Right, and you can record normal TV in black and white, but why would you want to?:)
How can I record my TV shows in black & white?
I know you are kidding, but my point is that current Tivos will record HDTV in widescreen format. Sure not at the native resolution, but still it is nice until I can drop a grand for an HDTV tivo.
I agree with almost everything and especially with taking a safety course.
However, this They're safer for the neighbors too. Of course, at close range, rifles offer a cleaner shot, and a greater opportunity to not kill. A handgun? I'm not that good of a shot and I don't like home intruders that close. YMMV. is wrong. Dangerously wrong.
Unless it is the only firearm, never use a rifle for home defense. Way too much chance for over penetration and a very good chance of going through a wall and hitting a neighbor.
Rifles are also much too bulky in the confines of a house and your not going to have time to line up a shot with a rifle.
A handgun is better and a shotgun is even better because you have more of a chance of hitting the criminal.
BTW, unless you have specific military training in sweeping the house or a loved one is in danger, never try to find the criminals. Get a phone, call the police and lock the bedroom or bathroom door. Tell the police you have a weapon and which room you are in. They will let you know when it is safe to come out.
...except that the originals poster's mom's car was broken into, so not only would you have given the criminals a gun registered in your name, you break the law by having a concealed (and probably loaded) weapon.
Whoops, criminals got a got illegally. Wow, never would have though that would have happened.
The simple fact that someone can break into my house or car and maybe steal a weapon is not a reason not to have a weapon. In fact, that is more of a reason to have a weapon since someone will break into your house.
I have a concealed gun permit and of course the pistol is loaded. A pistol isn't useful unless it is loaded.
Been reading here for years and I have never seen a hint of Republican or Libertarian views expressed in/. editorializing and there certainly isn't a lack of editorializing.
If you lowered your threshold to -1 you would have seen my conservative replies.
Slamming Bush will get your Score to 5:, Interesting but refuting it will get you a score of -1:, Troll.
If you are using this solely as a personal drive then it is pricey, but ok.
If you plan on sharing it then don't buy. It's crappy and crippled "sharing software" (and I use that term loosely) is terrible. You have to install special software to access it and you have to issue passwords for people to be able to write to the drive.
-21 members of the Bin Laden family were flown out of the country on special chartered flights on September 13 while all other flights were grounded. They were NEVER questioned on Osama at all and there is no clear reason why they were given free flight out without interrogation.
Parts of this is NOT true. Yes, they flew out on 9/13 but not ALL flights were grounded. They WERE questioned and the permission to leave was granted by RICHARD CLARK. Yes, THAT Richard Clark. When asked about this in the 9/11 hearing he said "I would do it again". Just think about it for a sec. If most of the planes were grounded, why would be the first to flay? Rich people on private planes. Richard Clark told the 9/11 commission those people were questioned and he gave the order to let them go.
-Prior to the war in Afghanistan, there were plans on the board to put in a gas pipeline through the country. Members of the Taliban visited Texas regarding the issue. The project was abandoned after the US bombed Afghanistan in 1999. After the recent war, Hamid Karzai was made the leader. The papers were signed giving the green light for the pipline. Prior to being the leader, Karzai was a consultant for one of the companies trying to build the pipeline.
And ALL of the plans and visits were make during the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION!
-Prior to 9/11, Bush had been on vacation over 40 percent of his time in office. During one of those vacations, he was given a security brief that outlined Osama bin Laden training his agents to fly planes in the US as tools of terror. Condi Rice talked about that memo in some of the investigations. Nothing was done about it.
No president, Republican or democratic, "goes on vacation" and every rational person knows this. The office travels with him everywhere. I'm sure the President has been told in memos several thousand possible ways of attack. That is why he has people that work for him such as the NSA/CIA/FBI and such. This was a HUGE INTELLIGENCE failure, not the President's. And yes, if this happened during clinton's administration I would be saying the same thing. No president could have prevented those attacks.
-Pre 9/11, many Bush administration officials are ON THE RECORD as saying that Saddam Hussein didn't have any weapons of mass destruction nor was he capable and wasn't a threat. AFTER 9/11, their tune was exactly opposite. Why?
I need to see those examples, but ON THE RECORD bill clinton, hillary clinton, al gore, john kerry, and dozens of other democrats saying there were WMDs as late as last year. As a matter of fact, clinton bombed the aspirin factory BECAUSE of the ties between saddam and a-q.
