But not entirely wrong. It's just simpler: you (never mention|bagatelize|fight) the next one down. Coke never mentions Pepsi, and depending on the area you're speaking of, MS never mentions Apple (when it comes to desktops) or Linux (when it comes to small middleware servers). In turn, when it comes to desktops, Linux gets the Mac fanboys quite upset. And so this little cynical game trickles down; Linux users tend to think they have a superior system to FreeBSD (they don't), etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Like Tom Lehrer used to say: 'And everybody hates the Hurd'. Oh no - he didn't say that.
It's about money. If you are my child and I leave you a house, then that house is worth something - *provided that you maintain it*. Which costs money. Which, in turn, is considered fair, because it keeps you from being lazy. If I can leave you the copyrights to my book and you reap royalties from it, then that costs you nothing - yet your gain is potentially infinite. That is considered unfair, because it'll allow you to be lazy, without you having done anything to deserve that. Society doesn't necessarily hate lazy people - it hates people who are lazy and who haven't done anything to deserve it. Besides, 'ownership' is already established, because my name will always be associated with the book. No copyrights necessary. If someone were to copy it without attributing it to me, then that's plagiarism, which is a different story altogether.
Exactly. What always struck me about certain applications that do a DTD-conformant XLST processing step _every_time_ a web page is checked. That means my web app is dependent on the location on the internet being reachable (proxies!! downtime!! all that yummy goodness!!), plus the unacceptable overhead. But.. they merrily keep on making XSLT processors that _will_not_run_ without access to the DTD (I'm looking at you java!).
You could implement a ttl-to-limbo variant; plus, you could implement all sorts of features with respect to how you discriminate - must a file be untouched for a year, or is one year after its ctime that you move it to limbo ? In reality, since people aren't very good at micromanaging their files, it's probably better if this feature were 'inherited' from the directory that it's in. Also, it's typically something that programs do instead of users; if I tag a tar with a ttl, then I'll want all files coming out of that tar to have the same ttl, and all the files that are created in that same dir using 'configure' and 'make' also. That way I can have an installation of some package and not worry about it's throwing files around: tomorrow they'll be gone. But if I want to keep them, then all I'd have to do is issue some command, and they'll live on my hard-disk forever. I guy can dream, I suppose..
So you would expect the rate of skin cancer among Ghaneans in Trondheim (for example) to be soaring. Then again, Norway has one of the best medical systems in the world, but you'd at least expect to see a correlation.
You assume tit-for-tat, where each case is really an individual one. I don't know about any of the incidents that you mention, and I don't know anything about Mr. Imus' past. As neither you should, if you want to call a proper judgement of the incident. And for now it seems to me like in a few years time, the good people of the US will have to look back with shame on their vehement reaction to something so absolutely ignorable. But than again, looking back will never be their strength, I suppose.
I see our resident 'switcheur' troll is absent today. Why is that, I wonder ? It must be the beautiful weather - I bet he's out on the beach with his beautiful friends.
Not inferior, just at the moment incapable (without questioning the reasons why). The point is; you don't apply standards to them - I think Iraq showed that; you're just not in their shoes and 'nationbuilding' clearly doesn't work. But you're not willing to lower your own standards either. Take, for example, Saudi Arabia. They portray themselves as a 'Muslim country' - no bibles allowed. Do we reciprocate and say: 'no qurans allowed' ? No, we don't. It would fly in the face of freedom of religion. Besides, we don't portray ourselves as a 'christian nation'. It would fly in the face of everything we went through during the enlightenment. Do we call Saudi 'inferior' ? Can we, really ? Are they genetically different - incapable of eduction - too poor ? No. Two reasons: 1) They are incapable at the moment (cultural issues, mainly) and 2) Larger picture: perhaps Saudi isn't a 'country' as such. Perhaps they do not see themselves as representatives of a people the way the peoples of nations of the West do. Then what's the use in comparing ? You call it leftist. I call it realist - different place, different people, different mores. Oh, and just to make sure: when I say 'at the moment', I don't mean to imply that when the moment passes, things will progress and all will be 'better', no - 'at the moment' means just strictly that.
It's called 'proportional judgement' and it's applied all the time: in Saudi you're not allowed to bring in a bible - should 'christian countries' disallow a quran ? Of course not. 'We' are expected to be 'better' than that. Palestinians kill people and Israelis kill people, yet we judge Israelis more harshly for it. We expect them to 'better', 'apply higher standards', 'be more careful'. The Russians implement laws that limit freedom and so does the US - not in the same way, and yet they're being compared. Why is that ? Because we expect the US to be 'better', 'more protected', 'less easily brought astray'. Anyone who has ever been in a debate must have encountered proportional judgement at some point. Haven't you ?
