Did you actually bother to read the stories that resulted from your search? It was the Iraqi Information Minister who claimed we were being drawn into a quagmire, and the press were laughing at him, reporting that statement as well as the overwhelming evidence agreeing with the official releases that the US forces were kicking ass and taking names. I remember the one BBC reporter who dared to question if the Americans were actually in Baghdad (since he hadn't seen them yet) being mocked roundly and having his sanity questioned on every network for several days.
It wasn't until the terrorists/freedom fighters was killing soldiers on a daily basis and preventing political, economic and industrial goals from being reached for a while that the press bothered to mention there was no real plan for what exactly to do if we WEREN'T greeted as liberators with open arms.
I swear, for a bunch of self-proclaimed "tough guys", neocons and Fox news viewers seem to be the biggest whiny professional crybabies in the world. Waah, waah, the only reason we failed despite our complete control of the government and carte blanche from the voting public to do anything we wanted for over half a decade is because the left sabotaged us! It's totally coincidental that people in Iraq are fighting against us years after we were supposed to have been finished, really the only reason our troops aren't home yet is the New York Times printing the word quagmire!
Meanwhile New Yorkers -- you know, those cowardly leftists who are actually victims of terrorist attacks every few years -- shrug their shoulders and tell you pussies to suck it up and get on with your lives.
Why the hell doesn't the world's largest military have the bandwidth to support our troops watching YouTube? We have missiles that cost millions each but we can't afford some Internet bandwidth? WTF?
Because much of their field infrastructure, for obvious reasons of portability, is wireless and satellite based. It takes a little longer to launch new satellites to get more bandwidth than it does to upgrade your DSL service. Yeah, in bases they have decent bandwidth, but the same problems that any other companies have in terms of bored office workers using it up killing time on YouTube. Many companies block those kinds of sites for the same reason.
If you were to watch any channel other than Fox News during the first part of the war, you would have thought that we were losing - that we were being driven out of the country...all of the channels besides Fox News...like we were raping their women, like we were killing innocent people on purpose.
Um, what? I don't know of any channels that gave this impression. I think maybe you need to step outside of the "no-spin zone" and back to reality, where the Iraqi Information Minister was the laughingstock of the world media from day one and even our staunchest foes were reporting how incredibly effective our "shock and awe" military campaign was at grabbing control so overwhelmingly and quickly.
It wasn't until 18 months into our 3-6 month war that anyone in the US media dared even question any of the glowing press releases of how perfectly everything was going.
And, BTW, I love how "nobody REALLY knows what's going on!" -- I'm sure all the 4-star Generals who turned down the War Czar post did so because they're just ignorant puppets of the leftist media with no experience in military matters, and they just don't have access to the "inside scoop" that you're keeping to yourself.
they failed with ADB, NuBus, Firewire, ADC, and PCI-X to name a few
The only one on that entire list that *Apple* actually wanted to make a "standard" in any sense (outside of their own hardware) was FireWire. The rest all did exactly what they were supposed to do for their respective markets, they certainly were not Apple failures in any way whatsoever.
That said, yeah, the idea of converting every surface to a touch screen just because the iPhone and iPods use one is silly -- people generally don't want to touch computer screens on a regular basis, it's tiring. I doubt Apple has any intention whatsoever of doing such a thing -- they're doing just fine with the multitouch trackpads, where they tested all this sort of stuff out before moving it to the iPod/iPhone interface.
Clearly you have not be around the xbox modding scene in a long while. If one would like to use myth tv as your media service on the xbox then you do not have to do ANY of the items you listed. Should one wish to run XBMC the only on required is #6. Your making modding your xbox into a much more difficult scenario than what it really is. A 13 year old with the proper instructions could mod a box in about 10 minutes.
*shrug* If you say so. Last time I modded a box, softmods were still notoriously unreliable and temporary, broken by every hardware and software update that MS put out. If, after 4+ years of development, they finally work perfectly, then fantastic.
It really makes no difference to my point, which was that Apple really doesn't care what you do with their box in terms of software (and has said so officially, much like TiVo's policy in regards to their series 1 devices), while MS has actively worked for many years to try and brick machines that show any signs of being modified from the factory version, and that continues to be their publicly stated official policy.
The war is seen as "unwinnable" because the public cannot see any benefit to it.