-Condi Rice is on camera saying "There is a definite connection between Iraq and 9/11." We now know that isn't true.
WRONG WRONG WRONG.
NO PERSON IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION SAID THERE WAS A CONNECTION BETWEEN IRAQ AND 9/11. NEVER. NOT ONCE have I heard President Bush and Vice President Cheney state "iraq had nothing to do with 9/11" REPEATEDLY.
However, and the 9/11 commission FOUND THIS TO BE TRUE "There WAS a connection between a-q and iraq that stretched back into the 90's"
I just disputed ALL of your points (with the exception about "many Bush administration officials are ON THE RECORD as saying that Saddam Hussein didn't have any weapons of mass destruction" because I haven't seen that.
But I have seen tens of thousands of dead Kurds who died by poisonous gas. I saw hundreds of thousands of dead iranians die by poisonous gas. I guess that qualifies as WMD.
Of course, germany, soviet union (now Russis), france, England, the u.n., Israel, and even hans blix tell us that iraq has WMDs.
I mean, she actually named her book "Treason", implying that anyone not supporting the Bush administration or any one of the wars our president starts is a traitor and should be killed.
Umm, no.
You don't even need to read the book in order to know what you just said was a HUGE leap.
The government is trying to scare us into giving up all our freedoms. Convince us that the enemy is all around us. Everywhere. And can strike at any time. We'll willingly give up our freedoms so the government can protect us. Because we want to live. That's 1984.
There is a little bit of difference between regulating 30 foot rockets that can fly 60 miles and searching people at the airport.
Always amazes me that people are now complaining about "losing freedoms" yet those same people are always wailing for stricter "gun control" laws.
Does it amaze you that some people think pistol shooting, motorcycle racing, skydiving, rock climbing, etc. are hobbies, too?
Umm, nope.
It would probably amaze you even more to hear that many people don't don't want to live in a perfectly safe but utterly boring world, nor do they appreciate being restricted by people who think they can make that world a reality.
Actually it wouldn't.
But I don't consider storing explosives and building a 30 foot rocket that can travel 60 miles to be the equivalent of "rock climbing" or "skydiving".
Stop all the silly suggestions as if such a rocket will be used to "shoot down a plane".
Is it really so hard to image that using "high-powered rockets, which can be 30 feet long and weigh hundreds of pounds -- with some flying more than 60 miles or reaching speeds over 1,000 miles per hour" can be used as a weapon?
Someone rolls up 15 miles outside of DC, fires a salvo of these rockets with 10 lb. of explosive on each and disappears before the first one even hits?
Sure, they won't do much damage but that is the point of terrorism. Terrorism can't win a war by itself, it requires the other party to lose the will to fight.
It amazes me that people think that building a rocket weighing "hundreds of pounds" or flying over 60 miles is "a hobby.
The really interesting thing is that over 1/2 of the replies to this topic are simply knee jerk anti-Bush rants.
If you can't see that a 30 ft rocket that can fly over 60 miles needs to have some type of regulation then I can't help you.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, and you can record normal TV in black and white, but why would you want to? :)
How can I record my TV shows in black & white?
I know you are kidding, but my point is that current Tivos will record HDTV in widescreen format. Sure not at the native resolution, but still it is nice until I can drop a grand for an HDTV tivo.
I do it all the time.
Now you do lose the enhanced resolution BUT it does record in widescreen format which is nice for movies over cable.
water is wet and the sky is blue.
generally.
I do have a license for Photoshop Elements 2 though.
Links? Can you back this up with any actual facts?
Show me the new published standard that "specifically excludes linux and probably OS/X".
Here is Microsoft's corporate number (425) 882-8080
Just call them and ask for them to fax you their strategies for world domination.
I agree with almost everything and especially with taking a safety course.
However, this They're safer for the neighbors too. Of course, at close range, rifles offer a cleaner shot, and a greater opportunity to not kill. A handgun? I'm not that good of a shot and I don't like home intruders that close. YMMV. is wrong. Dangerously wrong.
Unless it is the only firearm, never use a rifle for home defense. Way too much chance for over penetration and a very good chance of going through a wall and hitting a neighbor.
Rifles are also much too bulky in the confines of a house and your not going to have time to line up a shot with a rifle.
