This thing SHOULD eat corpses. You know how much land is wasted in cemeteries and such? And how much cash in embalming and other funereal preparations? This could have saved thousands of acres and millions of dollars. Oh well, there's still a chance Japan will come through for it.
Because for the simple reason: the cars the other people are putting out don't do what I need. Some don't have climate control, some are hobbyist cars. Some won't work with the roads I need to drive down. Some require me to buy a new garage to keep it in.
I want a car that'll work on the roads I need, with the features I know I need, and can be kept where I already have a place to keep my car.
Hey, I've seen some retarded people that aren't ugly. They're merely not pretty. A better analogy would be "much like ugly people can't help being bitter."
The images are PD now, putting them on wikipedia won't change that. Beyond that, there have been layperson descriptions of what the test entails for years. Even knowing the test exists invalidates the results to at least a degree, since the person looking will try to say what they think the test-giver wants to hear. While THAT might be diagnostically useful, it's not the same as what the person actually sees.
Does it produce enough science to justify the cost? You say "who knows." I say that's ridiculous.
I say putting a dollar value on knowledge is ridiculous. To quantify the effect of knowledge gained, based on the money expended to obtain it? By that, penecillin must have been one of the best ROI discoveries ever.
If the money to keep it running can be found, and they can still think of things to do, then they should continue. If they run out of tasks, experiments, et al, then yes, nix it then.
The only reason copyright exists is to allow a 3rd party to benefit from the works of an artist.
Err. No. The only reason organizations such as the RIAA and the CMRRA exist is to profit from the works of another. The reason copyright was created was so that the primary artist was able to gain compensation for their works before the public was allowed unmoderated use. That's still its primary reason for existing. Without it, the 3rd parties would be able to simply take the work and use it on their own.
You mean that Gates bailed them out, and they have a history of making shitty products well beyond what anyone would reasonably pay for the products, even if they DID work as advertised?
No. That would only be true if it was a median IQ. Averages are thrown by outliers. Someone with a 120 IQ requires an 80 to average to 100. Or two 90s. And 90 is already pretty far off, but it isn't *that* much stupider than 100.
Actually, it's the former in each case. Office:Mac causes OSX to come tumbling down like a how of cards. Adobe causes all my open programs to become not open. Randomly occurring, but consistent behaviour.
They were found guilty of assisting in making copyrighted materials available.
Except as swedish law was *always* applied before, you had to actually charge the people who *made* the materials available. You were not allowed to charge just the accessories. Thus, the charges and subsequent conviction push the law past where it was allowed to previously apply.
Tech support pushes each patch to the college's patch server as soon as they've made sure it's stable, and there's been a few firmware patches, so it seems unlikely that's the cause. Personally, I'm just taking the stand I usually take. "Each OS has its points. OSX's isn't "it just works," it's "it works well for designers and people who just surf, IM and email."" Others can and will prefer it by tastes, obviously, but it doesn't really offer any substantial bonuses for people outside those groups that I can ascertain.
Well, I ran the beta for a while, and it was okay. I'm running the RC on both my desktop (for gaming) and my laptop. And so far, there's only one thing I've run across that's an issue.
I gave the RC a small partition on my laptop, about 25GB or so for everything. And it's down to about 4 GB now, and there's issues cropping up with the Volume Shadow Service and the Error Reporting which cause everything to lock up for about 5 minutes every few hours, when it tries to do anything with either one of them. So if you run your HDD close to full, I'd recommend a pass at the moment, since it's not actually giving me any reasons up front, I had to dig in to the event log, and that's the only excuse I could find for the behaviour. When I have some time, I'll try adding some more space from my main partition and see if it helps at all.
I have never seen an unstable UNIX or OS X install unless hardware is not playing nice or damaged. This is typically the reason why any UNIX-based, UNIX-like OS fails. rarely is it a software issue - but they do happen.
It's literally a brand new machine, less than 3 months old. A 24" iMac. There's no reason for the hardware to be damaged or not playing well together. And I'm running Office:Mac 2008 (the company standard) and Adobe Acrobat Professional. Word will literally crash 3 times in 5 minutes some days, and Acrobat will randomly close everything. This behaviour was also present on an older iMac, running Office:Mac 2004. What's more, since this is an academic environment (We're adjunct to a University), we're not given any of the administrator passwords, so even if I wanted to poke around in the guts, my options are limited. Though granted, that last part is hardly OSX's fault.
I can. I run OSX on my work computer, and it's shit. Forget the idiocy in divorcing the menu bar from the window (shit, lemme double check which of the 5 open documents I'm saving), and the trouble in resizing a window that's already in the bottom right corner (I need to move it elsewhere, just to change the size, really?), all the programs I need for work are available on Windows. Only on OSX they're unstable. Programs I've used for years, problem-free in Windows, crash several times a month in OSX. And why the ever-living hell do I need to restart for a Safari update? I don't even use Safari.
