The term 'war' is so nebulous to most Americans. After all, everything is a war. The war on drugs, the war on porn, the war on terrorism....the term 'war' is being used as a catch-all term to describe anything that has required government intervention. When you get right down to it, few people know what is actually going on when it comes to the real thing. How many people, for example, have seen the horrific consequences from the use of white sulphur? This was commonly used against innocent civilians in Iraq. More recently, I saw a clip of a Lebanese mother sitting with her infant and nine-year-old son- the son had been horribly injured by an explosive device that was targeted at a nearby car. It was very difficult to watch, but that's what's happening.
I think the "tubes" analogy more aptly describes the vacuous holes that exist in the heads of those who wrote, and voted in favor of, this legislation. Strangely missing from the article was any hint at a reason to consider such a move. Just how many acts of sexual predation have occurred using the facilities at public libraries? Hm...didn't think so.
but now you could expect yourself to be extraordinarily rendered if you choose to encrypt your converstations because you have the gall to actually believe the government has no right to recording and storing your conversations, Dub's dirty tricks or not.
That's only until a certain critical mass starts to understand the NEED to do this, and follow through. Yes, they can make examples out of a few people and try to scare everyone away from the idea, but that's no more effective than temporarily manning a speed trap to catch people exceeding the limit. Given the current government's quenchless thirst for things that are none of its business, I wholeheartedly support the use of encryption. PGP, TrueCrypt, and whatever else will get the job done.
and he dismisses as 'random malarkey' the idea that Microsoft is having trouble hiring and keeping the kind of brilliant employees that have always been the company's competitive weapon.
Um, no. The company's "competitive weapon" doesn't have anything to do with the alleged "brilliance" of its employees, save for the number of inventive ways that the security of its products has been compromised. The company's "competitive weapon" quite simply, is its monopolistic, anti-competitive behavior.
Granted, this is easier said than done, but it seems like reporting a bug or issue, or just providing feedback is a MAJOR hassle. Having to "sign up" and "have an account" just to report a problem is a pain, and then on top of that, having to navigate a labrynthine website to hopefully end up at the right place - I imagine that it turns away a lot of people who just don't have the time or energy to deal with it.
As a member of the Executive Branch, Bush can decide what laws he enforces or not.
Yes, it's called the "veto". If the proposed legislation isn't suitable, he expresses his disapproval by vetoing the bill. Period. He's not a supreme court justice, and it is completely outside the scope of his authority to determine the constitionality of a law. It's his duty to uphold the law, whether or not he personally agrees with it- that's part of the oath required to occupy the office of the president.
Why even bother with the formality of the legislative and judicial branches if the president can simply ignore them? The system of checks and balances that was designed specifically to keep any one branch from stepping too far over the line- it isn't optional. It's how things work. If the president can't bring himself to conduct his affairs in a lawful and constitutional manner, he has no business being in office.
I'm willing to bet that this is a colossal embarrassment to his father, who had far more wisdom than w. could ever hope for.
Have you ever heard of a signing statement? It's apparently a way for the president to advise, interpret, or negate specific portions of legislation put forth by Congress. The US Supreme Court has already ruled that a line-item veto is unconstitutional, but this is essentially what these signing statements allow. Bush has used this to challenge 750 laws so far, one of which includes the ban on the torture of detainees. The whitehouse says its "important for the president to express reservations about the constitionality of certain provisions of laws." (source: Cafferty on CNN).
Hello? Anyone home? Did Bush skip school the day they discussed the Supreme Court in civics class?
I'd never heard of signing statements before, but apparently Bush thinks he can use these to completely override both the Constitution and Congress. I amazed at his outright contempt toward the principles he was sworn to uphold. But I guess if he can lie about that, he can lie about anything...and he has.