A handgun is better and a shotgun is even better because you have more of a chance of hitting the criminal.
BTW, unless you have specific military training in sweeping the house or a loved one is in danger, never try to find the criminals. Get a phone, call the police and lock the bedroom or bathroom door. Tell the police you have a weapon and which room you are in. They will let you know when it is safe to come out.
...except that the originals poster's mom's car was broken into, so not only would you have given the criminals a gun registered in your name, you break the law by having a concealed (and probably loaded) weapon.
Whoops, criminals got a got illegally. Wow, never would have though that would have happened.
The simple fact that someone can break into my house or car and maybe steal a weapon is not a reason not to have a weapon. In fact, that is more of a reason to have a weapon since someone will break into your house.
I have a concealed gun permit and of course the pistol is loaded. A pistol isn't useful unless it is loaded.
And a glock 27 in the car.
As cheap as PCs are, you will undoubtedly spend more time trying to clean the computers than they are worth.
Donate them and buy new computers.
Been reading here for years and I have never seen a hint of Republican or Libertarian views expressed in /. editorializing and there certainly isn't a lack of editorializing.
If you lowered your threshold to -1 you would have seen my conservative replies.
Slamming Bush will get your Score to 5:, Interesting but refuting it will get you a score of -1:, Troll.
This is a left-leaning board. It is what it is.
Dont forget the monthly subscription sharges for the Tivo service.
I haven't paid a monthly fee to Tivo in almost 5 years.
B&W was a *GREAT* game. I logged about 350 hours on it and its expansion pack (it keeps track for you). The final level of B&W took me 40 hours alone.
:)
All I know about Bush is I had a job when Clinton was president.
you probably got your ass fired for playing B&W everyday.
usb and ethernet, well done
www.ximeta.com
If you are using this solely as a personal drive then it is pricey, but ok.
If you plan on sharing it then don't buy. It's crappy and crippled "sharing software" (and I use that term loosely) is terrible. You have to install special software to access it and you have to issue passwords for people to be able to write to the drive.
But what if it hadn't been brought to their attention? Then the taxpayers would be out a bunch of coin.
Well, yes. What is your point?
Just because they did the right thing after the fact, doesn't mean they were in the right to begin with.
Ok, so they get accused of ripping off people.
When it is proved they didn't and they withheld payment to the people that did, you slam them anyway.
So if they act unscrupulously they get slammed. (which they should)
But if they don't and try to fix the problem, they get slammed also.
Looks to me like the people will accuse them no matter what.
...that Coke Halliburton sent to Iraq was so expensive...
Except it wasn't Halliburton. It was an arabic company Halliburton used as a sub-contractor.
And as soon as it was brought to Halliburton's attention, they suspended payment to that sub-contractor.
But why let truth get in the way of a baseless accusation?
Really?
Three words....
There is a GOD!
NO BUSH IN 2004. Save our civil liberties!
Three words? I count four.
I guess the "intellectuals" are campaigning against Bush.
That is the slowest torrent I have ever seen. 10 peers and I'm getting 0.9KiB/s
Yeah, it was the same for me the first 6 or so hours. The next 6 hours I got 8 KBs.
Then it kicked up to 260 KBs and finished the next day.
Yeah, it is karma whoring :)
r .d mg.torrent
http://66.90.75.92/suprnova//torrents/2052/tige
Please, please, please keep the torrent client up after you have downloaded.
-21 members of the Bin Laden family were flown out of the country on special chartered flights on September 13 while all other flights were grounded. They were NEVER questioned on Osama at all and there is no clear reason why they were given free flight out without interrogation.
Parts of this is NOT true. Yes, they flew out on 9/13 but not ALL flights were grounded. They WERE questioned and the permission to leave was granted by RICHARD CLARK. Yes, THAT Richard Clark. When asked about this in the 9/11 hearing he said "I would do it again". Just think about it for a sec. If most of the planes were grounded, why would be the first to flay? Rich people on private planes. Richard Clark told the 9/11 commission those people were questioned and he gave the order to let them go.
-Prior to the war in Afghanistan, there were plans on the board to put in a gas pipeline through the country. Members of the Taliban visited Texas regarding the issue. The project was abandoned after the US bombed Afghanistan in 1999. After the recent war, Hamid Karzai was made the leader. The papers were signed giving the green light for the pipline. Prior to being the leader, Karzai was a consultant for one of the companies trying to build the pipeline.
