I've been using GAIM for about a month, while my wife uses AOL AIM on her Win95 machine. I've had GAIM crash twice in the time I've used it. In all fairness, I usually have lots of stuff going, and lately I've been compiling kernels and changing filesystems-- I'm sure it gets confused.:) I've got the AOL client, but I've never installed it. I've been happy with GAIM. After reading the article, it looks like I made the right choice.
AOL needs some server stability, however. For a while last week none of her server-located buddies would work. AOL wouldn't even recognize her username/password pair. A few days later it worked fine again (!) How bizarre. Last night chat rooms didn't seem to work. Many members of my family use AIM, and it's easier for all to join a chat room than to juggle many little windows. Rooms could be created, but invitations to join weren't received by anyone. These annoyances seriously detract from AIM's utility and make users wonder if they're doing something wrong.
On a lighter note, I can't tell you my frustration with my family over their inability to understand that I don't use the AOL client. Just last night mom kept pointing me to certian menu items and features that GAIM doesn't have-- "Help" menus, that kind of thing. I just couldn't make her understand that GAIM != AOL AIM.
I do not agree that Earth has been "human-friendly" for "several hundred million years" based on my belief that if it were, people would be there.
I think it's incorrect to start the civilization clock so early as to show that supposed alien cultures could be more advanced than our own. It was my conjecture that any alien people that might be looking for us wouldn't be any more advanced than we are because they'd have had to go through the same process to get there as we have, and would take the same time. I do not understand how you make the argument that "if the timeframe was bumped" we as a species could have been on the scene 200 million years ago. If you believe in evolution in the classical sense it is a silly thing to even suggest, as that would be a supernatural event and out of the realm of possiblity. There's no quirk of evolutionary fate; if evolution is true, then it had to run its course. Things happened at the necessary rate and proper direction to make us here. It takes time that can't be shortcut.
I admit that there are stars of similar size to our sun that are much older in the galaxy. I do not agree that there'd be life on them simply on that account. If you agree with the cosmologists' calculations that the universe is "only" 15-20 billion years old, most of that time must be spent making heavier elements out of the primordial hydrogen-- that's all there was in the beginning, they say. It would take a good number of those years to precipitate a few large stars, have them churn away making heavier elements, and then nova to belch them back out. It's been a while, but if I remember correctly, this would have to happen a few times to make some elements. I'd have to get my stellar evolution textbook out for accurate times, but it seems like most of the history of the universe was spent building the heavier elements required for planets, rocks, ice, us-- anything that is non-stellar.
It then follows that there has been, relatively speaking, no time for life to come about; it's been an explosion (at least here!) in the cosmic time scale. Since the universe seems to be homogeneous, I don't see any reason to believe that life could have happened any earlier anywere else than it did here, especially if we restrict ourselves to the (logical) presupposition that any life out there would look like what we have here.
I take exception to a statement in your point #3-- that ours is a "relatively primitive culture," and how that is the reason that we "gobble up" bandwidth.
First, Since there is absolutely no hard evidence that there is anything alive outside of our own Earth, it is silly to say that ours is a "relatively primitive" culture unless you are comparing us to some fantastic culture from your own imagination. I do not mean to say that modern (western, too) society does not have problems or shortcomings, but to imply that there's more advanced cultures "out there" is wildly speculative at best. Even if you believe the modern scientific dogma about evolution, why should any ET culture be further advanced than our own? If the universe is "only" 15-20 billion years old, and those other life forms would be chemically similar to us (hey, that's as reasonable as any other postulate here), they'd require the same elements available, which would mean the same stellar processes (current theories require a few cycles of stellar formation and nova to provide elements above Lithium), and would take the same time to form. If they're out there, it seems more reasonable to think they'd be "only" as advanced as we are.
Furthermore, non-zero bandwidth is required by physical principles. No matter how "advanced" whatever culture anyone has, it doesn't change how the universe operates. Higher data rates always require a wider channel. Yes, we can use coding schemes that encode more than one bit per symbol, such as cramming 56,000 bits into an 8-kHz phone line. These schemes degrade noise immunity and impose tighter tolerances on channel quality as it becomes more difficult to differentiate between symbols. Nothing is free.
Oh-- about your point #1: if somebody fifty lightyears away started receiving I Love Lucy and immediately sent a "hello" message, we'd not get it for another fifty years! C is the same number coming and going!
As some people here already mentioned, some of these early technologies were good for their day but had significant shortcomings that caused their demise.
