As a male between the age of 16 and 36 I am a member of the militia. So therefore I have the right to whatever arms I think are necesary to defend my country from all threats internal or extrenal. So why does the governement disagree. They must be a threat.
No, reboot means that you start the computer up again. Powering down, and then powering up counts as a reboot. And Linux machines don't need that. In fact they perform better WITHOUT a reboot. And Linux has many nice features for increased productivity. Some of them are available as third party applications for windows. some aren't. I can shade, iconify, or I can use virtual desktops on my linux machine. I also have a wide variety of desktop environments available. I tend to stick to one environment, and one focus setting, but if I wanted to I could change at any time. My computer was recently rebooted for a failed attempt to upgade it. But even though I had a planned reboot recently. my uptime is now just shy of 11 days. Everything is running fine. In fact, it'll be running fine until I have a hardware failure, or another reason to reboot.
It's not just the justification. It's the entire purpose behind the second amendment. And behind all the new gun laws that try to supersede the second amendment. A little rebellion from time to time is good for the country. Even if it is bad for the belligerents.
Yeah, because when the percentage of oxygen drops that low from it's usual 20-22% that means that the carbon dioxide, or carbon monoxide has increased by a similar amount. Nitrogen is not a toxic gas that will make you gasp and your blood fail to work propery. It's not really the lack of oxygen that causes hypoxia, it's the lack of binding to hemoglobin.
No, we exhale about 19% oxygen normaly. The bigger problem with rebreathing your own air is the buildup of CO2. That's why the astronauts on Apollo 13 were more worried about their scrubbers than their oxygen supply.
Not quite. I've purchased Linux software from time to time. When it was worth purchasing. I've even considered purchasing more. I dislike windows for many reasons. And like Linux for many reasons. Just because nobody is exploiting the market doesn't mean it's not there. And having an idea of the installed base of Linux with comparison to Mac would definatly be usefull information to those who sell software.
Except that you're awnsering my post totaly out of context. I was replying within the context of people who buy a Mac for the hardware, with the parent to my post specificaly stating purchasing it because the hardware is better than other PC manufacterers. Now as far as the laptop goes, you have a point. While a build your own laptop is posible, it is quite expensive and dificult to make. However when the post you're attacking because "it's about the OS" is replying to a post SPECIFICALY about how the Mac hardware is the purpose of purchasing one, you're starting to get a bit off key. Thank you for posting a quite cogent, and in fact rather impassioned reply to what I said. However, since I wasn't arguing the merits of the OS anyway, it's a total nonsequiter. If one wants to run Mac OS, then of course they should purchase a Mac. However if someone wants to have the best posible hardware for running Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, etc... Then for a small investment in time, you can do far better price-performance with a hand-built or whitebox desktop PC.
Yeah, but if you care enough to get the truly best, you build your own. And then you don't suck. So far as I can tell Mac has mothing to compare with what you can do when you roll your own.
Yeah, but at least with Chritianity the source material is out there for people to read. And to belive or not. For the most part Bibles are not considered to be some strange and wonderous thing that one must train for years and years to be able to understand. While this was not always the case, it is the case currently. Now, for Scientology there is a great deal of the source material that is kept secret, so that the lay public cannot study it and determine it's applicability to their lives and souls. Ergo Christianity is actualy MORE scientific that Scientology, as well as being more able to reach those who seek spiritual guidance. (Disclaimer, I'm an agnostic, with leanings toward the teachings of Jesus of Nazerus, with a bit of the teacings of Lau Tsu mixed in)
Yeah, but if the OS put programs in the path like a sane operating system, then you wouldn't need this overpowered search thingie you're talking about. So, once again Linux is still superior. And under gnome you can use tab complete in the run dialog, so, once again, Linux still wins. Thanks for trying. By the way, Max Headroom suffered a core dump. I think I have him somewhere on my hard drive. It was sad, but I'm thinking I might rebuild him sometime. If i get around to it. So anyway, how is the method that Vista is so proud of better than what I just said? And why am I replying to an AC and actualy expecting a result. Get a fucking account so we can have a dicussion, instead of being a fucktard.
How would a mammal developing leaves invalidate evolution? By evolutionary theory if a mammal has leaves then apparently it's an advantage. Because of the way that evolution is defined "the animal that is more fit to survive in an enviromnemt will" it is imposible to disprive, do to it simply being circular logic. We define the fittest organism as the organism that survives. So once again, we are faced with a tautology, which is scientificaly useless.