Happy MS customer here: I plan on preordering the Win7 upgrade, since the price is lower on a preorder. I think the pricing is okay, since it's in line with, or lower than, Vista's current costs, despite this being a down economy, where it's important to squeeze every sale you can get. Would I be happy if the cost was even lower? Yeah, but everyone likes cheaper stuff. If I'm willing to drop money on programs for my computer, ranging from $50-$100, can I really bitch about the OS costing at the high end? After all, I'm using it more than anything else on my computer, since it's running all the time.
Have you actually looked at a tax form? There's 50 bajillion different credits and deductions you can get if you're lower/middle class. I haven't paid any income tax in 4 years. And we all know the rich find loopholes to lower their tax burden as well. If we closed up more of those loopholes, then I'd be fine with doing away with income tax (it's a relatively recent invention anyways). But considering no one's actually made significant (or really, insignificant) tax cuts, I'll fucking take them where I can get them, since my city council doesn't even know the meaning of the term "single digit tax increase," let alone "cut taxes."
Yep, appeal to ridicule isn't a logical fallacy at all, so of course any subject that people joke about isn't worthy of exploration at all. This is a research project done by a relatively small team, and not taking any resources away from other endeavours. What is such a bad idea about making cows slightly more efficient? The only reason they even exist anymore is because they're used as a food source. They're walking meat refrigerators. Since they only exist because we keep them around, we might as well tweak them.
The green movement is now nothing but grifters and snake oil men chasing after obama bucks
Are you stupid, or did you just not read the summary? Alberta is in Canada. They don't get any money from your President. In fact, no tax money is being spent on it at all. I actually work at the University of Alberta, and no government money goes to research, unless it's specifically ordered by the government. It's all endowments from Councils and Boards that disburse money based on relative merits, and that money comes from companies in the related industries.
Sure. Now, go get every car made before 1990 off the roads.
Oh, and make sure to tell the people who can't afford a new car that "it's to save the environment." New cars are much better than older cars, but there's millions of old cars on the road, simply because people can't dish out a few grand just to have a car that doesn't pollute as much. They kinda need that money to not be homeless and starving. Reducing emissions from new cars isn't the issue. New cars are a small part of the problem. It's old cars still hanging around, and more people overall driving that is the issue with trying to fix emissions from vehicles.
Slashdot Mirror
This thing SHOULD eat corpses. You know how much land is wasted in cemeteries and such? And how much cash in embalming and other funereal preparations? This could have saved thousands of acres and millions of dollars. Oh well, there's still a chance Japan will come through for it.
Err, no. The Federal Agents found that the 3 had offered the money. It's a poorly written summary.
Well, there are corn-based alcohols, though you're right, I don't believe they're malted.
Because for the simple reason: the cars the other people are putting out don't do what I need. Some don't have climate control, some are hobbyist cars. Some won't work with the roads I need to drive down. Some require me to buy a new garage to keep it in.
I want a car that'll work on the roads I need, with the features I know I need, and can be kept where I already have a place to keep my car.
He said *improved* security. Linux is fairly stable, security-wise.
WOOSH!
It was a joke, replacing "science" for "god"
Hey, I've seen some retarded people that aren't ugly. They're merely not pretty. A better analogy would be "much like ugly people can't help being bitter."
The images are PD now, putting them on wikipedia won't change that. Beyond that, there have been layperson descriptions of what the test entails for years. Even knowing the test exists invalidates the results to at least a degree, since the person looking will try to say what they think the test-giver wants to hear. While THAT might be diagnostically useful, it's not the same as what the person actually sees.
Does it produce enough science to justify the cost? You say "who knows." I say that's ridiculous.
I say putting a dollar value on knowledge is ridiculous. To quantify the effect of knowledge gained, based on the money expended to obtain it? By that, penecillin must have been one of the best ROI discoveries ever.
If the money to keep it running can be found, and they can still think of things to do, then they should continue. If they run out of tasks, experiments, et al, then yes, nix it then.
The only reason copyright exists is to allow a 3rd party to benefit from the works of an artist.
Err. No. The only reason organizations such as the RIAA and the CMRRA exist is to profit from the works of another. The reason copyright was created was so that the primary artist was able to gain compensation for their works before the public was allowed unmoderated use. That's still its primary reason for existing. Without it, the 3rd parties would be able to simply take the work and use it on their own.
You mean that Gates bailed them out, and they have a history of making shitty products well beyond what anyone would reasonably pay for the products, even if they DID work as advertised?
Hmm. Hasn't happened in Canada.
You fail it.
No. That would only be true if it was a median IQ. Averages are thrown by outliers. Someone with a 120 IQ requires an 80 to average to 100. Or two 90s. And 90 is already pretty far off, but it isn't *that* much stupider than 100.
Actually, it's the former in each case. Office:Mac causes OSX to come tumbling down like a how of cards. Adobe causes all my open programs to become not open. Randomly occurring, but consistent behaviour.
They were found guilty of assisting in making copyrighted materials available.