The Edison Cylinder, for example, was fragile and quickly wore out as it was made of wax. Phonograph albums were easier to store and held more program, but still had the wear problem. I can't tell you how bad a record sounds after spending most of its life getting played on a Sears Silvertone console. Ick. Compact disks sacrificed some of the program duration, and exchange we get a higher fidelity, and in my opinion more durable, recording medium. It's a natural progression in technology.
Don't get me started on the Amiga; suffice it to say I've owned four of them.
I own a reel lawnmower that I bought two years ago at Lowes (it's an American Lawnmower Company model). I don't think that these "died" off due to any flaw in their design; mine does a really good job. They're not even that hard to push. Rotary mowers, however, allow the user to go longer periods between mowings. I know that in the springtime I can't skip a week-- sometimes it needs mowing twice a week. With a gasoline powered rotary mower the engine has enough power to slog through the overgrowth. Reel mowers get bogged down for the same reason that you can't cut a phonebook with scissors: not enough power to close the blades. The ever-increasingly powerful engines allows people to avoid mowing for even longer times resulting in removing more plant than is healthy.
Also, contrary to the article, reel mowers actually cut closer than rotary mowers; mine won't go higher than 2-7/8" high. Reel mowers are also less traumatic on the grass since the mowers cleanly cut the leaves instead of tearing them as with a machete.
Finally, reel type mowers are safer since you can't cut your feet off. Stick a hand or foot under a rotary mower and it gets whacked off. Stick a finger in your reel mower and it's off for a bandage, or at most a stitch or two. Of course, that means that sticks and other yard debris are serious impediments. (Not that you should run over things with rotary mowers-- they make great catapults!)
That's really odd. When I installed Red Hat 6.2 on my system at home, it did all that for me. I did have to tell it what make and model monitor I had, but it figured out the rest and came up with X the first time.
Would this not be analogous to a situation where the family farm is surrounded by new development and that makes the land value skyrocket?
Or, more correctly, I know of real estate speculators. They buy property based on their projections of what is going to happen to the area in the next ten or so years. If, in those ten years, a lot of people move to the area, their property is worth much more than originally. They can then sell their property at a nice profit (execpt for the specter of capital gains tax, but that's another argument).
Likewise, people that saw the future and acted on it by registering domain names before the "dot-com" rush should be rewarded for their foresight and speculation. It's gambling like everything else.
But that's not the point of the article. The article says that the registrar is hoarding expired domain names. This amounts to insider trading and is wrong. I see nothing evil with registering a domain with the idea that it would be worth more in the future. But if I'm the registrar and arbiter of the process, then I cannot be allowed to participate. The SEC guards against that happening on Wall Street; perhaps we need somebody to keep the registrars in line.
People, I think, are more likely to find somebody's page via a search engine like Google than by typing in a name.
Proponents of domain names claim that it makes business easier to find. They say that it's easier to type "http://www.mybusiness.com/" than "http://www.myserviceprovider.net/~mybusiness" but fail to mention that it's even easier to go to a search engine and type in keywords for what you're looking for.
A similar thing is happening down in Palm Bay, the next town over. A Chevrolet dealer bought the old Builder's Square when it closed and wants to re-open the place as an auto dealership. Currently there's only one dealership in Palm Bay; they'd be the second.
Our local paper is reporting that the dealer wants the name of the road that the site is on changed to "Chevrolet Avenue" or somesuch, reasoning that people would be more able to find their lot. Other people on the street are opposed to it; they're not involved with auto sales. Somebody even wrote the paper demanding that the street they live on be changed to their last name so that friends and relatives would more easily find their house!
Both cases-- domain names and street names-- entirely miss the point. There are better methods than everyone having their own domain: register with the big search engines and have meaningful data in the META tags!
Since there is a (large but) limited number of meaningful domain names, that means that they're a scarce resource. If people want to speculate on their value, what's wrong with that? Do you get mad when people "squat" on their investment portfolios? I mean, how dare they hold on to their stock certificates, waiting for them to go up in value when you want and deserve them more!
The whole domain name fetish also is contradictory to the ideals of the "web," where everything is interconnected with links. If your site is useful, people will link to it. If people need to find you, they'll do a search.
That said, if NSI is holding onto names that have expired and should be available again, I would liken that to insider trading. The broker is paid his commission for doing his job; it's unethical for him to hold the merchandise hostage!
Imagine going to a real estate agent in a town peppered with "for sale" signs and him telling you that nothing's available!
