Hey, y'know something? I thought that the way Boromir was portrayed was one of the more interesting changes in the movie.
In the book, he was quite proud and aloof, confident in his position as the best man in Gondor--but without the blood of Numenor evident in his veins. In the movie, he was really the only one besides Gandalf that looked at all at ease with the Hobbits (teaching them to fight, roughhousing, laughing), which was (I thought) a very well-done counterpoint to the fact that we all knew he was going to try to take the Ring.
The contrast between the grimly stoic Boromir of the book and the laughing Boromir of the movie was also underscored by the fact that all those admirable qualities seem to have been dropped by the Aragorn and Elrond characters. Boromir was a man among Men to admire and follow, but Aragorn and Elrond inspired awe. In the movie Aragorn was the one coldly pushing the group on and Elrond was a jerk.
I'm not saying I disliked the movie, mind. I reckon I'll still go see if five or six more times, at least. But some of the fundamental characterizations of the major players were changed or missing. I do believe that was a deliberate decision, made, as others have pointed out, to present the balance of viewpoints and conflicting opinions that are introduced more leisurely and subtly in the books.
I checked out SQL-Ledger at one point. I was impressed by a lot about it: ease of install, excellent DB backend choice, stability, the works.
But a most cursory examination of security made me reject it out of hand for our company. A complete lack of auditing was one problem--this isn't just security, it's also a requirement for responsible accounting (think taxes here). As the parent post says, this is real money we're playing with here.
But more serious is the fact that SQL-Ledger trusts the user in almost everything. This is the most elementary mistake in architecting web applications. I don't ever want to hear anyone bashing Matt's Script Archive or Microsoft if SQL-Ledger is accepted as good security.
Look at it this way: even if the Accounting Trolls (TM) aren't hackers, what about everyone else on the subnet? Who's forgetting here that the biggest security risk comes from the inside, where the staff is familiar with the system?
SQL-Ledger has a lot of Really Cool Stuff about it. I wish I could use it or endorse it for others.
Offtopic is offtopic. We're reading this to discuss Lutris and Enhydra and nothing else. Marking an offtopic post as such has nothing to do with stifling speech.
Oh, and as long as I'm flaming you, the possessive form of the word is "its," not "it's."
On the other hand, one large bulb is better than many small ones - One 100W bulb is typically brighter than two 50W bulbs.
Er, yeah...at the source, that's true.
Light dissipates on an exponential scale, though. It's far better to have many smaller light sources distributed over the area to be illuminated than to have a single bright source in the center.
This doesn't really have anything to do with the question of turbines. On the other hand, neither did yours.:)
Second, wars in the middle east cannot be like Vietnam because there's nowhere to hide.
The area of most concern here is Afghanistan, which, if you'll recall by way of the ten-year war against the Soviet Union, has (understatement! =>) sufficiently adequate terrain from which to conduct a massive guerrilla campaign.
Same as the Balkans. Same as Chechnya. Learn from history.
I believe that water cooling could have prevented the steel core from overheating.
Not a chance. Not a f*cking chance.
Aside from the objections others have raised, about the design of the system and the crash knocking it out, a 767 carries 23,980 gallons of fuel at maximum capacity. These planes were fueled for a transcontinental flight. The entire load of highly refined jet fuel went shooting all over the place at temperatures above 1000 degrees (that's Fahrenheit,for our funny foreign friends) and kept burning for a long time. The air the fire was sucking in could have conceivably created a Dresden-like situation--I don't know if it did, and my stomach starts to hurt every time I think about it.
Notice how every few years a national forest will catch on fire and burn for a while? Isn't it kinda pathetic watching clueless politicians direct firefighters to pour water on it? We're looking at the same situation for the WTC--there's simply no way any piddling amount of water that could possibly be delivered by a sprinkler system or cooled pipes could have kept down the heat discharge.
This is actually a ripe subject for a whole other line of discussion.
In Israel, an American sees the results of terrorism everywhere. Israelis probably don't even notice. Bus stops look like armored bunkers. Casual inspection of passers-by on the street isn't quite as casual as in US cities. Trash can lids on buses have warnings to beware of suspicious objects. Hitchhiking is alive and well: Israeli youth, required to serve in the military, catch rides off the street to get home on a weekend pass. I never saw a group stand there for more than a minute before someone picked them up--after all, who wouldn't want a couple of friendly and heavily armed soldiers in the back seat? Israeli immigration officers are the only ones I've ever seen in multiple countries who actually pay attention to their job and carefully examine every single page in a passport.
