What, you can't pick up the phone? Are your arms broken? Mom and grandma would love to hear from you, even if you're just calling to say LibreOffice a few times.
But more seriously, so what if people aren't sure how to pronounce the name without hearing it a few times? Will that stop them from using it? From typing its name in an email or search engine? How often did anyone really say OpenOffice besides those of us pushing its use? In my experience, when friends/family/coworkers needed help with OpenOffice the always asked about 'Office'/spreadsheets/'Excel'/documents/or however else they thought of it to themselves. I don't expect it to be any different with LibreOffice.
Now, I'm aware a lot of people only care about the book they're reading and not the person who wrote it, and that's fine. But if you like to consider just who'll be getting money from your purchase, you might find this good to know.
And it's not like tax table changes are rare events to begin with. I used to maintain the payroll software for our small business, and we'd typically get a few tax table updates each year.
But it also shows that simply extending the duration of the yellow light greatly reduces injury and accidents too. So, the real issue is, is there justification to use the method that requires paying a third party $700,000 (annually, I assume) to install and maintain the cameras--and charge lots of people high fines to pay for said contract--over simply changing the timing of the lights?
Nonsense. All religions are bad. Even Buddhism has its extremists (Google for examples.)
The problem is that any philosophy that claims to have a God-given truth inevitably turns evil because you can't question God-given truth. When you can't question beliefs, you can't hold believers accountable and corruption sets in.
Ok, all religions have some extremists who do horrible things. This does not make all religions 'bad'. If it does, it makes all ideologies and causes bad, because they have extremists just as much as religions do (just look at PETA or politics in general) and are just as capable of having beliefs that can't be questioned.
Is it really so hard not to vastly overgeneralize whenever criticizing religion? Sure, it's possible to believe religion is detrimental in general, but could people at least support their positions with points that aren't overgeneralized, hyperbole, or non-specific to religion? An argument for reason and rationality over faith isn't going to convince anyone if it's based on flawed premises.
Better yet, this should be tested independently of driving in normal conditions, allowing there to be groups of people who are allowed to drive only while texting or drinking.
That may help once your laptop has been stolen, but it doesn't do anything to prevent the theft in the first place. It may not be a bad idea, but it isn't really what the submitter is asking about.
It's also possible to get a motherboard with an SSD built-in and ready to operate with SRT.
The $240 GIGABYTE GA-Z68XP-UD3-iSSD has a 20GB SSD and, in the words of the manufacturer is (so feel free to take salt with them) is:
able to outperform hybrid drive systems by more than 2X (PC Mark Vantage HDD test) and HDD-only systems by as much as 4X (PC Mark Vantage HDD test) and deliver a 60% performance improvement over HDD-only systems in PC Mark Vantage Suite.
I just built a system with this motherboard, and while I haven't run any benchmarks, it does seem to be very fast.
I heard they spent a week trying to track down a bug where large chunks of the rainforest would simply disappear--and then they realized it wasn't a bug...
Pizza on the moon! That sounds great! After a long day of doing sciency moon stuff, you can relax with a delicious, hot slice of--wait, the Japanese arm of Domino's Pizza? Ah, yes, imagine staring up with poignant homesickness at the beautiful blue Earth over your steaming slice of Mayo Jaga (potato with sizzling hot mayo) pizza... or perhaps you'll fondly remember the Earthly restaurants you've loved while nibbling at your delicious slice of Camembert Mille-Feuille Seafood pizza.
But don't worry. I'm sure the rest of the Asian pizza places will quickly step up to compete and offer a much wider mouthwatering selection.
How come homosexuals get to constantly get to broadcast their sexual orientation all the damn time? Typical reverse discrimination that runs rampant these days.
I know! It's terrible that they can just run around offending everyone by being themselves while those poor straight people have to skulk around, being careful about displaying affection in public lest they risk hostility and possibly even violence. Something must be done!
I don't see any way cameras can be both ineffective and a privacy problem simultaneously. If they don't work then they are, at best, an expensive placebo.
Because the THEORY of Evolution is merely a man-made attempt to push God out of their lives. This is yet another example of Intelligent Design. Anyone who examines the INCREDIBLE COMPLEXITY of living things should be able to realize that these are examples of intelligent design. Symbiotic relationships, even moreso.
Yes, the theories all those scientists have come up with, pieced together from many data and refined time and time again to account for new data, has nothing against your assertion backed by "BECAUSE I SAID SO."
Really, why do they even bother scrounging around in the dirt to come up with some absurd theory of 'evolution' when any fool can see--wait, that sounds familiar somehow...
The multiverse theory, as I have always understood it, posits that for every possible "choice", universes are created to express each on the possibilities, or "choices". This could be purely causality, or could be free will. Who really knows.
That's a common science fiction/fantasy theme (and so far as I know, nothing more) and not at all what they're talking about.
However, and this is not semantics, a universe is generally defined as " the totality of everything that exists".
If we use that definition, then he is correct about this being nonsense because then every newly created universe is in fact splitting into two universes. Quasi-Mitosis on a grand scale if you will. If this is true, then we have been expanding at an exponential rate since the beginning of the universe itself, and all of these "bubbles" are in fact, part of a single universe.
That is entirely semantics. The article is saying is that everything we've been considering the entirety of existence--i.e. the universe--may just be something that exists in a bubble beside other such bubbles with similar contents. You're complaining, not that they're wrong, but that instead of saying our universe is beside others in a 'multiverse', they should have said that 'the universe' might be much bigger than we thought and consists of lots of 'bubbles' that contain discrete regions similar to what we currently consider to be the universe but may have different laws of physics.
Also, there was no mention of universes splitting; I can only assume you got that from that choice-based multiple universe theory you thought they were talking about.
A lot of people seem confused about exactly what the court found wrong with Zediva's actions.