No, it's seen as unwinnable because we're fighting an enemy that is impossible to distinguish from our allies until it is too late, and our victory condition (establish democracy) is not even seen as a desirable goal for our own ally or the local populace.
Stop trying to convince yourself that only supporters of the war "see the benefits" to strategic thinking about the region. Most of those opposed to the war are and were thinking strategically as well, the only difference is that everything THEY said was going to happen has come true, while everything the pro-war side has said would happen has NOT. Who, then, seem to be displaying a more practical ability at strategic thinking?
I suspect the court will sidestep this particular argument, because it's WAY too big for anyone but the Supreme Court to rule on in principle. But the easy "out" for the presiding court is the fact that Verizon never petitioned the government -- they responded to government requests.
There was no political argument that Verizon was trying to bring to the attention of the government that they shared the data with the government to prove, they merely handed over confidential (and legally protected) documents because someone in the government asked for them (with no legal right to do so).
In this case I would imagine the whole argument can easily be avoided entirely due to the order of events.
Perhaps the religious leadership isn't QUITE as ignorant as you think.
Ironic that people so often use "stupid" to mean only ignorant, while you made the inverse mistake. Just because the religious views may have a net positive effect on reproduction doesn't preclude ignorance, all you're claiming is that their behavior isn't as foolish or stupid as some may think.
It's also ironic that the religious view, as you've examined, is ultimately limited by the view of man as a mere animal, limited to the natural world for its means of reproduction and dominance (ironic because they claim it is the secularists who degrade us by viewing humanity as merely animals).
For a small historical period at the beginning of the modern scientific understanding of biology your comparison was valid, but that was because the advantages of being a scientific secular society had not yet overcome the immediate disadvantages of dramatically lowered reproduction. This was mitigated by the fact that social change happened slower than scientific change, so eventually we experienced a great birth boom worldwide as the traditional religious and biological reproductive needs were expressed through the birth of many children, while at the same time the scientific advantages began ramping up -- instead of having 12 children of whom 9 died before maturity, you could have 12 children of whom 9 lived thanks to better medicine, nutrition, etc. Since historically no family really expected to have more than 2-4 children (if that) ever grow up, people quickly curtailed their behavior to adapt to the new biological reality.
Now we've reached the point where yes, people in the most advanced societies are only choosing to have 1 or 2 children in their entire lifetime, but those children are virtually guaranteed to live to maturity. And we now have women who had no hope of reproduction giving birth to triplets or sextuplets thanks to fertility treatments.
We are quickly entering a world where men and women will commonly live to be 100 years in age, and can have children at 50 or 60. Soon parents will be able to both select for genetically desired traits as well as clone without requiring any notion of conventional fertility. Beyond that we'll likely be able to house and reproduce the minds of all those secular humanists in mechanical hybrid bodies that are, relatively speaking, immortal.
The traditional animalistic methods of reproduction could never hope to overcome such a tremendous advantange in strength, survivability and reproduction that future technologist society could be based on. The secular/technologist society can (and already does) build GPS-guided smart missiles and robot warriors to fight battles, and the traditional religious societies have to rely on high birthrates to compensate for war, famine, disease.
I don't have much hope that crusading against birth control will in any way allow a group an ultimate evolutionary advantage against the society that can destroy millions of evolutionary rivals by merely pushing a button.
The prohibitions against promiscuity and birth control seek to balance the wants of men with the legitimate interests of women.
LOL, you need to meet some more interesting women:)
And I can assure you that the side effect of hormonal birth control of adding a few pounds to the butt and breasts of the average young woman (as well as clearing up skin) is no burden on most young women's attractiveness OR sexual desire.
Sorry, but, as an American, I feel obligated to take all my solutions in pill form. Don't you have some kind of confidence boosting pill I could take?
Most adult gathering places sell fake confidence in a convenient liquid form called "beer", and it is remarkably effective as long as you aren't a morose drunk:)
"...nothing more than prostitution" you said. That implies a bias: that prostitution is low. It may be unintentional, but there you go.
I interpreted it is meaning it is "nothing more [interesting] than prostitution" -- ie, there's no particularly compelling reason it would be featured on slashdot because there's no novel social or technical thing involved. Perhaps your reading is the one with unintentional bias?
Apple have actually provided a full PC which they will do everything within their power to stop you running Mac OSX, Linux & MythTV on.
