Or, if you don't like any of that and want to stay on genuine Gnome2 for now, install Scientific Linux 6.2 and have your Gnome desktop behave exactly as you expect it to behave.
Personally, I don't get the whole 3D thing. I find it disorienting and distracting. But I'm an old fart with my expectations set long ago.
Still, I keep thinking that 20 years from now we're going to find out that 3D glasses give you cancer of the butthole or at least make you cross-eyed or something.
"It's hard getting the balance right for sure, and things are far from perfect here in the UK. There's the ever present danger of it swaying too much towards censorship"
You just put a man in jail for something he tweeted. I think the censor ship has sailed.
And the US is not perfect, either. So? Do our failures somehow justify yours?
"I realize the UK doesn't have laws protecting what he did. I'm saying maybe it should, because not having them is worse than this guy not going to jail, in the long run."
Kind of makes one appreciate his forefathers having actually written down their constitution, doesn't it?
Personally, I don't think he should be kicked out of school or put in jail. I think he should just be reviled by his peers and shunned by civil people. Being an asshole is its own punishment.
Talking to ATC is not nearly as important to the safety of a flight as is having reliable navigation systems. Talking to ATC is only about separating you from other aircraft, and in a lost radio situation, ATC will move aircraft out of your way. Nav systems separate you from mountains, and ATC has no authority over mountains.
I may be talking out of my ass on this, but it seems to me that the amount of interference necessary to bust up a voice transmission would be a lot more than is necessary to simply move a VOR or NDB needle a degree or two. Any electrical engineers want to jump in here?
If that happened, I would think that the Avionics & Electronics certificate holder who signed off on the aircraft's radio installations ought to be examined -- as should the manufacturer of the cell phone. But the fact remains that sometimes electronic devices malfunction. So a cell phone or WiFi card maybe generates interference that it should not generate, and it does it near a poorly-installed nav system -- yes, it could cause problems. We can never eliminate this 100%.
Try flying an ILS (Instrument Landing System) to minimums on a dark, bumpy night with fuel running low and your glideslope indicator or localizer off by just a couple of degrees. You could easily find yourself coming out of the clouds 200 yards left or right of your runway or having your radar altimeter screaming at you even though it looks like you're right on the glide slope. Or worse, never come out of the clouds and run right into the ground.
My point is, devices that create radio signals can and sometimes do interfere with each other. Its only common sense that the aircraft's electronic systems should have priority over your Facebook status, especially during takeoff and landing and below 10,000 ft.
And yes, although I no longer fly for an airline, I am a pilot.
You don't need to imagine a situation where if you don't enforce your property rights you lose them. That is reality, at least in most of the US. The concept is called "squatters' rights", and it boils down to this: If someone openly encroaches on your real property for some period of time, and you take no action to stop the encroachment, the encroaching party can become the legal owner of the property, or at least have a legal right to continue using it.
So, as ridiculous as you seem to think the analogy is, it is actually the way things work.
And though you would probably never lose your property rights for allowing one trespasser to use your property without permission, if people openly used your property as a thoroughfare for some period of time, you might legally lose your right to control that access.
It is almost entirely true that drug addicts rob to pay for drugs because drugs are illegal and therefore costly. So even though you meant to be sarcastic, you were right in the first part.
Sure, people get robbed for beer money, too, but I think there's a lot less of that simply because beer is much more affordable than crank.
I'm curious how you can have the sig you have and hold the opinion you obviously hold about drug laws.
I have an idea that could really make these fuckers stand up and take notice:
A group of independent songwriters/composers post a bunch of their own original work to YouTube. Let these assholes at Rumblefish assert copyright of that original work. Get them to do it a LOT -- like a couple thousand times, so that there's enough of a case/potential damages to interest a lawyer who will work for a cut of the damages. Document the entire process, then sue Rumblefish for falsely claiming copyright and attempting to gain commercially from material to which they have no claim. Repeat until there is no Rumblefish left to sue.
I'm running Scientific Linux 6.1 64-bit, and it comes with Gnome 2. Works great on my Dell notebook, and I can even run KVM virtual hosts. Very useful for when I want to torment myself with Unity or Gnome 3 -- I can just install a VM, play with it until I almost go insane, and then when I want to step back from the edge, I just shut down the VM.
"Individuals are not taxed until they actually sell property and realize their gains and the solution to the problem is called mark-to-market taxation."
Convince me that its actually a problem before you try to sell me a solution.