It wasn't that they were streaming one disc to multiple people at once (they weren't).
It wasn't that they were renting discs to people.
It wasn't because they were streaming the content of discs they'd purchased.
It was that Zediva was playing movies for other people (and taking money for it) without having the public performance rights to do so. This is the same principle that stops someone from opening a movie theatre and just buying a DVD of each movie they want to show. The 1991 case said a hotel can't get around that by having a bunch of VCRs and sending the output of each to a single hotel room, and the judge for the Zediva case found this to be no different. And he's right.
Slashdot Mirror
These go to two.
What, you can't pick up the phone? Are your arms broken? Mom and grandma would love to hear from you, even if you're just calling to say LibreOffice a few times.
But more seriously, so what if people aren't sure how to pronounce the name without hearing it a few times? Will that stop them from using it? From typing its name in an email or search engine? How often did anyone really say OpenOffice besides those of us pushing its use? In my experience, when friends/family/coworkers needed help with OpenOffice the always asked about 'Office'/spreadsheets/'Excel'/documents/or however else they thought of it to themselves. I don't expect it to be any different with LibreOffice.
While I won't deny that some of Card's books I read a long time ago were good (and he has the awards to prove it), if you're particular about whom you support, be aware that he is a rabid opponent of gay marriage and has written things such as "Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down"
Now, I'm aware a lot of people only care about the book they're reading and not the person who wrote it, and that's fine. But if you like to consider just who'll be getting money from your purchase, you might find this good to know.
And it's not like tax table changes are rare events to begin with. I used to maintain the payroll software for our small business, and we'd typically get a few tax table updates each year.
The actual product from ToysRUs will be Visual Hello Kitty.
But it also shows that simply extending the duration of the yellow light greatly reduces injury and accidents too. So, the real issue is, is there justification to use the method that requires paying a third party $700,000 (annually, I assume) to install and maintain the cameras--and charge lots of people high fines to pay for said contract--over simply changing the timing of the lights?
Ok, all religions have some extremists who do horrible things. This does not make all religions 'bad'. If it does, it makes all ideologies and causes bad, because they have extremists just as much as religions do (just look at PETA or politics in general) and are just as capable of having beliefs that can't be questioned.
Is it really so hard not to vastly overgeneralize whenever criticizing religion? Sure, it's possible to believe religion is detrimental in general, but could people at least support their positions with points that aren't overgeneralized, hyperbole, or non-specific to religion? An argument for reason and rationality over faith isn't going to convince anyone if it's based on flawed premises.
Better yet, this should be tested independently of driving in normal conditions, allowing there to be groups of people who are allowed to drive only while texting or drinking.
That may help once your laptop has been stolen, but it doesn't do anything to prevent the theft in the first place. It may not be a bad idea, but it isn't really what the submitter is asking about.
It's the tinfoil hats. He's waiting for everyone to take them off so he doesn't scorch the oven.
What they really need to do is cut them where it hurts--in their budget.
I just built a system with this motherboard, and while I haven't run any benchmarks, it does seem to be very fast.
But the SSD doesn't have to be added as a discrete component. You can already get motherboards that incorporate a small SSD drive to be used with SRT.
Yes. Clearly, the optimal solution is to remove lawyers' hands at once.
I heard they spent a week trying to track down a bug where large chunks of the rainforest would simply disappear--and then they realized it wasn't a bug...
I'm sure they'll come to a fair and reasonable agreement that all charges will be dropped if he simply puts the camera back where he found it.
"Bring in the logic probe!"
Maybe this recent push has to do with the upcoming Asteroids movie that was announced a while back.
Pizza on the moon! That sounds great! After a long day of doing sciency moon stuff, you can relax with a delicious, hot slice of--wait, the Japanese arm of Domino's Pizza? Ah, yes, imagine staring up with poignant homesickness at the beautiful blue Earth over your steaming slice of Mayo Jaga (potato with sizzling hot mayo) pizza... or perhaps you'll fondly remember the Earthly restaurants you've loved while nibbling at your delicious slice of Camembert Mille-Feuille Seafood pizza.
But don't worry. I'm sure the rest of the Asian pizza places will quickly step up to compete and offer a much wider mouthwatering selection.
I'd have to guess that they bound him to a rock and had a giant eagle eat his liver.
I know! It's terrible that they can just run around offending everyone by being themselves while those poor straight people have to skulk around, being careful about displaying affection in public lest they risk hostility and possibly even violence. Something must be done!
Easily: false positives.
Yes, the theories all those scientists have come up with, pieced together from many data and refined time and time again to account for new data, has nothing against your assertion backed by "BECAUSE I SAID SO."
Really, why do they even bother scrounging around in the dirt to come up with some absurd theory of 'evolution' when any fool can see--wait, that sounds familiar somehow...
That's a common science fiction/fantasy theme (and so far as I know, nothing more) and not at all what they're talking about.
That is entirely semantics. The article is saying is that everything we've been considering the entirety of existence--i.e. the universe--may just be something that exists in a bubble beside other such bubbles with similar contents. You're complaining, not that they're wrong, but that instead of saying our universe is beside others in a 'multiverse', they should have said that 'the universe' might be much bigger than we thought and consists of lots of 'bubbles' that contain discrete regions similar to what we currently consider to be the universe but may have different laws of physics.
Also, there was no mention of universes splitting; I can only assume you got that from that choice-based multiple universe theory you thought they were talking about.
It was that Zediva was playing movies for other people (and taking money for it) without having the public performance rights to do so. This is the same principle that stops someone from opening a movie theatre and just buying a DVD of each movie they want to show. The 1991 case said a hotel can't get around that by having a bunch of VCRs and sending the output of each to a single hotel room, and the judge for the Zediva case found this to be no different. And he's right.