Now, I know that this is just broadsiding you, but would you please tell me an experiment that would be able to falsify evolution? If a statment isn't falsafiable it's not a full scientific theory. And so I'm not sure what could be ran to falsify it. If you're going to just be working with tautologies, aren't you being dogmatic as well? I do look forward to your response, and hope that it is well worded and thought out.
As for your refutation of point one, you should re-read what I wrote. I said the worLd that god created, not the word. One little letter, lots of meaning. As for your alleged refutation of the third, I never said that humans aren't wreched creatures who will do whatever they want and find any justification they can for it. In fact you didn't refute anything at all that I wrote. Actualy I find any sort of zelotry quite annoying, and that's why I'm twitting you. I mean, the evidence of catastrophism is quite clear and marked in the fosil record, and yet you seem to be espousing the gradualist doctorine of Charles Darwin, of which there is no support. And further you are failing to provide rational support for your position. You instead misinterpret my statements, and show your true zelotry to the church of sticking your fingers in your ears. By the way, if you were making as poor of arguments on the other side, well, there would be someone else taking you apart, but if not, I'd be more than happy to do that to.
I'm not saying anyone should close their eyes to anything. In fact I'm stating specificaly that in order to propery understand God one MUST study the world that God created.
No, modern religions are based on the dreams of various mystics, the teachings of a Jewish carpenter, the teachings of an Egyptian prince, The teachings of an Indian prince, and the teacings of an Arab merchant. These have been interpreted by various theologians and clergy, however the basis still remains. If you don't know what specific historical persons I'm talking about, check Wikipedia.
The existance of a supreme being does not require that any have faith in that supreme being. He either exists or he doesn't. Faith in that being may help people to be better people, but a lack of faith does not mean that there is no god.
Major point about Gallileo. He actualy did insult the powers that be. Directly. He called the pope a simpleton. And if the pope were not a close personal friend, he would have felt the full weight of the inquizition, for being a dumbass. He was also conviced because he refused to acknowledge evidence that would have proven the heliocentric model to an extent that would have removed the heresy charge for teaching it all because he was to much of an ass to sway from his conviction that comets were optical illusions. Belive it or not, the rule on heresy for the Roman inquisition was that if reality and scripture disagree, reality wins. Galleleo was a prick, and a bully.
Your blind seperation of religion and science is quite disturbing. Especialy when you consider that the basis of modern science is found in the natural philosophers, primarily monks and clergymen, who were seeking to better understand the mind of god, and the eventual date of judgment day. I mean, if one truly wishes to be godly, how can they close their eyes to what god has created, and force themselves not to try to understand it. Of course I also feel that God doesn't require faith, Man requires having faith. God doesn't require anything of us, except for us to be what we are. After all, that's how he created us.
Ehh, I thought video games were training grounds for terrorists and school shooters. People are scared of terrorists. Bill is just inconsistant. He's right to an extent though. Video games are fine if you can handle them. but if you have to much invested in them, you can loose track of reality. But then again, books are good if you can handle them, TV news is good in moderation, alcohol is good in moderation. Food is good in moderation. He's just stating the obvious. Now excuse me while I go back to rotting my brain out with the internet. And what's that damned yellow thing outside the window?
Re:About 5 years ago I was robbed
on
Free Geek Robbed
·
· Score: 1
It's rural America, EVERYONE has knives and guns. If you pull one you're escalating the confontation to the level where letal force is allowable. Also, though it's illegal to beat the crap out of someone, few people will report to the police that they were assaulted for commiting a crime. It includes a confession. Also if you think that stuff !> life you've never been to rural America, and soaked in the culture. Stuff is quite worth killing over, and killing someone who pisses you off is almost worth dying for.
Hate to break it to you, but they are going to tank on dec 26. I'd sell all your options on the 23 of dec. That is of course if you're talking about the yummy and smaller pie pumpkins, as opposed to the stringy and grotesqe jack-o-lantern pumpkins.
I'm going to pass on some wisdom my father passed on to me. He said "Son, you should marry a rich, blonde, nymphomaniac with a liquor store." He also said "If you have to settle for two, take the nympho with a liqor store"
Software patents are pantents on a way of doing something, a process, not on a result. So, the actual interfaces aren't patented, only the method, so as long as a different method is used, you're fine. The actual interfaces are generaly not patented, because there tends not to be enough innovation to warrant a patent.
Your parent comment said that the slang and idioms are bizzare, not stupid. As in they are not what makes sense based on his understanding. I can give a concrete example of a slang term that many Americans consider bizzare that us used by NZ AU and UK. In all those locations the word "Pissed" means drunk, wheras in the US "pissed" means very angry, a short hand for pissed off, which I'm not sure if that is present in your particular slangs. Or it can also mean "the state of somthing having been urinated on" E.G. "I am not sleeping in a pissed bed" Or it can also be the past tense of piss, which means to urinate. I'm not sure where the piss in your particular dialects come from, but in American English it comes from the French word for to urinate. Is that good enough for you?
