I'm sorry but this is part of checks and balances. The Republicans have brought us out of balance and the Democrats are checking them. Checks and balances doesn't mean we always have to have a 50/50 blend of opposing viewpoints - the founding fathers thought bigger than that. If the voters are not satisfied with Democratic ( party ) rule, they can vote in more Republicans. Just because the Democrats have a super majority doesn't mean checks and balances aren't working. That smacks of Republican whining to me.
There's a French movie called "novo" that you might find interesting. It is about a guy with short term memory lss tat gets through the day with a constant stream of clues.
"there is no good reason to immediately jump to the conclusion that the problem of Colony Collapse Disorder is caused by pollution"
******
See, I see it differently. I think it is completely logical to start with the premise that all these chemicals in the atmosphere are fucking shit up. The fact is that we are living in a horrible experiment whereby we try to see how far we can push biological systems before they collapse and we are conditioned to accept this as normal. I for one am tired of breathing benzene and drinking mercury.
Yes, the bees may be suffering from a virus. I contend that organisms are much more successful at fighting infections when they start from a baseline of a healthy immune system, adequate food supply and tolerable levels of stress. Much like we see in cancer in humans and in diseases in trees, the host is more likely to succumb to disease when under stress because their immune systems are weakened.
"This wouldn't fix anything. The database can be built so that your own vote shows you who you really voted for, but the vote totals can still be skewed, since the total tallies can not be looked at person by person."
_________
Yeah, but that require a much larger effort to concoct and conceal.
Thanks for letting us know about your bad file transfer. Many of us may have gone on and purchased Macs based on years of reliable service. Now we know better.
It is my prediction that it's Widescreen only because pretty soon Apple will sell only HD widescreen formats. Their niche is going to be the HDTV market. Like me, people have bought these great HDTVs and there is very little content on digital cable that looks good on them.
That's not the point. The post you replied to said that "it's not exactly like we're going out of our way to detail the number of Iraqis killed by Americans in the news.
No, you can't keep the number of Iraqi deaths a secret, but you can refuse to keep a running total, you can make it difficult for journalists to do their job, you can imply that accurate reports of Iraqi casualties only helps the enemy, and you can redicule and downplay careful, scientific studies of the number of Iraqi dead.
Consider for another moment a need for a more permanently installed area denial weapon. The standard choice for this, for decades:
Land mines.
Interesting idea. Or, we could get serious about banning them and cleaning them up. The U.S. Government doesn't give a shit about the damage done by land mines or cluster bombs. They would both be illegal in a second if the U.S. wern't opposed to the bans on their use.
AHumbleOpinion said: First, it is no secret and it could never be kept secret.
It's not a secret because there ARE no statistics kept by the military. The military is either profoundly uninterested or afraid of the consequences of keeping a tally. Either way it sucks.
Maybe Microsoft thinks that they can gain a significant share of enterprise Linux installations with a distribution they control. Then, they will do their classic embrace and extend to use the leverage to their advantage.
Microsoft knows that no one ever got fired for buying IBM of Microsoft. IBM is pushing Linux and that doesn't help Microsoft. By providing a Microsoft-approved Linux, they can get a slice of the pie and out themselves into a position to do to Linux what they have tried to do with every other standard technology - embrace and extend it.
Only a moron or someone looking to game the system would find the current faith-based voting machines to be adequate. When I cast my ballot, I have no idea if the vote is registered correctly, I have no idea if the correct vote tallies are sent to the state, and I have no recourse of possibility for a recount if the totals seem strange - as they did in 2004.
The problems that computers are good as solving in the voting booth are the problems associated with producing clear, understandable ballot choices that are accessible to everyone. Computers are good at this because they now have nice, bright, colorful screens with plenty of room for wide names, multiple candidates etc. Also, computers can offer magnified screens, and audio output for people with hearing and vision problems. Finally, computers can print out a perfectly legible ballot with no hanging chads or overvoting.
That, in my opinion, should be the extent of the role of the voting computer. The voting computer should produce a ballot that is human and machine readable. That is to say, the ballot should say on line 1 - President: John Smith with the "A" bubble filled in, on line 2, Senator: Sally Jane with the "C" bubble filled in, etc. etc.
The ballots should then be run through an optical scanner and also be hand-counted by an election board. When the two counts are within statistical insignificance, the result should be phoned in as well as sent in electronically by the optical scanner machine.
If we followed this procedure, the person voting should not be confused at the ballot box, there should be no hanging chads, etc. The voter can look at their ballot once cast and see that they voted for whom they intended to vote. Their ballot would be ran through an optical scanner for immediate feedback, yet checked by a human count. The official results would be sent by two separate vectors to reduce the possibility of false tallies being delivered and there would be no step that would be susceptible to hackers or people deliberately altering the machines. In addition, if there were questions about the totals, we could actually reform a recount.
Although, it just occurs to me that you would be shooting without the benefit of a viewscreen at that point. Maybe two lenses or some kind of lens that works in either direction. Are these things possible?
