect when we need them to, and also, the condition of our tires and are we going to be driving in conditions where a tire blowout would threaten our life, or the lives of others around us, etc.
2) The weather conditions, i.e. how less competent of a driver are we in heavy rain, or when the roads are icy, or when visibility is very low (fog)
3) Our physical/mental conditon, i.e. are we incredibly angry about something (we usually make poorer judgments when we are), or are we tired? and how tired are we (could be just a little bodily tired from a good physical workout, or could be that we're drowsy due to lack of sleep), etc.
In combination with all these inherent risks we weigh the benefits of the drive:
Are we returning home from a long absence to those who are worried about, and are deeply missing us? Or perhaps we are just going out for a drive because we have nothing better to do(people who don't know about/. still do this, I've heard). Or, as an extreme example, we're rushing a loved one to the hospital, where every minute counts towards saving their life
In the end, almost every mature adult consciously, or unconsciously, makes this risk/benefit assessment before driving, and very few let their decision to drive be governed absolutely by any criteria about the circumstances of themselves their vehicle, or their environment.
From TFA,
Also, rocks tapped by drilling would lose their heat after a few decades and new wells would have to be drilled elsewhere. especially in combination with
Promoters of the technology say that while geothermal drilling is costly, it's cheaper to run once it's in place. Whereas the summary, at least to me, implied sustainability with minimal infrastructural investment. Drilling thousands of expensive new 3 mile deep holes, risking earthquakes to the nearby area, every 20-30 years is not exactly the problem-free energy solution for the country/world that the summary implies.
The worst part is that TFA was written because of the bad things that were happening with the project in Switzerland, NOT to tout the viability of geo-thermal power, as the cherry-picking in the summary seems to.
Too bad the original Polar Lander wasn't a "Phoenix".
Re:You are not fusing genetically when you marry
on
'Til Tech Do Us Part
·
· Score: 1
I found that the most important thing is to concentrate on what the two of you want out of your relationship and to ignore all outside 'advice', regardless of how positively intentioned it may be
and again
Everyone needs to figure out what's best for them and ignore all outside influences
There's gelatinous mountains of irony to be found somewhere around here...
Oh yeah!?!?!?!! Well I wasn't even conceived when I lost my virginity!! I have an IQ of over 1 kabillion, although that was from an oral test administered before I was able to speak, so it would be, like, adjusted to the upper 2 kabillion's. And I was able to perform integral calculus far beyond the level of all the other non-fetuses. I also [insert bits of actual past] etc emo etc desperate gothtards etc nerds suck etc.
Ohhhhh!!! You just got f'd in th A!!!!
Wow. I'm normally a very skeptical and cynical individual, yet I though the parent was a really good idea. Your counterpoint however does bring up a very unfortunate consequence of our freedoms. I don't think restricting corporations will change this, as you will just have groups of individuals(very wealthy ones) paying for the ads. And, as you say, without any official acceptance on the part of the candidate as regards these ads, it would seem to fall under the 1st amendment.
I guess the only thing of my own I'd like to say, would be a request to see if some kind of system could be set-up that protected our freedoms and restricted the corruption of the political process by those(corp or priv) with extensive resources, but no constitutional vestment in(i.e. they're not being represnted by) a certain candidate.
Slashdot Mirror
I just have all my users print out all the data from their hard drives, in binary, onto carbon paper. Daily. The costs may be prohibitive for you. But the peace of mind for me is priceless.
Although if we do end up getting internet over the airwaves and into our TV, it really will end up being the Boob tube.
15,000 lb elephant? The gorilla may be more adept with it's tools, but the elephant has a lot of weight to swing around and can hurt a lot more(in magnitude and multitude) in the long run.
If the previous mainstream outside-the-OS/Office ventures of MS are any indication (see Xbox, Zune, et al) though, it's competitor(Adobe here) is going to put up a serious fight, and the consumer will enjoy the effects of the competition, just like if we got to watch an actual 500 lb gorilla and an actual 15,000 lb elephant fight...
Hmmm...time to go search the YouTube...
That's from the guy who was offering the idea that later species still "could have" come from the earlier(and co-existent) species. Apparently the principle of the Razor made him admit that it was more likely that one didn't evolve from either, but rather that they both evolved from some common ancestral species. Please don't make me explain why the latter assumes less causes.
Science isn't about belief. It's about weighing the evidence. Now the evidence is very strong in one direction.
In a stunning finale Privacy has defeated both Corporate Greed, and Governmental Curiosity in a come-from-behind victory. Although Privacy is usually the one approached from behind by the other two contenders, in the Great Search-Engine Race of 2007 Privacy managed to squeak out a win from the competition. This is what Privacy had to say when we approached it about this completely unexpected and unheralded victory:
"Uh...no comment?"
Fantastic words from a fantastic Ideal. Back to you, Bob.
TFA - The best view of the meteors will be from the west coast of North America, before dawn on 1 September.