If our environment was anything close to what they experience, we'd be hugely less likely to rail about some artificial standard of "civil liberties."
The large portion of Americans would die on their feet before living on their knees.
Bullshit.
Take a look around. Ever-increasing taxes, ever-decreasing rights, a monolithic, nightmarish maze of bureaucratic governmental laws and regulations, and you can say we won't live on our knees? We already are, my friend.
Bet it felt like a satisfying piece of rhetoric to type, though.
Sure, this is a feel good article for Linux advocates, but it's really depressing to look at the conclusions the fellow draws and the logic that leads to them.
That would leave Linux to revert to its original role: a revolutionary solution for serving up Web pages -- but little else.
Are you people seriously agreeing with the conclusions of they guy who wrote this? How about his assertion that no one besides Sun thinks that high-end Unix variants have a place anymore?
No kidding.
We've got a T1 line with no prohibitions on reselling bandwidth and we're located in a densely populated area just down the block from the CO, but the equipment cost was just too much for us to actually go into the business.
I imagine established DSL providers have a multiplexor or some such thing at their end instead of racks and racks of individual DSL routers, but I really don't know. At that point it's really the scale of business that allows a substantial profit to be made from razor thin margins.
Quoth the article: Responsible marketers who use unsolicited mass e-mail as their medium of choice always provide a way out, usually in the form of a Web link or a valid reply address.
How is this unsolicited mass email, in any way shape or form, responsible?
It's this line of thinking, that anybody is fair game for a deluge of unwanted ads until they tell each and every individual sender to cut it out, that brings us the ridiculuous opt-in vs. opt-out argument. This shouldn't even be a debate. The answer is obvious, and I'll use small words for marketeers who don't get it and are currently lobbying our elected representatives:
We don't want your ads.
Your ads are spam, not a valid advertising.
You can bluster to the government all you want about revenue and promotion, but in the end, you're building a business model that depends on tactics extremely unfriendly to the consumer.
(twit) Now, Notes isn't particularly good at mail (although Exchange is much, much worse). However, if your company bought a Notes system and only uses it for mail, they should, quite frankly, have their heads examined. And so should you. (/twit)
Guess what the federal bankruptcy courts just did? At least, here in NJ. Your tax dollars at work.
(This is great! I get to use the twit tag and it's *not* a flame!)
Slashdot Mirror
In the book, he was quite proud and aloof, confident in his position as the best man in Gondor--but without the blood of Numenor evident in his veins. In the movie, he was really the only one besides Gandalf that looked at all at ease with the Hobbits (teaching them to fight, roughhousing, laughing), which was (I thought) a very well-done counterpoint to the fact that we all knew he was going to try to take the Ring.
The contrast between the grimly stoic Boromir of the book and the laughing Boromir of the movie was also underscored by the fact that all those admirable qualities seem to have been dropped by the Aragorn and Elrond characters. Boromir was a man among Men to admire and follow, but Aragorn and Elrond inspired awe. In the movie Aragorn was the one coldly pushing the group on and Elrond was a jerk.
I'm not saying I disliked the movie, mind. I reckon I'll still go see if five or six more times, at least. But some of the fundamental characterizations of the major players were changed or missing. I do believe that was a deliberate decision, made, as others have pointed out, to present the balance of viewpoints and conflicting opinions that are introduced more leisurely and subtly in the books.
Damn, man, you just ruined it for me!
Very old indeed.
Let's see, what entities in Middle-Earth caused things to be by singing and were unaffected by the mortal powers therein...?
I checked out SQL-Ledger at one point. I was impressed by a lot about it: ease of install, excellent DB backend choice, stability, the works.
But a most cursory examination of security made me reject it out of hand for our company. A complete lack of auditing was one problem--this isn't just security, it's also a requirement for responsible accounting (think taxes here). As the parent post says, this is real money we're playing with here.
But more serious is the fact that SQL-Ledger trusts the user in almost everything. This is the most elementary mistake in architecting web applications. I don't ever want to hear anyone bashing Matt's Script Archive or Microsoft if SQL-Ledger is accepted as good security.
Look at it this way: even if the Accounting Trolls (TM) aren't hackers, what about everyone else on the subnet? Who's forgetting here that the biggest security risk comes from the inside, where the staff is familiar with the system?
SQL-Ledger has a lot of Really Cool Stuff about it. I wish I could use it or endorse it for others.
Hey, forget those. I want the Dot-Daddy extension.
I run a web-based whois host here, y'see...