Why can't you use the camera to "send people snaps and movies of what you're looking at"? You just turn the phone around to take your picture or video.
I wasn't trying to get modded as funny. I don't think Phil Schiller was trying to be funny either. Most phones have speakerphone mode and all accept earpieces (which are becoming very common). Videoconferencing over cell phones seems like a natural progression to me and Apple has all the pieces to make it happen.
I think iTunes the player - not the store - is still a competitive advantage. It's an extremely powerful and logical music database app and it's, IMHO, the slickest, easiest, rip, mix, burn, sync tool available for MP3 players going. A good example is the finesse with which it treats podcasts. It syncs both ways so that podcasts you have listened to all the way through - either on the iPod or in iTunes - are deleted from either ( if you choose that in preferences ). Also, Smart Playlists are hella cool.
Phil Schiller made a comment a little while back - "we think the camera is on the wrong side of the phone". I think you are going to see some category-busting features like videoconferencing.
Well, that is the big concern, and it may be justified. However, many of the big-money programs like the video and design apps would be rejected by the mac faithful if they didn't take full advantage of the platform. Hence, those developers have an incentive to use Apple's APIs. Also, this presupposes that the situation will always be that Windows has such an overwhelming lock on the OS market. If Apple were to do this, it would be a gamble, but perhaps people would be buying so many Macs that the thinking might switch to, "why bother to write a program for Windows?".
I mean, there are plenty of developers for the Mac right now with a 3% worldwide market share. I should think a 10% market would be plenty of incentive for a developer to make sure their software takes advantage of all the strengths of a particular platform.
Finally, what if the integration was seamless? What if the app, written for Windows, ran at full speed, totally adopted the look and feel of the Mac, and somehow even took advantage of system-wide calls like spell check and other services. Sound farfetched? Maybe. But you have to look at NeXT and think Apple may be up to the task. But then, I'm an admitted fanboy.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm worried about The Onion. How can they match headlines like this?
I'm sorry but this is part of checks and balances. The Republicans have brought us out of balance and the Democrats are checking them. Checks and balances doesn't mean we always have to have a 50/50 blend of opposing viewpoints - the founding fathers thought bigger than that. If the voters are not satisfied with Democratic ( party ) rule, they can vote in more Republicans. Just because the Democrats have a super majority doesn't mean checks and balances aren't working. That smacks of Republican whining to me.
There's a French movie called "novo" that you might find interesting. It is about a guy with short term memory lss tat gets through the day with a constant stream of clues.
"there is no good reason to immediately jump to the conclusion that the problem of Colony Collapse Disorder is caused by pollution"
******
See, I see it differently. I think it is completely logical to start with the premise that all these chemicals in the atmosphere are fucking shit up. The fact is that we are living in a horrible experiment whereby we try to see how far we can push biological systems before they collapse and we are conditioned to accept this as normal. I for one am tired of breathing benzene and drinking mercury.
Yes, the bees may be suffering from a virus. I contend that organisms are much more successful at fighting infections when they start from a baseline of a healthy immune system, adequate food supply and tolerable levels of stress. Much like we see in cancer in humans and in diseases in trees, the host is more likely to succumb to disease when under stress because their immune systems are weakened.
"This wouldn't fix anything. The database can be built so that your own vote shows you who you really voted for, but the vote totals can still be skewed, since the total tallies can not be looked at person by person."
_________
Yeah, but that require a much larger effort to concoct and conceal.
Thanks for letting us know about your bad file transfer.
Many of us may have gone on and purchased Macs based on years of reliable service.
Now we know better.
it's dust.
It is my prediction that it's Widescreen only because pretty soon Apple will sell only HD widescreen formats. Their niche is going to be the HDTV market. Like me, people have bought these great HDTVs and there is very little content on digital cable that looks good on them.
Personally, I don't understand why I can't print out a directory listing 6 years after the debut of OS X.
That's not the point. The post you replied to said that "it's not exactly like we're going out of our way to detail the number of Iraqis killed by Americans in the news.
No, you can't keep the number of Iraqi deaths a secret, but you can refuse to keep a running total, you can make it difficult for journalists to do their job, you can imply that accurate reports of Iraqi casualties only helps the enemy, and you can redicule and downplay careful, scientific studies of the number of Iraqi dead.
Consider for another moment a need for a more permanently installed area denial weapon. The standard choice for this, for decades:
Land mines.
Interesting idea. Or, we could get serious about banning them and cleaning them up. The U.S. Government doesn't give a shit about the damage done by land mines or cluster bombs. They would both be illegal in a second if the U.S. wern't opposed to the bans on their use.
Virak Sais:
Yes, I'm sure that they, with their 10 years and $40 million, never thought of that;
Yeah, look what all that time and money has done for the missle defense system. Besides, the miltary doesn't make mistakes, right?
AHumbleOpinion said:
First, it is no secret and it could never be kept secret.