That depends - I have a friend who was introduced to the world of grocery not too long ago, and who filled me in on some of the details. For career cashiers (and yes, they do exist), they can be making 2-3 times that. If you happen to get into a "key" position (which typically aren't cashiers), the starting pay can be anywhere from $9/hr or so, up to around $16/hr. That may vary of course, depending on which part of the country you happen to be in.
Haven't you heard? Network TV execs, despite their multi-million-dollar annual salaries, can only gaurantee "up to" a certain level of competence. Everything in between is fair game.
There are many things Bush isn't (a coalition builder, a leader, etc), but one sure thing he is: a politician. One thing that will help us is to stop electing politicians, and start electing leaders. Easier said than done, though.
Sounds vaguely like the Old Testament in the...gasp... bible. And there are literalists who believe that it is meant to be followed. While I don't know nearly enough about the Koran to comment intelligently, where violence is concerned Christianity and Islam (based on your description), are close cousins. I'd venture to say that the only reason we can talk about the issues you mention has nothing to do with either religion, but the fact that there was a group of men who understood the disastrous consequences associated with laws based on religion.
Absolutely- if the extra focus on design is called for and appropriate, then go for it. If it's not, then it's time to put the ego aside and think about the users.
To be honest, (and not rude, mind you), I'm not sure that anything like DPSS is the answer. Designrs are notorious for pulling the attention away from providing a clean UI in favor of providing something that serves as pedestal for their alleged design skills. This works very well in markets like advertising, but is an unfortunate misuse of technology as far as the web is concerned. Sure, it helps when things look nice, but not when it impedes the user's objectives.
...making a browser while using it as a reference in the design of real, live, honest-to-goodness, websites. Then they might see how weird some of the standards (their implementation) might seem to end-users (the developers).
Maybe they're using the same company that cost the IRS a few hundred million a few years ago- for something that was eventually scrapped. With the current "it's fer terrism" mentality, and all the illegal spying and end-runs around various "obstacles" imposed by the constitution, I'd hope for a repeat performance.
How can less errors help with a method that was completely flawed from the start? I mean, didn't it ever occur to anyone in DHS that normal, law-abiding American citizens might have names similar to at least some of those that are on "the list," and that because of this, they'd be subject to baseless abuse by those relying on it? After all, someone would never attempt to identify themselves as someone other than who they really are...nah, that would never happen.
Re:Comments from people who actually create Creati
on
Beginning GIMP
·
· Score: 1
I've used the GIMP for almost *everything* related to raster images for several years now. I'm not a designer, but I do work with web technologies. It is my opinion that certain aspects of the interface are annoying (as hell), but overall, it gets the job done.
For those that work in the production of the pop-cultural, money-driven industry, yes, that's true. However, I believe that people will continue push Blender in ways that will drive its future development - *other* people, not necessarily those working for Disney and Pixar. Because of this, I think Blender stands a good chance of continuing to gain ground. It may *never* be *as good* as the tools used by these studios, but at some point, it may very well be good enough to accomplish 95% of what the studios can manage.
I found the interface to Blender to be a raging pain and not worth the effort. If you're a starving student Animation Master sells for $300
I'd save my money. I bought A:M quite a few years ago, and abruptly stopped supporting it when the ego-maniacal moderator of their mailing list kicked a bunch of members - some of them quite well known in the A:M community - for complaining about bugs in the software that were causing some serious stability problems. I was one of those that got kicked, and I haven't looked back since. There are a number of upgrades I could have purchased by now, but I just couldn't see continuing to support an effort in which someone's fragile ego is so firmly entrenched.
I did, for several reasons. Perhaps the most salient is that it wasn't the typical sugar-coated, start-to-finish, spoon-fed, junk. It was thought-provoking, and open to interpretation. This doesn't work with a lot of people, but it's only because they're too young to understand it, or they're old enough, but fail to allow themselves to think in more abstract terms.
Slashdot Mirror
We don't need to see it -- just report the story.
