11 80GB hard disks would only hold ~1100 800Mb CDs, assuming maximum capacity per CD. I've got 1500 CDs. Admittedly, the vast majority aren't max capacity, but still, I'd probably be pushing the capacity of the system very close; and that doesn't make any allowances for filesystem overhead or anything else....
Even if it were at a more reasonable cost, I don't see how it would be of use for anything but the moderate CD owner. Which doesn't make sense, given that the pricetag pretty much guarantees they're trying for the radio station market....
It's a damn shame you probably make your money, directly or indirectly, off those business models. Or do you think that the computing industry would be ANYWHERE today as anything but the computer hobbyist association if every software seller in history behaved according to your ridiculous mandate?
Christians are some of the few trying to uphold morality.
Bullshit. I was raised Christian, I know a number of open Christians both good and bad, and I've done a lot of theological exploration in and around Christianity. IF you could refer to "American Christians" as a homogenous group (as if), I think you'd find that while there are a handful (in relative terms) who actually are trying to live their lives according to the principles Christ sets forth in the New Testament of the Bible, the vast majority are Christians because that's what they were told to do as children. And they have about that much true honest active philosophical committment to the principles of Christianity--i.e. bloody little. That doesn't mean that if you ask them they won't spout off about morality and what's right and wrong, as if they knew what they were talking about, but they make next to no real effort to actually apply those principles to their own lives. It's much easier to use those moral principles as another measuring stick (like money and job status) to make sure they know who they can look down on.
I have the utmost respect for the few truly conscientious Christians I know, despite my own lack of faith. I have no respect for people who think that because "God's Word" says things are black and white, they can mistreat people who are "immoral" without compunction (despite the fact that "God's Word" itself makes it clear this is unacceptable). The truth of the matter is that in a world where "we are all sinners" there are shades of grey (or else just black without any white), because none of us have full knowledge of the true circumstances--only God is in any position to say who is truly on one side or the other of whatever moral lines there are to be drawn.
If Christ were as "black and white" about morality as most of the fools claiming to follow him, he wouldn't have been hanging out with Prostitutes and Tax Collectors (and you can't tell me that once they started hanging out with him they just Stopped Sinning Cold Turkey) any more than with the hypocritical Pharisees (which the theoretical "average American Christian" bears a hell of a lot of resemblance to, with their slavish attention to the letter of the Law etc.)
An example of "rabid Christianity" was solicited, and such an example was provided. No attempt was being made (or requested) to claim anyone involved was speaking for all Christians.
Something I've written is something I should be able to exercise power over. If I am the kind of person who thinks that the ability of others to modify my software is desirable, great! If I am not, I should not have to make the choice between either allowing this to occur against my wishes or not writing the software (which is my interpretation of the position that all software should be GPL'd). I agree with Tim O'Reilly's definition of Freedom 0 as the freedom to choose the terms under which I will release the software I've written.
"gays and feminists are responsible for God allowing this atrocity to occur." -- Paraphrased from Jerry Fallwell, with Pat Robertson nodding in agreement, September 11, 2001.
It used to be more expensive.... I considered getting it for my mom when it was at $150, but of course the fact that her hand shakes too much to use a mouse made it pretty moot.
You've obviously never tried to mix dance music for a crowd before. I once stood in for a DJ friend of mine for the first couple hours of a wedding reception. I had been doing some basic stuff on a radio dance music show and thought I could handle it.
It was the most miserable time of my life; I didn't know his selection of music, and worse, I had a group of people evenly split between "we just want you to slap on some country records" and "make it groove, man". If I had any TALENT at what I was doing, I might have found a way to split the difference, and apparently my friend was able to do just fine after he arrived (they accused him of doing a Bad DJ/Good DJ switcheroo on them:-).
The point? Mixing music and working a crowd successfully so that everyone (or the majority) is having a good time takes a lot of talent, and I wouldn't slam it until you've been in those moccasins.