Let's also not forget that some of those military people are actually going to uphold their oaths to support and defend the Constitution. Whole battalions could swing one way or the other depending on how their commanders see the situation.
I sure hope it never comes to that.
What I don't understand is how a British person, on British soil, can commit a crime in the US.
Did he go to the US and set up and run his servers from there, or did he do it all from the UK? If he did it all from the UK, then it just seems like plain, common sense that he should only be subject to British law. How do you violate US law if you were never in a US jurisdiction?
I've always had the same idea about extradition of Colombian drug dealers from Colombia to the US. You have people who have never set foot outside of Colombia, but who somehow find themselves subject to US jurisdiction. How the FUCK does that work?
FWIW, Colombia did something very similar in July. I don't know that they have outlawed selling locked phones, but they do require carriers to unlock them when a user moves his number to a new carrier.
Puedo portar mi número y usar el mismo equipo que uso con mi actual concesionario?
Solo en algunos casos. Si tu equipo tiene la misma tecnología que utiliza la empresa operadora a la que deseas cambiarte, y se encuentra desbloqueado, es decir sin restricciones de acceso a la red de otros operadores, podrás seguir usándolo.Si el equipo se encuentra bloqueado. Es obligación del operador donante, luego de la confirmación de aceptación de la solicitud de portación, realizar el desbloqueo del equipo terminal.
The last line says: "It is the obligation of the transferring carrier, after confirmation of acceptance of the request for change of carrier, to unlock the end-user equipment."
Of course, you can only use the same equipment if it is compatible with the new carrier's technology, but your number is portable regardless, as long as you are willing to provide suitable equipment (or can work out a deal with the new carrier to provide it for you).
What we really need is for people to take a basic economics course before blabbering about changing the definitions of terms. They might find that there are already widely-accepted terms for the situations they think are so neglected in the language of economics.
But I do agree about the monkeys. Its possibly an improvement to my idea of appointing representatives via a random draft or lottery system instead of elections.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you (windoze people) live with this shit???
I've said it before, but I'm happy to say it again: Fuck Adobe.
And this is why some people should pay more to buy Macs. Still no justification for staying on Windoze.
Or, if you don't like any of that and want to stay on genuine Gnome2 for now, install Scientific Linux 6.2 and have your Gnome desktop behave exactly as you expect it to behave.
Personally, I don't get the whole 3D thing. I find it disorienting and distracting. But I'm an old fart with my expectations set long ago.
Still, I keep thinking that 20 years from now we're going to find out that 3D glasses give you cancer of the butthole or at least make you cross-eyed or something.
"It's hard getting the balance right for sure, and things are far from perfect here in the UK. There's the ever present danger of it swaying too much towards censorship"
You just put a man in jail for something he tweeted. I think the censor ship has sailed.
And the US is not perfect, either. So? Do our failures somehow justify yours?
"I realize the UK doesn't have laws protecting what he did. I'm saying maybe it should, because not having them is worse than this guy not going to jail, in the long run."
Kind of makes one appreciate his forefathers having actually written down their constitution, doesn't it?
Personally, I don't think he should be kicked out of school or put in jail. I think he should just be reviled by his peers and shunned by civil people. Being an asshole is its own punishment.
The UK legal system has lost its fucking mind.
Talking to ATC is not nearly as important to the safety of a flight as is having reliable navigation systems. Talking to ATC is only about separating you from other aircraft, and in a lost radio situation, ATC will move aircraft out of your way. Nav systems separate you from mountains, and ATC has no authority over mountains.
I may be talking out of my ass on this, but it seems to me that the amount of interference necessary to bust up a voice transmission would be a lot more than is necessary to simply move a VOR or NDB needle a degree or two. Any electrical engineers want to jump in here?
If that happened, I would think that the Avionics & Electronics certificate holder who signed off on the aircraft's radio installations ought to be examined -- as should the manufacturer of the cell phone. But the fact remains that sometimes electronic devices malfunction. So a cell phone or WiFi card maybe generates interference that it should not generate, and it does it near a poorly-installed nav system -- yes, it could cause problems. We can never eliminate this 100%.
Try flying an ILS (Instrument Landing System) to minimums on a dark, bumpy night with fuel running low and your glideslope indicator or localizer off by just a couple of degrees. You could easily find yourself coming out of the clouds 200 yards left or right of your runway or having your radar altimeter screaming at you even though it looks like you're right on the glide slope. Or worse, never come out of the clouds and run right into the ground.