Huh? Since when has Apple made even a token effort to stop people from running different software on their hardware? They do try to stop running OS X on foreign hardware (but they don't waste a lot of developer resources on it) but that's a very different thing.
Compare how easy it is to load a completely different OS on the AppleTV: 1) write new OS to drive. 2) Apple publicly says they won't do anything via updates to try and stop people from doing it 2) Done.
vs what it took to turn the XBox into a standalone media device: 1) Order potentially illegal mod kit 2) Solder delicate wires to tiny holes 3) Flash hacked firmware (pray you don't screw up, or goto 1) 4) Boot from illegal CD/DVD 6) Install illegal software. 7) Be sure never to load any dashboard updates from MS, since they will all try to brick the machine 8) Done!
Hm, I don't have any problems with slashdot on Safari. Are you sure it isn't Saft or Pithhelmet or something causing a problem? I've used both the Panther and Tiger versions of Safari with all the intermediate updates and never had a problem with a particular site crashing the browser (though of course some didn't work right).
The problem posed by the topic has already been solved.
Um, no it hasn't. The problem is not "How do we remove everything useful about Firefox and make it Safari with a different rendering engine?". The problem is "how do we make Firefox, with ALL its functionality including extensions, a more integrated application on the Mac?"
I could understand the desire for Camino back when Safari was less than great. But Safari rocks now, it's a great browser. The only thing it's missing are all the great extensions that the FF community has developed.
Your premise is wrong. Companies are simply groups of individuals working together to achieve a goal. They are as natural as marriage or any other number of institutions that people take for granted.
WTF? Marriage does not exist "naturally", it's a legal/religious institution. The same is true of corporations.
The people who comprise institutions are real people. They have rights. Institutions themselves are simply convenient artificial structures people create for a variety of reasons.
eah, in fact my right to exist is granted by the government...Stalin would be so proud of you.
If you're a company (ie, an artificial entity that exists only based on law and not any natural basis), then yes, you do exist solely by the legal grace of the real people in the jurisdictions where you conduct business.
Considering Stalin was a communist, and large international megacorporations are generally somewhat capitalist, I think you may have to repeat 7th grade.
Wrong, lack of belief is not agnosticism. Agnosticism is generally the belief that the existence or nonexistence of God is unknowable or unprovable. It says nothing about personal belief in God, or lack of belief in god. Of course there is a lot of overlap between all these categories, but the basic point is that an athiest does not necessarily "believe" anything. He may believe something, or may not. There is no inherent belief in atheism, only lack of belief in one particular thing.
Generally agnosticism refers to the belief that the existence or nonexistence of God is unknowable or unprovable. It says nothing about personal belief in God, or lack of belief in god. Of course there is a lot of overlap between all these categories, but the basic point is that an athiest does not necessarily "believe" anything. He may believe something, or may not. But not believing in God is not the same as believing there is no God.
Surely the belief that there is no god is still a belief?
Some atheists believe there is no God. Many more simply don't believe there is a God. The absence of a belief does not imply the belief of the opposite.
Re:Social hack - use "bullfight" for "speed trap".
on
Is Your GPS Naive?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Why should I move over (at my expense!) for some jackass to be able to put me and everybody else at risk?
Because you're putting everybody else at risk more than he is? Or was that a rhetorical question?
Me, I'm personally happy to cruise along in the righthand lane in my non-aerodynamic vehicle that is lucky to go 75 downhill with a tailwind. For some reason going out of my way to break the law, annoy others, and risk my own safety for no reason whatsoever just never occurred to me.
Screw speed and size reduction. All I want it compatibility with other OSs (i.e., fewest things that have to be installed on a base OS to use it). For that, I'd have to say Zip and/or gzip wins.
I have to admit I switched over/back to ZIP about a year ago for everything for exactly this reason. yeah, it meant a lot of my old archives increased in size (sometimes by quite a bit), but knowing that anything anywhere can read the archive makes up for it. ZIP creation and decoding is supported natively by Mac and Windows and most Linux distros right from the GUI, so it makes it brain-dead simple to deal with.
Re:that's not what they told me
on
Is Your GPS Naive?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
in Virginia traffic school, which I had to attend at age 16 over half my life ago. They said you do not have any obligation to move or go faster than the speed-limit whatsoever. This was from the county-enforced state-approved course taught AT the courthouse. Honestly, I think your type are assholes. But I'm too tired for a flame war right now so I will probably ignore your response.
you should probably be a little more careful about who you're repying to when throwing around "your type are assholes" responses, since I assume you were intending that for the original poster and not me. (Especially if you're trying to avoid getting into flamewars.)