Except as swedish law was *always* applied before, you had to actually charge the people who *made* the materials available. You were not allowed to charge just the accessories. Thus, the charges and subsequent conviction push the law past where it was allowed to previously apply.
Tech support pushes each patch to the college's patch server as soon as they've made sure it's stable, and there's been a few firmware patches, so it seems unlikely that's the cause. Personally, I'm just taking the stand I usually take. "Each OS has its points. OSX's isn't "it just works," it's "it works well for designers and people who just surf, IM and email."" Others can and will prefer it by tastes, obviously, but it doesn't really offer any substantial bonuses for people outside those groups that I can ascertain.
Well, I ran the beta for a while, and it was okay. I'm running the RC on both my desktop (for gaming) and my laptop. And so far, there's only one thing I've run across that's an issue.
I gave the RC a small partition on my laptop, about 25GB or so for everything. And it's down to about 4 GB now, and there's issues cropping up with the Volume Shadow Service and the Error Reporting which cause everything to lock up for about 5 minutes every few hours, when it tries to do anything with either one of them. So if you run your HDD close to full, I'd recommend a pass at the moment, since it's not actually giving me any reasons up front, I had to dig in to the event log, and that's the only excuse I could find for the behaviour. When I have some time, I'll try adding some more space from my main partition and see if it helps at all.
I have never seen an unstable UNIX or OS X install unless hardware is not playing nice or damaged. This is typically the reason why any UNIX-based, UNIX-like OS fails. rarely is it a software issue - but they do happen.
It's literally a brand new machine, less than 3 months old. A 24" iMac. There's no reason for the hardware to be damaged or not playing well together. And I'm running Office:Mac 2008 (the company standard) and Adobe Acrobat Professional. Word will literally crash 3 times in 5 minutes some days, and Acrobat will randomly close everything. This behaviour was also present on an older iMac, running Office:Mac 2004. What's more, since this is an academic environment (We're adjunct to a University), we're not given any of the administrator passwords, so even if I wanted to poke around in the guts, my options are limited. Though granted, that last part is hardly OSX's fault.
I can. I run OSX on my work computer, and it's shit. Forget the idiocy in divorcing the menu bar from the window (shit, lemme double check which of the 5 open documents I'm saving), and the trouble in resizing a window that's already in the bottom right corner (I need to move it elsewhere, just to change the size, really?), all the programs I need for work are available on Windows. Only on OSX they're unstable. Programs I've used for years, problem-free in Windows, crash several times a month in OSX. And why the ever-living hell do I need to restart for a Safari update? I don't even use Safari.
Happy MS customer here: I plan on preordering the Win7 upgrade, since the price is lower on a preorder. I think the pricing is okay, since it's in line with, or lower than, Vista's current costs, despite this being a down economy, where it's important to squeeze every sale you can get. Would I be happy if the cost was even lower? Yeah, but everyone likes cheaper stuff. If I'm willing to drop money on programs for my computer, ranging from $50-$100, can I really bitch about the OS costing at the high end? After all, I'm using it more than anything else on my computer, since it's running all the time.
Have you actually looked at a tax form? There's 50 bajillion different credits and deductions you can get if you're lower/middle class. I haven't paid any income tax in 4 years. And we all know the rich find loopholes to lower their tax burden as well. If we closed up more of those loopholes, then I'd be fine with doing away with income tax (it's a relatively recent invention anyways). But considering no one's actually made significant (or really, insignificant) tax cuts, I'll fucking take them where I can get them, since my city council doesn't even know the meaning of the term "single digit tax increase," let alone "cut taxes."
Yep, appeal to ridicule isn't a logical fallacy at all, so of course any subject that people joke about isn't worthy of exploration at all. This is a research project done by a relatively small team, and not taking any resources away from other endeavours. What is such a bad idea about making cows slightly more efficient? The only reason they even exist anymore is because they're used as a food source. They're walking meat refrigerators. Since they only exist because we keep them around, we might as well tweak them.
STOP IT
this is now WAY beyond nonsense
The green movement is now nothing but grifters and snake oil men chasing after obama bucks
Are you stupid, or did you just not read the summary? Alberta is in Canada. They don't get any money from your President. In fact, no tax money is being spent on it at all. I actually work at the University of Alberta, and no government money goes to research, unless it's specifically ordered by the government. It's all endowments from Councils and Boards that disburse money based on relative merits, and that money comes from companies in the related industries.
Sure. Now, go get every car made before 1990 off the roads.
Oh, and make sure to tell the people who can't afford a new car that "it's to save the environment." New cars are much better than older cars, but there's millions of old cars on the road, simply because people can't dish out a few grand just to have a car that doesn't pollute as much. They kinda need that money to not be homeless and starving. Reducing emissions from new cars isn't the issue. New cars are a small part of the problem. It's old cars still hanging around, and more people overall driving that is the issue with trying to fix emissions from vehicles.
NASA's already done it.