Some companies' qualification time takes longer than two weeks. Unless you think unqualified patches are a good idea, giving them time to make the process work is not a bad idea. As it is 30 days is a hard accelleration of most patch qual times.
Let's try a different perspective. I was trying to apply occam's razor to a different part of the problem than you thought.
I want to explain why Ashcroft would propose eliminating attorney/client priveledge.
1) Some person, who we have know knowledge of, in detention over 9/11 has used their attorney (we believe) to commit additional acts of terrorism. (this presupposes they've actually been allowed to see an attorney) 2) Ashcroft has wanted to eliminate attorney/client priveledge for a long time and this makes a good excuse.
Which one seems simpler? More likely? Fits more of the facts? Doesn't seem to me that 2) requires a massive conspiracy.
It has nothing to do with privacy. It has to do with having a right to counsel. If the prosecution knows every conversation you've had with your defense lawyer, effective counsel can be impossible to achieve. "They know we planted the evidence, so we just have to discredit the means they intend to use to show that."
t sounds like the DoJ is just seeking to formally recognize that some detainees may be seeking to use their lawyers as
agents of future violence, not just sources of legal advice, and wish to prevent that. Risky, but not unreasonable.
Do we really have any evidence that such a thing has actually occurred, or is even likely to occur? Seems to me that occam's razor would indicate that Ashcroft is using 9/11 cynically to get an agenda across that has not one damn thing to do with terrorism.
If this gets submitted, please spare us all a lot of embarassment and spell Die Fliedermaus correctly...(and double check that I got the ie in Fliedermaus in the right order too)
Sadly, I don't think it made that mark. There were some moments, and occasionally the Tick sounded like he was trying to be Adam West, but overall it was pretty flat.
KDHX is community radio in the St Louis area, 88.1 FM. A bright spot in the wasteland of corporate owned radio. Personally I never listened to anything regularly but the Saturday night Reggae show, but it was a fantastic show, and one I couldn't get anywhere else.
In any case, knowing the call letters and number for the station means it isn't hard to remember at all.
As far as why they need anything but kdhx.org, that is a mystery they ought to explain. I would suspect the link being a porn site has something to do with it (I'm sure it can't do much for their reputation, being considered "fringe" around town anyway), but that's really a different problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if it were at a more reasonable cost, I don't see how it would be of use for anything but the moderate CD owner. Which doesn't make sense, given that the pricetag pretty much guarantees they're trying for the radio station market....
Who needs those blasted tides anyway?
It's a damn shame you probably make your money, directly or indirectly, off those business models. Or do you think that the computing industry would be ANYWHERE today as anything but the computer hobbyist association if every software seller in history behaved according to your ridiculous mandate?
So I'm not entitled to make a living by selling my binary, since I can only sell one copy and then have it given away from there?
It is MY CREATION. Are you saying that the product of my effort is not mine to do with as I wish? If that's the case, go ahead, give me your paycheck.
Bullshit. I was raised Christian, I know a number of open Christians both good and bad, and I've done a lot of theological exploration in and around Christianity. IF you could refer to "American Christians" as a homogenous group (as if), I think you'd find that while there are a handful (in relative terms) who actually are trying to live their lives according to the principles Christ sets forth in the New Testament of the Bible, the vast majority are Christians because that's what they were told to do as children. And they have about that much true honest active philosophical committment to the principles of Christianity--i.e. bloody little. That doesn't mean that if you ask them they won't spout off about morality and what's right and wrong, as if they knew what they were talking about, but they make next to no real effort to actually apply those principles to their own lives. It's much easier to use those moral principles as another measuring stick (like money and job status) to make sure they know who they can look down on.
I have the utmost respect for the few truly conscientious Christians I know, despite my own lack of faith. I have no respect for people who think that because "God's Word" says things are black and white, they can mistreat people who are "immoral" without compunction (despite the fact that "God's Word" itself makes it clear this is unacceptable). The truth of the matter is that in a world where "we are all sinners" there are shades of grey (or else just black without any white), because none of us have full knowledge of the true circumstances--only God is in any position to say who is truly on one side or the other of whatever moral lines there are to be drawn.