And FWIW (I did live in Virginia for much of the last decade), the state law does require you to allow overtaking vehicles the left lane if they provide an audible signal that they want to pass http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+co d+46.2-842. Every state I've ever lived in or looked up the rules for, some similar law has been on the books.
Since when does Quicktime come with kernel mode disk controller drivers? I agree it isn't a great piece of Windows software, but I fail to see how it should have anything whatsoever to do with how the data is being read from the disk by the OS -- if the OS can read the network/SCSI/SATA/PATA drive, what difference does it make to quicktime other than read performance? How can QT cause a BSOD reading from a particular device when it has nothing to do with the driver accessing the device?
I think (i do not know - so back off, i'm guessing) that there is some kind of problem with Vista and video... at least, i'm seeing a trend.
Considering the huge mess that NVidia is having with getting decent video drivers out the door for Vista, I'd say there is in fact quite a bit of evidence for such a statement. This is what happens when you ship an OS 6 months or more early because you have contractual obligations to get it out to corporate customers before the end of the year, rather than actually waiting for it to be done.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you actually bother to read the stories that resulted from your search? It was the Iraqi Information Minister who claimed we were being drawn into a quagmire, and the press were laughing at him, reporting that statement as well as the overwhelming evidence agreeing with the official releases that the US forces were kicking ass and taking names. I remember the one BBC reporter who dared to question if the Americans were actually in Baghdad (since he hadn't seen them yet) being mocked roundly and having his sanity questioned on every network for several days.
It wasn't until the terrorists/freedom fighters was killing soldiers on a daily basis and preventing political, economic and industrial goals from being reached for a while that the press bothered to mention there was no real plan for what exactly to do if we WEREN'T greeted as liberators with open arms.
I swear, for a bunch of self-proclaimed "tough guys", neocons and Fox news viewers seem to be the biggest whiny professional crybabies in the world. Waah, waah, the only reason we failed despite our complete control of the government and carte blanche from the voting public to do anything we wanted for over half a decade is because the left sabotaged us! It's totally coincidental that people in Iraq are fighting against us years after we were supposed to have been finished, really the only reason our troops aren't home yet is the New York Times printing the word quagmire!
Meanwhile New Yorkers -- you know, those cowardly leftists who are actually victims of terrorist attacks every few years -- shrug their shoulders and tell you pussies to suck it up and get on with your lives.
Because much of their field infrastructure, for obvious reasons of portability, is wireless and satellite based. It takes a little longer to launch new satellites to get more bandwidth than it does to upgrade your DSL service. Yeah, in bases they have decent bandwidth, but the same problems that any other companies have in terms of bored office workers using it up killing time on YouTube. Many companies block those kinds of sites for the same reason.
Um, what? I don't know of any channels that gave this impression. I think maybe you need to step outside of the "no-spin zone" and back to reality, where the Iraqi Information Minister was the laughingstock of the world media from day one and even our staunchest foes were reporting how incredibly effective our "shock and awe" military campaign was at grabbing control so overwhelmingly and quickly.
It wasn't until 18 months into our 3-6 month war that anyone in the US media dared even question any of the glowing press releases of how perfectly everything was going.
And, BTW, I love how "nobody REALLY knows what's going on!" -- I'm sure all the 4-star Generals who turned down the War Czar post did so because they're just ignorant puppets of the leftist media with no experience in military matters, and they just don't have access to the "inside scoop" that you're keeping to yourself.
The only one on that entire list that *Apple* actually wanted to make a "standard" in any sense (outside of their own hardware) was FireWire. The rest all did exactly what they were supposed to do for their respective markets, they certainly were not Apple failures in any way whatsoever.
That said, yeah, the idea of converting every surface to a touch screen just because the iPhone and iPods use one is silly -- people generally don't want to touch computer screens on a regular basis, it's tiring. I doubt Apple has any intention whatsoever of doing such a thing -- they're doing just fine with the multitouch trackpads, where they tested all this sort of stuff out before moving it to the iPod/iPhone interface.
*shrug* If you say so. Last time I modded a box, softmods were still notoriously unreliable and temporary, broken by every hardware and software update that MS put out. If, after 4+ years of development, they finally work perfectly, then fantastic.