And ALL of the plans and visits were make during the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION!
-Prior to 9/11, Bush had been on vacation over 40 percent of his time in office. During one of those vacations, he was given a security brief that outlined Osama bin Laden training his agents to fly planes in the US as tools of terror. Condi Rice talked about that memo in some of the investigations. Nothing was done about it.
No president, Republican or democratic, "goes on vacation" and every rational person knows this. The office travels with him everywhere. I'm sure the President has been told in memos several thousand possible ways of attack. That is why he has people that work for him such as the NSA/CIA/FBI and such. This was a HUGE INTELLIGENCE failure, not the President's. And yes, if this happened during clinton's administration I would be saying the same thing. No president could have prevented those attacks.
-Pre 9/11, many Bush administration officials are ON THE RECORD as saying that Saddam Hussein didn't have any weapons of mass destruction nor was he capable and wasn't a threat. AFTER 9/11, their tune was exactly opposite. Why?
I need to see those examples, but ON THE RECORD bill clinton, hillary clinton, al gore, john kerry, and dozens of other democrats saying there were WMDs as late as last year. As a matter of fact, clinton bombed the aspirin factory BECAUSE of the ties between saddam and a-q.
-Condi Rice is on camera saying "There is a definite connection between Iraq and 9/11." We now know that isn't true.
WRONG WRONG WRONG.
NO PERSON IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION SAID THERE WAS A CONNECTION BETWEEN IRAQ AND 9/11. NEVER. NOT ONCE have I heard President Bush and Vice President Cheney state "iraq had nothing to do with 9/11" REPEATEDLY.
However, and the 9/11 commission FOUND THIS TO BE TRUE "There WAS a connection between a-q and iraq that stretched back into the 90's"
I just disputed ALL of your points (with the exception about "many Bush administration officials are ON THE RECORD as saying that Saddam Hussein didn't have any weapons of mass destruction" because I haven't seen that.
But I have seen tens of thousands of dead Kurds who died by poisonous gas. I saw hundreds of thousands of dead iranians die by poisonous gas. I guess that qualifies as WMD.
Of course, germany, soviet union (now Russis), france, England, the u.n., Israel, and even hans blix tell us that iraq has WMDs.
I mean, she actually named her book "Treason", implying that anyone not supporting the Bush administration or any one of the wars our president starts is a traitor and should be killed.
Umm, no.
You don't even need to read the book in order to know what you just said was a HUGE leap.
The rocket builders are being singled out because they are a small enough group to regulate without causing an uproar
You don't really believe that do you?
Really?
The government is trying to scare us into giving up all our freedoms. Convince us that the enemy is all around us. Everywhere. And can strike at any time. We'll willingly give up our freedoms so the government can protect us. Because we want to live. That's 1984.
There is a little bit of difference between regulating 30 foot rockets that can fly 60 miles and searching people at the airport.
Always amazes me that people are now complaining about "losing freedoms" yet those same people are always wailing for stricter "gun control" laws.
Does it amaze you that some people think pistol shooting, motorcycle racing, skydiving, rock climbing, etc. are hobbies, too?
Umm, nope.
It would probably amaze you even more to hear that many people don't don't want to live in a perfectly safe but utterly boring world, nor do they appreciate being restricted by people who think they can make that world a reality.
Actually it wouldn't.
But I don't consider storing explosives and building a 30 foot rocket that can travel 60 miles to be the equivalent of "rock climbing" or "skydiving".
Stop all the silly suggestions as if such a rocket will be used to "shoot down a plane".
Is it really so hard to image that using "high-powered rockets, which can be 30 feet long and weigh hundreds of pounds -- with some flying more than 60 miles or reaching speeds over 1,000 miles per hour" can be used as a weapon?
Someone rolls up 15 miles outside of DC, fires a salvo of these rockets with 10 lb. of explosive on each and disappears before the first one even hits?
Sure, they won't do much damage but that is the point of terrorism. Terrorism can't win a war by itself, it requires the other party to lose the will to fight.
It amazes me that people think that building a rocket weighing "hundreds of pounds" or flying over 60 miles is "a hobby.
The really interesting thing is that over 1/2 of the replies to this topic are simply knee jerk anti-Bush rants.
If you can't see that a 30 ft rocket that can fly over 60 miles needs to have some type of regulation then I can't help you.