How do you think the ozone got there in the first place? Ozone is an unstable configuration of oxygen; it doesn't last forever and must be continually replenished! Ozone in the atmosphere is made by the impingement of ultraviolet light on normal O2 in the atmosphere. The O2 molecule absorbs the UV energy and breaks int 2O. These 2O combine with nearby O2 to make O3 (ozone). It's a naturally-occuring phenomena.
3O2 + 1uv ---> 2O3
The ionization that you mention already happens daily! It's just done by light rather than by a strong E field.
at home on my K6-2. It was 2.4.0-test8. I couldn't get the networking stuff to work long enough to get a mail out! I also tried to grab 2.4.0-test10, but at twenty megabytes for the gziped tar file, it would not download either.
I had to revert to 2.2.17, which is what I have at home now. When I get the chance I'll grab the latest 2.4 and try again. I'm ever optimistic!
I'd love to test thing more thoroughly. I've written software before and am fully aware of the difficulties. I'm extremely appreciative of the effort that the contributers-- all of them-- have put in. I only wish I had the time to help as well! Right now, however, my (real?) job is draining just about every ounce of energy I've got. By the end of another day fighting with software at work, I'm in no mood to do any real hacking at home:( . Sorry, guys.
On the bright side, I'm very happy with what I've got. I can install new software and my mail client doesn't break like my wife's Outlook 97. I can play around to my heart's content. Whee! Yes, it'd be nice to be able to use that camera that we got for Christmas last year (wife's Win machine is a P100 with no USB, my RH6.2 box has USB) but it's not killing us.
I'm happy that I have a floppy based system that allows my computers to share the modem (LRP). I'm happy to have productivity tools that I can grab and use (StarOffice 5.2). All in all I'm happy with my box!
It's evident that those that are complaining the loudest have done the least when it comes to writing software. Those of us that have done it understand the work involved and are much more happy with what we have! Hey, they are giving it away, you know!
I remember a while back there used to be a system that pressed a standard VCR into service as a backup system. The data was recorded as a black and white pattern in the video, and that was recorded on the tape. A special cable was attached to the serial port and the data could then be retrieved.
At least that's how the Amiga version worked:)
I'm sure it would be possible to make it work; the question would be at what cost (would new hardware be required? Those cameras I don't think were made to accept video from their USB ports, were they?), and the effort involved (Spend a fortune to save a nickel?)
Jeff
Jeff
WINE 1.0 Preview-- Looks nice, doesn't work!
on
Wine In New Skins
·
· Score: 1
I've been trying the binary RPM builds of Wine for quite some time now. As the treasurer of a local church, I use Quicken Deluxe 99. Currently it's installed on my wife's Win95 machine. I'd been hopeful that with Wine I could run QD99 on my Linux (RH 6.2, 2.2.17) box.
Before I installed the 1.0 Preview from Codeweavers, I could almost use QD99 with Wine. I could view the registers, but trying to change the data resulted in a crash. Since I installed the Codeweavers preview, it doesn't work at all.
Now I must admit that the Codeweaver installer system is prettier than the RPM I'd been using before, but I'd gotten used to just "rpm -Uh wine-whatever" and having the newest code working. I was getting hopeful of very soon finding success.
This is not meant to bash anyone; I am grateful for all the efforts put in to making Wine work. I can't imagine the time and work involved except to say I know it's immense! I just was disappointed in the Codeweaver preview's seeming lack of utility when compared to older builds.
How, exactly, did the Florida Supreme Court get it right?
As a resident of FL, I vote for state representatives. Those state representatives create and pass statutes that are signed by seperately elected governors, much like the way the United States federal government works.
The court's job is not to create law, but to interpret law. What the court did last month is not interpretation, but was usurpation of the legislative powers of the state house.
The court got it exactly wrong, but that's what we get from a bunch of He-Coon justices (for the Florida-impared, the deceased ex-Governor, Lawton Chiles, called himself an old he-coon).
Aren't they the ones that are against the traditional idea of civil liberties and way of doing things? If they're at all consistant, they'll be pro-DMCA.
Here's a link to some things that the ACLU may very well be involved with.
I can see sending money to the EFF, but certianly not the ACLU.
Because most of my posts are lengthly enough to require me to read and re-read them before posting. This short thing I probably won't preview, but I've previewed every other post I've made in this discussion.
so there!
I've also consistantly checked the box for +1 bonus, too.
Of course we have a direct say in how it's run: the House of Representatives! I don't know where you are, but I distinctly remember voting directly for the re-election of Dave Weldon, the Representative from my district.
Furthermore, thanks to the seventeenth amendment, we also have as our voice the Senate, which was orignally the voice of the several states:
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The
electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided,
That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may
direct.