It really makes no difference to my point, which was that Apple really doesn't care what you do with their box in terms of software (and has said so officially, much like TiVo's policy in regards to their series 1 devices), while MS has actively worked for many years to try and brick machines that show any signs of being modified from the factory version, and that continues to be their publicly stated official policy.
No, it's seen as unwinnable because we're fighting an enemy that is impossible to distinguish from our allies until it is too late, and our victory condition (establish democracy) is not even seen as a desirable goal for our own ally or the local populace.
Stop trying to convince yourself that only supporters of the war "see the benefits" to strategic thinking about the region. Most of those opposed to the war are and were thinking strategically as well, the only difference is that everything THEY said was going to happen has come true, while everything the pro-war side has said would happen has NOT. Who, then, seem to be displaying a more practical ability at strategic thinking?
I suspect the court will sidestep this particular argument, because it's WAY too big for anyone but the Supreme Court to rule on in principle. But the easy "out" for the presiding court is the fact that Verizon never petitioned the government -- they responded to government requests.
There was no political argument that Verizon was trying to bring to the attention of the government that they shared the data with the government to prove, they merely handed over confidential (and legally protected) documents because someone in the government asked for them (with no legal right to do so).
In this case I would imagine the whole argument can easily be avoided entirely due to the order of events.
Ironic that people so often use "stupid" to mean only ignorant, while you made the inverse mistake. Just because the religious views may have a net positive effect on reproduction doesn't preclude ignorance, all you're claiming is that their behavior isn't as foolish or stupid as some may think.
It's also ironic that the religious view, as you've examined, is ultimately limited by the view of man as a mere animal, limited to the natural world for its means of reproduction and dominance (ironic because they claim it is the secularists who degrade us by viewing humanity as merely animals).
For a small historical period at the beginning of the modern scientific understanding of biology your comparison was valid, but that was because the advantages of being a scientific secular society had not yet overcome the immediate disadvantages of dramatically lowered reproduction. This was mitigated by the fact that social change happened slower than scientific change, so eventually we experienced a great birth boom worldwide as the traditional religious and biological reproductive needs were expressed through the birth of many children, while at the same time the scientific advantages began ramping up -- instead of having 12 children of whom 9 died before maturity, you could have 12 children of whom 9 lived thanks to better medicine, nutrition, etc. Since historically no family really expected to have more than 2-4 children (if that) ever grow up, people quickly curtailed their behavior to adapt to the new biological reality.
Now we've reached the point where yes, people in the most advanced societies are only choosing to have 1 or 2 children in their entire lifetime, but those children are virtually guaranteed to live to maturity. And we now have women who had no hope of reproduction giving birth to triplets or sextuplets thanks to fertility treatments.
We are quickly entering a world where men and women will commonly live to be 100 years in age, and can have children at 50 or 60. Soon parents will be able to both select for genetically desired traits as well as clone without requiring any notion of conventional fertility. Beyond that we'll likely be able to house and reproduce the minds of all those secular humanists in mechanical hybrid bodies that are, relatively speaking, immortal.
The traditional animalistic methods of reproduction could never hope to overcome such a tremendous advantange in strength, survivability and reproduction that future technologist society could be based on. The secular/technologist society can (and already does) build GPS-guided smart missiles and robot warriors to fight battles, and the traditional religious societies have to rely on high birthrates to compensate for war, famine, disease.
I don't have much hope that crusading against birth control will in any way allow a group an ultimate evolutionary advantage against the society that can destroy millions of evolutionary rivals by merely pushing a button.
LOL, you need to meet some more interesting women
And I can assure you that the side effect of hormonal birth control of adding a few pounds to the butt and breasts of the average young woman (as well as clearing up skin) is no burden on most young women's attractiveness OR sexual desire.
Most adult gathering places sell fake confidence in a convenient liquid form called "beer", and it is remarkably effective as long as you aren't a morose drunk
I interpreted it is meaning it is "nothing more [interesting] than prostitution" -- ie, there's no particularly compelling reason it would be featured on slashdot because there's no novel social or technical thing involved. Perhaps your reading is the one with unintentional bias?
Huh? Since when has Apple made even a token effort to stop people from running different software on their hardware? They do try to stop running OS X on foreign hardware (but they don't waste a lot of developer resources on it) but that's a very different thing.