Slashdot Mirror
As a male between the age of 16 and 36 I am a member of the militia. So therefore I have the right to whatever arms I think are necesary to defend my country from all threats internal or extrenal. So why does the governement disagree. They must be a threat.
No, reboot means that you start the computer up again. Powering down, and then powering up counts as a reboot. And Linux machines don't need that. In fact they perform better WITHOUT a reboot. And Linux has many nice features for increased productivity. Some of them are available as third party applications for windows. some aren't. I can shade, iconify, or I can use virtual desktops on my linux machine. I also have a wide variety of desktop environments available. I tend to stick to one environment, and one focus setting, but if I wanted to I could change at any time. My computer was recently rebooted for a failed attempt to upgade it. But even though I had a planned reboot recently. my uptime is now just shy of 11 days. Everything is running fine. In fact, it'll be running fine until I have a hardware failure, or another reason to reboot.
It's not just the justification. It's the entire purpose behind the second amendment. And behind all the new gun laws that try to supersede the second amendment. A little rebellion from time to time is good for the country. Even if it is bad for the belligerents.
Yeah, because when the percentage of oxygen drops that low from it's usual 20-22% that means that the carbon dioxide, or carbon monoxide has increased by a similar amount. Nitrogen is not a toxic gas that will make you gasp and your blood fail to work propery. It's not really the lack of oxygen that causes hypoxia, it's the lack of binding to hemoglobin.
Do Androids Dream of Electic Sheep. I belive. They don't always keep the same name when they do a screen version.
No, we exhale about 19% oxygen normaly. The bigger problem with rebreathing your own air is the buildup of CO2. That's why the astronauts on Apollo 13 were more worried about their scrubbers than their oxygen supply.
Not quite. I've purchased Linux software from time to time. When it was worth purchasing. I've even considered purchasing more. I dislike windows for many reasons. And like Linux for many reasons. Just because nobody is exploiting the market doesn't mean it's not there. And having an idea of the installed base of Linux with comparison to Mac would definatly be usefull information to those who sell software.
Except that you're awnsering my post totaly out of context. I was replying within the context of people who buy a Mac for the hardware, with the parent to my post specificaly stating purchasing it because the hardware is better than other PC manufacterers. Now as far as the laptop goes, you have a point. While a build your own laptop is posible, it is quite expensive and dificult to make. However when the post you're attacking because "it's about the OS" is replying to a post SPECIFICALY about how the Mac hardware is the purpose of purchasing one, you're starting to get a bit off key. Thank you for posting a quite cogent, and in fact rather impassioned reply to what I said. However, since I wasn't arguing the merits of the OS anyway, it's a total nonsequiter. If one wants to run Mac OS, then of course they should purchase a Mac. However if someone wants to have the best posible hardware for running Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, etc... Then for a small investment in time, you can do far better price-performance with a hand-built or whitebox desktop PC.
Yeah, but if you care enough to get the truly best, you build your own. And then you don't suck. So far as I can tell Mac has mothing to compare with what you can do when you roll your own.
Yeah, but at least with Chritianity the source material is out there for people to read. And to belive or not. For the most part Bibles are not considered to be some strange and wonderous thing that one must train for years and years to be able to understand. While this was not always the case, it is the case currently. Now, for Scientology there is a great deal of the source material that is kept secret, so that the lay public cannot study it and determine it's applicability to their lives and souls. Ergo Christianity is actualy MORE scientific that Scientology, as well as being more able to reach those who seek spiritual guidance. (Disclaimer, I'm an agnostic, with leanings toward the teachings of Jesus of Nazerus, with a bit of the teacings of Lau Tsu mixed in)
Yeah, but if the OS put programs in the path like a sane operating system, then you wouldn't need this overpowered search thingie you're talking about. So, once again Linux is still superior. And under gnome you can use tab complete in the run dialog, so, once again, Linux still wins. Thanks for trying. By the way, Max Headroom suffered a core dump. I think I have him somewhere on my hard drive. It was sad, but I'm thinking I might rebuild him sometime. If i get around to it. So anyway, how is the method that Vista is so proud of better than what I just said? And why am I replying to an AC and actualy expecting a result. Get a fucking account so we can have a dicussion, instead of being a fucktard.