The term 'war' is so nebulous to most Americans. After all, everything is a war. The war on drugs, the war on porn, the war on terrorism....the term 'war' is being used as a catch-all term to describe anything that has required government intervention. When you get right down to it, few people know what is actually going on when it comes to the real thing. How many people, for example, have seen the horrific consequences from the use of white sulphur? This was commonly used against innocent civilians in Iraq. More recently, I saw a clip of a Lebanese mother sitting with her infant and nine-year-old son- the son had been horribly injured by an explosive device that was targeted at a nearby car. It was very difficult to watch, but that's what's happening.
...the intersection of government boobs and internet tubes.
I think the "tubes" analogy more aptly describes the vacuous holes that exist in the heads of those who wrote, and voted in favor of, this legislation. Strangely missing from the article was any hint at a reason to consider such a move. Just how many acts of sexual predation have occurred using the facilities at public libraries? Hm...didn't think so.
but now you could expect yourself to be extraordinarily rendered if you choose to encrypt your converstations because you have the gall to actually believe the government has no right to recording and storing your conversations, Dub's dirty tricks or not.
That's only until a certain critical mass starts to understand the NEED to do this, and follow through. Yes, they can make examples out of a few people and try to scare everyone away from the idea, but that's no more effective than temporarily manning a speed trap to catch people exceeding the limit. Given the current government's quenchless thirst for things that are none of its business, I wholeheartedly support the use of encryption. PGP, TrueCrypt, and whatever else will get the job done.
and he dismisses as 'random malarkey' the idea that Microsoft is having trouble hiring and keeping the kind of brilliant employees that have always been the company's competitive weapon.
Um, no. The company's "competitive weapon" doesn't have anything to do with the alleged "brilliance" of its employees, save for the number of inventive ways that the security of its products has been compromised. The company's "competitive weapon" quite simply, is its monopolistic, anti-competitive behavior.
MAKE IT EASY.
Granted, this is easier said than done, but it seems like reporting a bug or issue, or just providing feedback is a MAJOR hassle. Having to "sign up" and "have an account" just to report a problem is a pain, and then on top of that, having to navigate a labrynthine website to hopefully end up at the right place - I imagine that it turns away a lot of people who just don't have the time or energy to deal with it.
As a member of the Executive Branch, Bush can decide what laws he enforces or not.
Yes, it's called the "veto". If the proposed legislation isn't suitable, he expresses his disapproval by vetoing the bill. Period. He's not a supreme court justice, and it is completely outside the scope of his authority to determine the constitionality of a law. It's his duty to uphold the law, whether or not he personally agrees with it- that's part of the oath required to occupy the office of the president.
Why even bother with the formality of the legislative and judicial branches if the president can simply ignore them? The system of checks and balances that was designed specifically to keep any one branch from stepping too far over the line- it isn't optional. It's how things work. If the president can't bring himself to conduct his affairs in a lawful and constitutional manner, he has no business being in office.
I'm willing to bet that this is a colossal embarrassment to his father, who had far more wisdom than w. could ever hope for.
Have you ever heard of a signing statement? It's apparently a way for the president to advise, interpret, or negate specific portions of legislation put forth by Congress. The US Supreme Court has already ruled that a line-item veto is unconstitutional, but this is essentially what these signing statements allow. Bush has used this to challenge 750 laws so far, one of which includes the ban on the torture of detainees. The whitehouse says its "important for the president to express reservations about the constitionality of certain provisions of laws." (source: Cafferty on CNN).
Hello? Anyone home? Did Bush skip school the day they discussed the Supreme Court in civics class?
I'd never heard of signing statements before, but apparently Bush thinks he can use these to completely override both the Constitution and Congress. I amazed at his outright contempt toward the principles he was sworn to uphold. But I guess if he can lie about that, he can lie about anything...and he has.
That depends - I have a friend who was introduced to the world of grocery not too long ago, and who filled me in on some of the details. For career cashiers (and yes, they do exist), they can be making 2-3 times that. If you happen to get into a "key" position (which typically aren't cashiers), the starting pay can be anywhere from $9/hr or so, up to around $16/hr. That may vary of course, depending on which part of the country you happen to be in.