Compare how easy it is to load a completely different OS on the AppleTV:
1) write new OS to drive.
2) Apple publicly says they won't do anything via updates to try and stop people from doing it
2) Done.
vs what it took to turn the XBox into a standalone media device:
1) Order potentially illegal mod kit
2) Solder delicate wires to tiny holes
3) Flash hacked firmware (pray you don't screw up, or goto 1)
4) Boot from illegal CD/DVD
6) Install illegal software.
7) Be sure never to load any dashboard updates from MS, since they will all try to brick the machine
8) Done!
I was thinking it sounded like a delicious dessert!
"I'll try the death by chocolate...oh, wait, the tort of outrage looks yummy!"
Hm, I don't have any problems with slashdot on Safari. Are you sure it isn't Saft or Pithhelmet or something causing a problem? I've used both the Panther and Tiger versions of Safari with all the intermediate updates and never had a problem with a particular site crashing the browser (though of course some didn't work right).
Um, no it hasn't. The problem is not "How do we remove everything useful about Firefox and make it Safari with a different rendering engine?". The problem is "how do we make Firefox, with ALL its functionality including extensions, a more integrated application on the Mac?"
I could understand the desire for Camino back when Safari was less than great. But Safari rocks now, it's a great browser. The only thing it's missing are all the great extensions that the FF community has developed.
WTF? Marriage does not exist "naturally", it's a legal/religious institution. The same is true of corporations.
The people who comprise institutions are real people. They have rights. Institutions themselves are simply convenient artificial structures people create for a variety of reasons.
If you're a company (ie, an artificial entity that exists only based on law and not any natural basis), then yes, you do exist solely by the legal grace of the real people in the jurisdictions where you conduct business.
Considering Stalin was a communist, and large international megacorporations are generally somewhat capitalist, I think you may have to repeat 7th grade.
Wrong, lack of belief is not agnosticism. Agnosticism is generally the belief that the existence or nonexistence of God is unknowable or unprovable. It says nothing about personal belief in God, or lack of belief in god. Of course there is a lot of overlap between all these categories, but the basic point is that an athiest does not necessarily "believe" anything. He may believe something, or may not. There is no inherent belief in atheism, only lack of belief in one particular thing.
Generally agnosticism refers to the belief that the existence or nonexistence of God is unknowable or unprovable. It says nothing about personal belief in God, or lack of belief in god. Of course there is a lot of overlap between all these categories, but the basic point is that an athiest does not necessarily "believe" anything. He may believe something, or may not. But not believing in God is not the same as believing there is no God.
Some atheists believe there is no God. Many more simply don't believe there is a God. The absence of a belief does not imply the belief of the opposite.
Because you're putting everybody else at risk more than he is? Or was that a rhetorical question?
Me, I'm personally happy to cruise along in the righthand lane in my non-aerodynamic vehicle that is lucky to go 75 downhill with a tailwind. For some reason going out of my way to break the law, annoy others, and risk my own safety for no reason whatsoever just never occurred to me.
I have to admit I switched over/back to ZIP about a year ago for everything for exactly this reason. yeah, it meant a lot of my old archives increased in size (sometimes by quite a bit), but knowing that anything anywhere can read the archive makes up for it. ZIP creation and decoding is supported natively by Mac and Windows and most Linux distros right from the GUI, so it makes it brain-dead simple to deal with.
you should probably be a little more careful about who you're repying to when throwing around "your type are assholes" responses, since I assume you were intending that for the original poster and not me. (Especially if you're trying to avoid getting into flamewars.)
And FWIW (I did live in Virginia for much of the last decade), the state law does require you to allow overtaking vehicles the left lane if they provide an audible signal that they want to pass http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+c
Since when does Quicktime come with kernel mode disk controller drivers? I agree it isn't a great piece of Windows software, but I fail to see how it should have anything whatsoever to do with how the data is being read from the disk by the OS -- if the OS can read the network/SCSI/SATA/PATA drive, what difference does it make to quicktime other than read performance? How can QT cause a BSOD reading from a particular device when it has nothing to do with the driver accessing the device?
Considering the huge mess that NVidia is having with getting decent video drivers out the door for Vista, I'd say there is in fact quite a bit of evidence for such a statement. This is what happens when you ship an OS 6 months or more early because you have contractual obligations to get it out to corporate customers before the end of the year, rather than actually waiting for it to be done.