"kilometrage" may sound silly to you, but I can assure you that on mainland Europe, it's a perfectly normal word (where, of course, some languages make their local variety of it).
But.. but.. KARR was destroyed ! Oh no - they must have reassembled him from that little blinking light that was left in the debris ! Oh no ! Micheal ! Come back ! We need you !
The result of which would be the same if you just assumed that MS is a dominant force and as such, has the moral obligation to make their products interoperable with anyone else's. Just as it is reasonable to assume that _within_ MS, they have all of their formats and protocol specs documented, simply because new people get to go to work there for the first time almost every day. Just as it is reasonable to assume that no such company could ever emerge from Belgium. They may be rancunous, but they're not stupid in Brussels, and the result, as I outlined above, is just the same.
Or have the cable on a large pully. And create a redundant subsystem on top of it, that throws out a parachute in case of an emergency. And have an independent computer monitor its position and vector, and throw the emergency switch when one of those values falls outside of safe parameters.
]] Evolution as an email client works fine with the Exchange Server.
Yes, but what about the other features of outlook - calendar, directory etc. ? I know exchange _can_ act like LDAP, I'm just not sure if it always _will_.
Currently, I'm allowed to have my Gentoo workstation. Next month I'm off to a new employer and they said: 'Ok. So long as you can run outlook for your agenda.'. I'd figure it would run under wine, and most of the people on the net seem to agree. I'd like to ask this question to the/. crowd, though - does an install of outlook under wine come with any conditions, caveats or things that you can plainly have not that windows users have ? Thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
But not entirely wrong. It's just simpler: you (never mention|bagatelize|fight) the next one down. Coke never mentions Pepsi, and depending on the area you're speaking of, MS never mentions Apple (when it comes to desktops) or Linux (when it comes to small middleware servers). In turn, when it comes to desktops, Linux gets the Mac fanboys quite upset. And so this little cynical game trickles down; Linux users tend to think they have a superior system to FreeBSD (they don't), etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Like Tom Lehrer used to say: 'And everybody hates the Hurd'. Oh no - he didn't say that.
You know that you're only allowed to record the ads ! /rolls eyes/.
I don't need SQL injection scanners. I use perl DBI and I always put arguments in as '?'.
It's about money. If you are my child and I leave you a house, then that house is worth something - *provided that you maintain it*. Which costs money. Which, in turn, is considered fair, because it keeps you from being lazy. If I can leave you the copyrights to my book and you reap royalties from it, then that costs you nothing - yet your gain is potentially infinite. That is considered unfair, because it'll allow you to be lazy, without you having done anything to deserve that. Society doesn't necessarily hate lazy people - it hates people who are lazy and who haven't done anything to deserve it. Besides, 'ownership' is already established, because my name will always be associated with the book. No copyrights necessary. If someone were to copy it without attributing it to me, then that's plagiarism, which is a different story altogether.
Exactly. What always struck me about certain applications that do a DTD-conformant XLST processing step _every_time_ a web page is checked. That means my web app is dependent on the location on the internet being reachable (proxies!! downtime!! all that yummy goodness!!), plus the unacceptable overhead. But.. they merrily keep on making XSLT processors that _will_not_run_ without access to the DTD (I'm looking at you java!).
You could implement a ttl-to-limbo variant; plus, you could implement all sorts of features with respect to how you discriminate - must a file be untouched for a year, or is one year after its ctime that you move it to limbo ? In reality, since people aren't very good at micromanaging their files, it's probably better if this feature were 'inherited' from the directory that it's in. Also, it's typically something that programs do instead of users; if I tag a tar with a ttl, then I'll want all files coming out of that tar to have the same ttl, and all the files that are created in that same dir using 'configure' and 'make' also. That way I can have an installation of some package and not worry about it's throwing files around: tomorrow they'll be gone. But if I want to keep them, then all I'd have to do is issue some command, and they'll live on my hard-disk forever. I guy can dream, I suppose..
So you would expect the rate of skin cancer among Ghaneans in Trondheim (for example) to be soaring. Then again, Norway has one of the best medical systems in the world, but you'd at least expect to see a correlation.
That's a tit, innit ? Whas a lovely tit like that doing next to a pile of vomit ?