Haven't you heard? Network TV execs, despite their multi-million-dollar annual salaries, can only gaurantee "up to" a certain level of competence. Everything in between is fair game.
Bush is not nor will ever be a coalition builder.
There are many things Bush isn't (a coalition builder, a leader, etc), but one sure thing he is: a politician. One thing that will help us is to stop electing politicians, and start electing leaders. Easier said than done, though.
Sounds vaguely like the Old Testament in the ...gasp... bible. And there are literalists who believe that it is meant to be followed. While I don't know nearly enough about the Koran to comment intelligently, where violence is concerned Christianity and Islam (based on your description), are close cousins. I'd venture to say that the only reason we can talk about the issues you mention has nothing to do with either religion, but the fact that there was a group of men who understood the disastrous consequences associated with laws based on religion.
What since 9/11/2001 has the United States of America done under President Bush's leadership...
Choose your words carefully - Bush is in no sense of the word, a leader.
It certainly wouldn't hurt if this resulted in much-needed spanking for Bush as well.
Absolutely- if the extra focus on design is called for and appropriate, then go for it. If it's not, then it's time to put the ego aside and think about the users.
To be honest, (and not rude, mind you), I'm not sure that anything like DPSS is the answer. Designrs are notorious for pulling the attention away from providing a clean UI in favor of providing something that serves as pedestal for their alleged design skills. This works very well in markets like advertising, but is an unfortunate misuse of technology as far as the web is concerned. Sure, it helps when things look nice, but not when it impedes the user's objectives.
Maybe they're using the same company that cost the IRS a few hundred million a few years ago- for something that was eventually scrapped. With the current "it's fer terrism" mentality, and all the illegal spying and end-runs around various "obstacles" imposed by the constitution, I'd hope for a repeat performance.
How can less errors help with a method that was completely flawed from the start? I mean, didn't it ever occur to anyone in DHS that normal, law-abiding American citizens might have names similar to at least some of those that are on "the list," and that because of this, they'd be subject to baseless abuse by those relying on it? After all, someone would never attempt to identify themselves as someone other than who they really are...nah, that would never happen.
I've used the GIMP for almost *everything* related to raster images for several years now. I'm not a designer, but I do work with web technologies. It is my opinion that certain aspects of the interface are annoying (as hell), but overall, it gets the job done.
Something about "old dogs" and "new tricks."
At least this is a bit more than the wrist tap Microsoft received for its anti-trust violations in the US.
For those that work in the production of the pop-cultural, money-driven industry, yes, that's true. However, I believe that people will continue push Blender in ways that will drive its future development - *other* people, not necessarily those working for Disney and Pixar. Because of this, I think Blender stands a good chance of continuing to gain ground. It may *never* be *as good* as the tools used by these studios, but at some point, it may very well be good enough to accomplish 95% of what the studios can manage.
Disney has plenty of movies waiting for you at your local video rental outlet.
I found the interface to Blender to be a raging pain and not worth the effort. If you're a starving student Animation Master sells for $300
I'd save my money. I bought A:M quite a few years ago, and abruptly stopped supporting it when the ego-maniacal moderator of their mailing list kicked a bunch of members - some of them quite well known in the A:M community - for complaining about bugs in the software that were causing some serious stability problems. I was one of those that got kicked, and I haven't looked back since. There are a number of upgrades I could have purchased by now, but I just couldn't see continuing to support an effort in which someone's fragile ego is so firmly entrenched.
But did anyone think that story was any good?
I did, for several reasons. Perhaps the most salient is that it wasn't the typical sugar-coated, start-to-finish, spoon-fed, junk. It was thought-provoking, and open to interpretation. This doesn't work with a lot of people, but it's only because they're too young to understand it, or they're old enough, but fail to allow themselves to think in more abstract terms.