Yeah, sorry, that was me. (:
Get a life, yahoo.
Offtopic is offtopic. We're reading this to discuss Lutris and Enhydra and nothing else. Marking an offtopic post as such has nothing to do with stifling speech.
Oh, and as long as I'm flaming you, the possessive form of the word is "its," not "it's."
Er, yeah...at the source, that's true.
Light dissipates on an exponential scale, though. It's far better to have many smaller light sources distributed over the area to be illuminated than to have a single bright source in the center.
This doesn't really have anything to do with the question of turbines. On the other hand, neither did yours. :)
Second, wars in the middle east cannot be like Vietnam because there's nowhere to hide.
The area of most concern here is Afghanistan, which, if you'll recall by way of the ten-year war against the Soviet Union, has (understatement! =>) sufficiently adequate terrain from which to conduct a massive guerrilla campaign.
Same as the Balkans. Same as Chechnya. Learn from history.
Not a chance. Not a f*cking chance.
Aside from the objections others have raised, about the design of the system and the crash knocking it out, a 767 carries 23,980 gallons of fuel at maximum capacity. These planes were fueled for a transcontinental flight. The entire load of highly refined jet fuel went shooting all over the place at temperatures above 1000 degrees (that's Fahrenheit,for our funny foreign friends) and kept burning for a long time. The air the fire was sucking in could have conceivably created a Dresden-like situation--I don't know if it did, and my stomach starts to hurt every time I think about it.
Notice how every few years a national forest will catch on fire and burn for a while? Isn't it kinda pathetic watching clueless politicians direct firefighters to pour water on it? We're looking at the same situation for the WTC--there's simply no way any piddling amount of water that could possibly be delivered by a sprinkler system or cooled pipes could have kept down the heat discharge.
This is actually a ripe subject for a whole other line of discussion.
In Israel, an American sees the results of terrorism everywhere. Israelis probably don't even notice. Bus stops look like armored bunkers. Casual inspection of passers-by on the street isn't quite as casual as in US cities. Trash can lids on buses have warnings to beware of suspicious objects. Hitchhiking is alive and well: Israeli youth, required to serve in the military, catch rides off the street to get home on a weekend pass. I never saw a group stand there for more than a minute before someone picked them up--after all, who wouldn't want a couple of friendly and heavily armed soldiers in the back seat? Israeli immigration officers are the only ones I've ever seen in multiple countries who actually pay attention to their job and carefully examine every single page in a passport.
If our environment was anything close to what they experience, we'd be hugely less likely to rail about some artificial standard of "civil liberties."
The large portion of Americans would die on their feet before living on their knees.
Bullshit.
Take a look around. Ever-increasing taxes, ever-decreasing rights, a monolithic, nightmarish maze of bureaucratic governmental laws and regulations, and you can say we won't live on our knees? We already are, my friend.
Bet it felt like a satisfying piece of rhetoric to type, though.
Sure, this is a feel good article for Linux advocates, but it's really depressing to look at the conclusions the fellow draws and the logic that leads to them.
That would leave Linux to revert to its original role: a revolutionary solution for serving up Web pages -- but little else.
Are you people seriously agreeing with the conclusions of they guy who wrote this? How about his assertion that no one besides Sun thinks that high-end Unix variants have a place anymore?
No kidding.
We've got a T1 line with no prohibitions on reselling bandwidth and we're located in a densely populated area just down the block from the CO, but the equipment cost was just too much for us to actually go into the business.
I imagine established DSL providers have a multiplexor or some such thing at their end instead of racks and racks of individual DSL routers, but I really don't know. At that point it's really the scale of business that allows a substantial profit to be made from razor thin margins.
How is this unsolicited mass email, in any way shape or form, responsible?
It's this line of thinking, that anybody is fair game for a deluge of unwanted ads until they tell each and every individual sender to cut it out, that brings us the ridiculuous opt-in vs. opt-out argument. This shouldn't even be a debate. The answer is obvious, and I'll use small words for marketeers who don't get it and are currently lobbying our elected representatives:
Great. Now we get even more clueless newbies asking for help on c.l.p.m and refusing to use CGI.pm.
(twit) Now, Notes isn't particularly good at mail (although Exchange is much, much worse). However, if your company bought a Notes system and only uses it for mail, they should, quite frankly, have their heads examined. And so should you. (/twit)
Guess what the federal bankruptcy courts just did? At least, here in NJ. Your tax dollars at work.
(This is great! I get to use the twit tag and it's *not* a flame!)