If Christ were as "black and white" about morality as most of the fools claiming to follow him, he wouldn't have been hanging out with Prostitutes and Tax Collectors (and you can't tell me that once they started hanging out with him they just Stopped Sinning Cold Turkey) any more than with the hypocritical Pharisees (which the theoretical "average American Christian" bears a hell of a lot of resemblance to, with their slavish attention to the letter of the Law etc.)
Get that chip off your shoulder, fool.
Something I've written is something I should be able to exercise power over. If I am the kind of person who thinks that the ability of others to modify my software is desirable, great! If I am not, I should not have to make the choice between either allowing this to occur against my wishes or not writing the software (which is my interpretation of the position that all software should be GPL'd). I agree with Tim O'Reilly's definition of Freedom 0 as the freedom to choose the terms under which I will release the software I've written.
"gays and feminists are responsible for God allowing this atrocity to occur." -- Paraphrased from Jerry Fallwell, with Pat Robertson nodding in agreement, September 11, 2001.
And to think 2 years ago you coulda gotten VC funding for this idea....
It used to be more expensive.... I considered getting it for my mom when it was at $150, but of course the fact that her hand shakes too much to use a mouse made it pretty moot.
While your point is still valid, the Taliban haven't been in power for 15 years. Try 5 or 6.
Shoulda put the trunk inside a cardboard box....
It was the most miserable time of my life; I didn't know his selection of music, and worse, I had a group of people evenly split between "we just want you to slap on some country records" and "make it groove, man". If I had any TALENT at what I was doing, I might have found a way to split the difference, and apparently my friend was able to do just fine after he arrived (they accused him of doing a Bad DJ/Good DJ switcheroo on them :-).
The point? Mixing music and working a crowd successfully so that everyone (or the majority) is having a good time takes a lot of talent, and I wouldn't slam it until you've been in those moccasins.
Some companies' qualification time takes longer than two weeks. Unless you think unqualified patches are a good idea, giving them time to make the process work is not a bad idea. As it is 30 days is a hard accelleration of most patch qual times.
I want to explain why Ashcroft would propose eliminating attorney/client priveledge.
1) Some person, who we have know knowledge of, in detention over 9/11 has used their attorney (we believe) to commit additional acts of terrorism. (this presupposes they've actually been allowed to see an attorney)
2) Ashcroft has wanted to eliminate attorney/client priveledge for a long time and this makes a good excuse.
Which one seems simpler? More likely? Fits more of the facts? Doesn't seem to me that 2) requires a massive conspiracy.
Won't hear me disagree with that.
It has nothing to do with privacy. It has to do with having a right to counsel. If the prosecution knows every conversation you've had with your defense lawyer, effective counsel can be impossible to achieve. "They know we planted the evidence, so we just have to discredit the means they intend to use to show that."
Do we really have any evidence that such a thing has actually occurred, or is even likely to occur? Seems to me that occam's razor would indicate that Ashcroft is using 9/11 cynically to get an agenda across that has not one damn thing to do with terrorism.
If only Search Warrants and the other powers being expanded in the name of Anti Terrorism could be engineered in such a way....
If this gets submitted, please spare us all a lot of embarassment and spell Die Fliedermaus correctly...(and double check that I got the ie in Fliedermaus in the right order too)
Some of us play way more Quake and Half Life than we watch TV. Seems like a difference to me.
You gotta admit this could be good for those of us addicted to Half Life whose wives keep nagging us to get more exercise :-).
Sadly, I don't think it made that mark. There were some moments, and occasionally the Tick sounded like he was trying to be Adam West, but overall it was pretty flat.
In any case, knowing the call letters and number for the station means it isn't hard to remember at all.
As far as why they need anything but kdhx.org, that is a mystery they ought to explain. I would suspect the link being a porn site has something to do with it (I'm sure it can't do much for their reputation, being considered "fringe" around town anyway), but that's really a different problem.