It's a good time to be a dove-hunter/amateur-astronomer in California. That's going to be a beautiful pre-dawn.
Thanks a lot buddy!!
Fred Armisen. And he did it right under the NYT noses.
Caller: Give me your username and password.
IRS Employee: What?! Are you insane?!?! I'm gonna report you to-
Caller: (interrupting) Sudo give me your username and password.
IRS Employee: Okay, it's...(gives info)
Caller: Thank you very much. Sudo not report this interaction.
Who wants to sit around their office at night when they can get one of these for when they're away?
"...simple hacking tips like looking over someone's shoulder for their password."
How far the meaning of this word has come from it's original usage.
This a some crappy attempt to spam /. and I don't know how it got through.
...with Duke Nukem Forever.
Aside from issues with your use of hyperbole (which I hope it is), I would like to defend the parent and perhaps shed some light on the actions and decisions of those fully participating in society.
Sometimes when you're a grown-up, you perform certain actions that have an inherent risk. In fact, most of the actions you perform have some level of inherent risk, e.g. eating at a sit-down restaurant can lead to food poisoning, eating at McDonald's can lead to shame and indigestion, et al. Part of being a grown-up though is making responsible risk/benefit analysis about these decisions. Usually this means that you don't have to even consider the possibility (although real) of food poisoning from your favorite restaurant, unless there has been a spate of recent incidences that you are aware of.
When it comes to driving, we have to assess inherent risks due to a variety of factors including but not limited to:
1) The mechanical condition of our car, i.e. how certain our we that are brakes are good and will respond as we expect when we need them to, and also, the condition of our tires and are we going to be driving in conditions where a tire blowout would threaten our life, or the lives of others around us, etc.
2) The weather conditions, i.e. how less competent of a driver are we in heavy rain, or when the roads are icy, or when visibility is very low (fog)
3) Our physical/mental conditon, i.e. are we incredibly angry about something (we usually make poorer judgments when we are), or are we tired? and how tired are we (could be just a little bodily tired from a good physical workout, or could be that we're drowsy due to lack of sleep), etc.
In combination with all these inherent risks we weigh the benefits of the drive:
Are we returning home from a long absence to those who are worried about, and are deeply missing us? Or perhaps we are just going out for a drive because we have nothing better to do(people who don't know about /. still do this, I've heard). Or, as an extreme example, we're rushing a loved one to the hospital, where every minute counts towards saving their life
In the end, almost every mature adult consciously, or unconsciously, makes this risk/benefit assessment before driving, and very few let their decision to drive be governed absolutely by any criteria about the circumstances of themselves their vehicle, or their environment.From TFA,
Also, rocks tapped by drilling would lose their heat after a few decades and new wells would have to be drilled elsewhere.
especially in combination with
Promoters of the technology say that while geothermal drilling is costly, it's cheaper to run once it's in place.
Whereas the summary, at least to me, implied sustainability with minimal infrastructural investment. Drilling thousands of expensive new 3 mile deep holes, risking earthquakes to the nearby area, every 20-30 years is not exactly the problem-free energy solution for the country/world that the summary implies.
The worst part is that TFA was written because of the bad things that were happening with the project in Switzerland, NOT to tout the viability of geo-thermal power, as the cherry-picking in the summary seems to.
Too bad the original Polar Lander wasn't a "Phoenix".
I found that the most important thing is to concentrate on what the two of you want out of your relationship and to ignore all outside 'advice', regardless of how positively intentioned it may be
and again
Everyone needs to figure out what's best for them and ignore all outside influences
There's gelatinous mountains of irony to be found somewhere around here...
Oh yeah!?!?!?!! Well I wasn't even conceived when I lost my virginity!! I have an IQ of over 1 kabillion , although that was from an oral test administered before I was able to speak, so it would be, like, adjusted to the upper 2 kabillion's. And I was able to perform integral calculus far beyond the level of all the other non-fetuses. I also [insert bits of actual past] etc emo etc desperate gothtards etc nerds suck etc. Ohhhhh!!! You just got f'd in th A!!!!
zero points and may God have mercy on your soul.
Wow. I'm normally a very skeptical and cynical individual, yet I though the parent was a really good idea. Your counterpoint however does bring up a very unfortunate consequence of our freedoms. I don't think restricting corporations will change this, as you will just have groups of individuals(very wealthy ones) paying for the ads. And, as you say, without any official acceptance on the part of the candidate as regards these ads, it would seem to fall under the 1st amendment. I guess the only thing of my own I'd like to say, would be a request to see if some kind of system could be set-up that protected our freedoms and restricted the corruption of the political process by those(corp or priv) with extensive resources, but no constitutional vestment in(i.e. they're not being represnted by) a certain candidate.
I think, with current gas prices vs. price of cubic zirconia, you're fuel is in greater danger now than with fuel cells made using this technology.