My point is, devices that create radio signals can and sometimes do interfere with each other. Its only common sense that the aircraft's electronic systems should have priority over your Facebook status, especially during takeoff and landing and below 10,000 ft.
And yes, although I no longer fly for an airline, I am a pilot.
You don't need to imagine a situation where if you don't enforce your property rights you lose them. That is reality, at least in most of the US. The concept is called "squatters' rights", and it boils down to this: If someone openly encroaches on your real property for some period of time, and you take no action to stop the encroachment, the encroaching party can become the legal owner of the property, or at least have a legal right to continue using it.
So, as ridiculous as you seem to think the analogy is, it is actually the way things work.
And though you would probably never lose your property rights for allowing one trespasser to use your property without permission, if people openly used your property as a thoroughfare for some period of time, you might legally lose your right to control that access.
It is almost entirely true that drug addicts rob to pay for drugs because drugs are illegal and therefore costly. So even though you meant to be sarcastic, you were right in the first part.
Sure, people get robbed for beer money, too, but I think there's a lot less of that simply because beer is much more affordable than crank.
I'm curious how you can have the sig you have and hold the opinion you obviously hold about drug laws.
I have an idea that could really make these fuckers stand up and take notice:
A group of independent songwriters/composers post a bunch of their own original work to YouTube. Let these assholes at Rumblefish assert copyright of that original work. Get them to do it a LOT -- like a couple thousand times, so that there's enough of a case/potential damages to interest a lawyer who will work for a cut of the damages. Document the entire process, then sue Rumblefish for falsely claiming copyright and attempting to gain commercially from material to which they have no claim. Repeat until there is no Rumblefish left to sue.
bwaahaahaaa!
NICE.
Actually, according to TFA, the US Treasury has never issued a bearer bond above $10,000 value.
"Intents and purposes". What the heck would an "intensive purpose" be, anyway?
I'm running Scientific Linux 6.1 64-bit, and it comes with Gnome 2. Works great on my Dell notebook, and I can even run KVM virtual hosts. Very useful for when I want to torment myself with Unity or Gnome 3 -- I can just install a VM, play with it until I almost go insane, and then when I want to step back from the edge, I just shut down the VM.
Convince me that its actually a problem before you try to sell me a solution.
Let's also not forget that some of those military people are actually going to uphold their oaths to support and defend the Constitution. Whole battalions could swing one way or the other depending on how their commanders see the situation. I sure hope it never comes to that.
They'd probably use the wrench sideways.
I have seen a facebook post where the guy said, "I just sharted." I think that counts as accidentally shitting yourself.
What I don't understand is how a British person, on British soil, can commit a crime in the US. Did he go to the US and set up and run his servers from there, or did he do it all from the UK? If he did it all from the UK, then it just seems like plain, common sense that he should only be subject to British law. How do you violate US law if you were never in a US jurisdiction? I've always had the same idea about extradition of Colombian drug dealers from Colombia to the US. You have people who have never set foot outside of Colombia, but who somehow find themselves subject to US jurisdiction. How the FUCK does that work?
http://vivirencolombia.com/preguntas-frecuentes-sobre-la-portabilidad-numerica-en-colombia/#more-34
Puedo portar mi número y usar el mismo equipo que uso con mi actual concesionario? Solo en algunos casos. Si tu equipo tiene la misma tecnología que utiliza la empresa operadora a la que deseas cambiarte, y se encuentra desbloqueado, es decir sin restricciones de acceso a la red de otros operadores, podrás seguir usándolo.Si el equipo se encuentra bloqueado. Es obligación del operador donante, luego de la confirmación de aceptación de la solicitud de portación, realizar el desbloqueo del equipo terminal.
The last line says: "It is the obligation of the transferring carrier, after confirmation of acceptance of the request for change of carrier, to unlock the end-user equipment." Of course, you can only use the same equipment if it is compatible with the new carrier's technology, but your number is portable regardless, as long as you are willing to provide suitable equipment (or can work out a deal with the new carrier to provide it for you).
"In this economy I'd take a salary (certainty)" Bwwwaaaahaaahhaaaaaa! There is no certainty other than death.
What we really need is for people to take a basic economics course before blabbering about changing the definitions of terms. They might find that there are already widely-accepted terms for the situations they think are so neglected in the language of economics. But I do agree about the monkeys. Its possibly an improvement to my idea of appointing representatives via a random draft or lottery system instead of elections.