How would a mammal developing leaves invalidate evolution? By evolutionary theory if a mammal has leaves then apparently it's an advantage. Because of the way that evolution is defined "the animal that is more fit to survive in an enviromnemt will" it is imposible to disprive, do to it simply being circular logic. We define the fittest organism as the organism that survives. So once again, we are faced with a tautology, which is scientificaly useless.
Now, I know that this is just broadsiding you, but would you please tell me an experiment that would be able to falsify evolution? If a statment isn't falsafiable it's not a full scientific theory. And so I'm not sure what could be ran to falsify it. If you're going to just be working with tautologies, aren't you being dogmatic as well? I do look forward to your response, and hope that it is well worded and thought out.
As for your refutation of point one, you should re-read what I wrote. I said the worLd that god created, not the word. One little letter, lots of meaning. As for your alleged refutation of the third, I never said that humans aren't wreched creatures who will do whatever they want and find any justification they can for it. In fact you didn't refute anything at all that I wrote. Actualy I find any sort of zelotry quite annoying, and that's why I'm twitting you. I mean, the evidence of catastrophism is quite clear and marked in the fosil record, and yet you seem to be espousing the gradualist doctorine of Charles Darwin, of which there is no support. And further you are failing to provide rational support for your position. You instead misinterpret my statements, and show your true zelotry to the church of sticking your fingers in your ears. By the way, if you were making as poor of arguments on the other side, well, there would be someone else taking you apart, but if not, I'd be more than happy to do that to.
Major point about Gallileo. He actualy did insult the powers that be. Directly. He called the pope a simpleton. And if the pope were not a close personal friend, he would have felt the full weight of the inquizition, for being a dumbass. He was also conviced because he refused to acknowledge evidence that would have proven the heliocentric model to an extent that would have removed the heresy charge for teaching it all because he was to much of an ass to sway from his conviction that comets were optical illusions. Belive it or not, the rule on heresy for the Roman inquisition was that if reality and scripture disagree, reality wins. Galleleo was a prick, and a bully.
Your blind seperation of religion and science is quite disturbing. Especialy when you consider that the basis of modern science is found in the natural philosophers, primarily monks and clergymen, who were seeking to better understand the mind of god, and the eventual date of judgment day. I mean, if one truly wishes to be godly, how can they close their eyes to what god has created, and force themselves not to try to understand it. Of course I also feel that God doesn't require faith, Man requires having faith. God doesn't require anything of us, except for us to be what we are. After all, that's how he created us.
Ehh, I thought video games were training grounds for terrorists and school shooters. People are scared of terrorists. Bill is just inconsistant. He's right to an extent though. Video games are fine if you can handle them. but if you have to much invested in them, you can loose track of reality. But then again, books are good if you can handle them, TV news is good in moderation, alcohol is good in moderation. Food is good in moderation. He's just stating the obvious. Now excuse me while I go back to rotting my brain out with the internet. And what's that damned yellow thing outside the window?
It's rural America, EVERYONE has knives and guns. If you pull one you're escalating the confontation to the level where letal force is allowable. Also, though it's illegal to beat the crap out of someone, few people will report to the police that they were assaulted for commiting a crime. It includes a confession. Also if you think that stuff !> life you've never been to rural America, and soaked in the culture. Stuff is quite worth killing over, and killing someone who pisses you off is almost worth dying for.
Hate to break it to you, but they are going to tank on dec 26. I'd sell all your options on the 23 of dec. That is of course if you're talking about the yummy and smaller pie pumpkins, as opposed to the stringy and grotesqe jack-o-lantern pumpkins.
I'm going to pass on some wisdom my father passed on to me. He said "Son, you should marry a rich, blonde, nymphomaniac with a liquor store." He also said "If you have to settle for two, take the nympho with a liqor store"
No it doesn't. You don't need a licence to use software, only to distribute it. Sorry, you fail.
Software patents are pantents on a way of doing something, a process, not on a result. So, the actual interfaces aren't patented, only the method, so as long as a different method is used, you're fine. The actual interfaces are generaly not patented, because there tends not to be enough innovation to warrant a patent.
Your parent comment said that the slang and idioms are bizzare, not stupid. As in they are not what makes sense based on his understanding. I can give a concrete example of a slang term that many Americans consider bizzare that us used by NZ AU and UK. In all those locations the word "Pissed" means drunk, wheras in the US "pissed" means very angry, a short hand for pissed off, which I'm not sure if that is present in your particular slangs. Or it can also mean "the state of somthing having been urinated on" E.G. "I am not sleeping in a pissed bed" Or it can also be the past tense of piss, which means to urinate. I'm not sure where the piss in your particular dialects come from, but in American English it comes from the French word for to urinate. Is that good enough for you?