It's not a secret because there ARE no statistics kept by the military. The military is either profoundly uninterested or afraid of the consequences of keeping a tally. Either way it sucks.
Maybe Microsoft thinks that they can gain a significant share of enterprise Linux installations with a distribution they control. Then, they will do their classic embrace and extend to use the leverage to their advantage.
Microsoft knows that no one ever got fired for buying IBM of Microsoft. IBM is pushing Linux and that doesn't help Microsoft. By providing a Microsoft-approved Linux, they can get a slice of the pie and out themselves into a position to do to Linux what they have tried to do with every other standard technology - embrace and extend it.
Only a moron or someone looking to game the system would find the current faith-based voting machines to be adequate. When I cast my ballot, I have no idea if the vote is registered correctly, I have no idea if the correct vote tallies are sent to the state, and I have no recourse of possibility for a recount if the totals seem strange - as they did in 2004.
The problems that computers are good as solving in the voting booth are the problems associated with producing clear, understandable ballot choices that are accessible to everyone. Computers are good at this because they now have nice, bright, colorful screens with plenty of room for wide names, multiple candidates etc. Also, computers can offer magnified screens, and audio output for people with hearing and vision problems. Finally, computers can print out a perfectly legible ballot with no hanging chads or overvoting.
That, in my opinion, should be the extent of the role of the voting computer. The voting computer should produce a ballot that is human and machine readable. That is to say, the ballot should say on line 1 - President: John Smith with the "A" bubble filled in, on line 2, Senator: Sally Jane with the "C" bubble filled in, etc. etc.
The ballots should then be run through an optical scanner and also be hand-counted by an election board. When the two counts are within statistical insignificance, the result should be phoned in as well as sent in electronically by the optical scanner machine.
If we followed this procedure, the person voting should not be confused at the ballot box, there should be no hanging chads, etc. The voter can look at their ballot once cast and see that they voted for whom they intended to vote. Their ballot would be ran through an optical scanner for immediate feedback, yet checked by a human count. The official results would be sent by two separate vectors to reduce the possibility of false tallies being delivered and there would be no step that would be susceptible to hackers or people deliberately altering the machines. In addition, if there were questions about the totals, we could actually reform a recount.
"Make sure you vote on November 7, make sure if you're using a DRE machine that your vote is properly recorded"
How exactly do I do that? I have no paper chit to put in a box and I have no idea what was written to the drive.
Is it a coincidence that our processed foods became inundated with huge amounts of corn syrup and soya fillers starting in the 80's?
Caspar
Ya put the razor in cold water, not hot--'cause
metal does what in cold?
Driver
I dunno, Johnny.
We hear the back door slam and Caspar appears in the front
passenger window.
. . . 'Ats what I'm tellin' ya. It contracts.
'At way you get a first class shave.
Driver
Okay, Johnny.
No, but we're not living in the places you mention. BTW - which way do they point the lens?
Although, it just occurs to me that you would be shooting without the benefit of a viewscreen at that point. Maybe two lenses or some kind of lens that works in either direction. Are these things possible?
Why can't you use the camera to "send people snaps and movies of what you're looking at"? You just turn the phone around to take your picture or video.
I wasn't trying to get modded as funny. I don't think Phil Schiller was trying to be funny either. Most phones have speakerphone mode and all accept earpieces (which are becoming very common). Videoconferencing over cell phones seems like a natural progression to me and Apple has all the pieces to make it happen.
I think iTunes the player - not the store - is still a competitive advantage. It's an extremely powerful and logical music database app and it's, IMHO, the slickest, easiest, rip, mix, burn, sync tool available for MP3 players going. A good example is the finesse with which it treats podcasts. It syncs both ways so that podcasts you have listened to all the way through - either on the iPod or in iTunes - are deleted from either ( if you choose that in preferences ). Also, Smart Playlists are hella cool.
Phil Schiller made a comment a little while back - "we think the camera is on the wrong side of the phone". I think you are going to see some category-busting features like videoconferencing.
Hey, your comment is very enjoyable and emblematic of a fine mind. You would make a fine Mac user. Come on in.
Well, that is the big concern, and it may be justified. However, many of the big-money programs like the video and design apps would be rejected by the mac faithful if they didn't take full advantage of the platform. Hence, those developers have an incentive to use Apple's APIs. Also, this presupposes that the situation will always be that Windows has such an overwhelming lock on the OS market. If Apple were to do this, it would be a gamble, but perhaps people would be buying so many Macs that the thinking might switch to, "why bother to write a program for Windows?".
I mean, there are plenty of developers for the Mac right now with a 3% worldwide market share. I should think a 10% market would be plenty of incentive for a developer to make sure their software takes advantage of all the strengths of a particular platform.
Finally, what if the integration was seamless? What if the app, written for Windows, ran at full speed, totally adopted the look and feel of the Mac, and somehow even took advantage of system-wide calls like spell check and other services. Sound farfetched? Maybe. But you have to look at NeXT and think Apple may be up to the task. But then, I'm an admitted fanboy.