That co-worker of yours. That wasn't Sandra Bullock, was it ?
You assume tit-for-tat, where each case is really an individual one. I don't know about any of the incidents that you mention, and I don't know anything about Mr. Imus' past. As neither you should, if you want to call a proper judgement of the incident. And for now it seems to me like in a few years time, the good people of the US will have to look back with shame on their vehement reaction to something so absolutely ignorable. But than again, looking back will never be their strength, I suppose.
I see our resident 'switcheur' troll is absent today. Why is that, I wonder ? It must be the beautiful weather - I bet he's out on the beach with his beautiful friends.
Not inferior, just at the moment incapable (without questioning the reasons why). The point is; you don't apply standards to them - I think Iraq showed that; you're just not in their shoes and 'nationbuilding' clearly doesn't work. But you're not willing to lower your own standards either. Take, for example, Saudi Arabia. They portray themselves as a 'Muslim country' - no bibles allowed. Do we reciprocate and say: 'no qurans allowed' ? No, we don't. It would fly in the face of freedom of religion. Besides, we don't portray ourselves as a 'christian nation'. It would fly in the face of everything we went through during the enlightenment. Do we call Saudi 'inferior' ? Can we, really ? Are they genetically different - incapable of eduction - too poor ? No. Two reasons: 1) They are incapable at the moment (cultural issues, mainly) and 2) Larger picture: perhaps Saudi isn't a 'country' as such. Perhaps they do not see themselves as representatives of a people the way the peoples of nations of the West do. Then what's the use in comparing ? You call it leftist. I call it realist - different place, different people, different mores. Oh, and just to make sure: when I say 'at the moment', I don't mean to imply that when the moment passes, things will progress and all will be 'better', no - 'at the moment' means just strictly that.
EODICPT ? That'll never fly. Surface Crack Rendering Application Technology for Copying Hazards. That's better.
It's called 'proportional judgement' and it's applied all the time: in Saudi you're not allowed to bring in a bible - should 'christian countries' disallow a quran ? Of course not. 'We' are expected to be 'better' than that. Palestinians kill people and Israelis kill people, yet we judge Israelis more harshly for it. We expect them to 'better', 'apply higher standards', 'be more careful'. The Russians implement laws that limit freedom and so does the US - not in the same way, and yet they're being compared. Why is that ? Because we expect the US to be 'better', 'more protected', 'less easily brought astray'. Anyone who has ever been in a debate must have encountered proportional judgement at some point. Haven't you ?
Three UN successes: Cyprus WHO Unicef
"kilometrage" may sound silly to you, but I can assure you that on mainland Europe, it's a perfectly normal word (where, of course, some languages make their local variety of it).
But.. but.. KARR was destroyed ! Oh no - they must have reassembled him from that little blinking light that was left in the debris ! Oh no ! Micheal ! Come back ! We need you !
I thought that the 'implied' operator was denoted as '<='. And A <= !A is true for A is zero. But my logic is rusty..
The result of which would be the same if you just assumed that MS is a dominant force and as such, has the moral obligation to make their products interoperable with anyone else's. Just as it is reasonable to assume that _within_ MS, they have all of their formats and protocol specs documented, simply because new people get to go to work there for the first time almost every day. Just as it is reasonable to assume that no such company could ever emerge from Belgium. They may be rancunous, but they're not stupid in Brussels, and the result, as I outlined above, is just the same.
Or have the cable on a large pully. And create a redundant subsystem on top of it, that throws out a parachute in case of an emergency. And have an independent computer monitor its position and vector, and throw the emergency switch when one of those values falls outside of safe parameters.
Is that why you've been trolling /. for weeks and weeks now ? Can I ask you a kind question ? Will you please give it up ?
Well I'd hate to see _that_ coming for me ! More so if it has one of those anti-rape devices installed, you know.
]] Evolution as an email client works fine with the Exchange Server.
Yes, but what about the other features of outlook - calendar, directory etc. ? I know exchange _can_ act like LDAP, I'm just not sure if it always _will_.
(I know I could google it, but) what's OWA ?
Currently, I'm allowed to have my Gentoo workstation. Next month I'm off to a new employer and they said: 'Ok. So long as you can run outlook for your agenda.'. I'd figure it would run under wine, and most of the people on the net seem to agree. I'd like to ask this question to the /. crowd, though - does an install of outlook under wine come with any conditions, caveats or things that you can plainly have not that windows users have ? Thanks.