This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
There are no national elections in the United States of America. All elections are held at the state level or down. We do not have national referendums. We don't have national votes for anything.
The legistlature of each state decides how to allocate electors to the electoral college. In modern times it's done by a popular vote in that state. It doesn't have to be, and maybe shouldn't be.
What? I do not want to live at the whim of an uninterested and uneducated electorate!
Secondly, we do not live in a direct democracy. And thank God for that! Mob rule does not sound like a fair or equatible way to govern.
Finally, even smart, intelligent people can behave in foolish ways. I never said that they were stupid. I said their actions were stupid. It is the hight of foolishness to rush through the voting process. Even a PhD could behave this way, and it would be just as foolish and stupid if a moron did. Perhaps more; the PhD should know better!
I never said stupid people shouldn't vote! I said people shouldn't vote stupidly!
The problem is not with a complicated mechanical system. The count is done mechanically, but the vote is manual, and no more complicated than drawing an "X" in the proper box.
The problem is with these slothful and unthinking voters that do one of the following things:
Do not double-check their ballot before depositing it in the ballot box. Voters finding errors on their ballot are supposed to call the attention of a poll supervisor, and the supervisor will provide the voter a fresh ballot. When the voter is happy with the condition of his votes on the new ballot he can deposit it with pride; his vote went how he wanted and will be counted.
Finding they marked the wrong candidtate, they do not call a poll supervisor and instead just mark their indended candidate. This is even dumber than not checking your ballot, since the voter leave the voting booth with the full knowledge that their ballot is invalid.
After voting the way they intended, they leave the poll to go to their victory parties. At the parties they note that their candidate isn't doing as well as they had anticipated. They walk across the room to their local representitave and tell Mr. Wexler that they "accidently" voted for the wrong guy! Mr. Wexler takes the ball and runs with it. They also . Meanwhile, Mr. Wexler repays the voter's allegience by saying that his constituents are all but complete idiots.
In any case, the responsibility lies entirely with the voter to mark his ballot properly. If the voter makes a mistake, it is his responsibility to get a fresh ballot to correct his mistake. Once the voter is satisfied with his choices, he must personally place his ballot in the box. No one can do it for him.
As far as voter confusion, if a voter doesn't understand the ballot, it is again his responsibility to find a poll supervisor to explain it.
Slashdot Mirror
In the USA!
AOL needs some server stability, however. For a while last week none of her server-located buddies would work. AOL wouldn't even recognize her username/password pair. A few days later it worked fine again (!) How bizarre. Last night chat rooms didn't seem to work. Many members of my family use AIM, and it's easier for all to join a chat room than to juggle many little windows. Rooms could be created, but invitations to join weren't received by anyone. These annoyances seriously detract from AIM's utility and make users wonder if they're doing something wrong.
On a lighter note, I can't tell you my frustration with my family over their inability to understand that I don't use the AOL client. Just last night mom kept pointing me to certian menu items and features that GAIM doesn't have-- "Help" menus, that kind of thing. I just couldn't make her understand that GAIM != AOL AIM.
Happy new year to all!
I think it's incorrect to start the civilization clock so early as to show that supposed alien cultures could be more advanced than our own. It was my conjecture that any alien people that might be looking for us wouldn't be any more advanced than we are because they'd have had to go through the same process to get there as we have, and would take the same time. I do not understand how you make the argument that "if the timeframe was bumped" we as a species could have been on the scene 200 million years ago. If you believe in evolution in the classical sense it is a silly thing to even suggest, as that would be a supernatural event and out of the realm of possiblity. There's no quirk of evolutionary fate; if evolution is true, then it had to run its course. Things happened at the necessary rate and proper direction to make us here. It takes time that can't be shortcut.
I admit that there are stars of similar size to our sun that are much older in the galaxy. I do not agree that there'd be life on them simply on that account. If you agree with the cosmologists' calculations that the universe is "only" 15-20 billion years old, most of that time must be spent making heavier elements out of the primordial hydrogen-- that's all there was in the beginning, they say. It would take a good number of those years to precipitate a few large stars, have them churn away making heavier elements, and then nova to belch them back out. It's been a while, but if I remember correctly, this would have to happen a few times to make some elements. I'd have to get my stellar evolution textbook out for accurate times, but it seems like most of the history of the universe was spent building the heavier elements required for planets, rocks, ice, us-- anything that is non-stellar.
It then follows that there has been, relatively speaking, no time for life to come about; it's been an explosion (at least here!) in the cosmic time scale. Since the universe seems to be homogeneous, I don't see any reason to believe that life could have happened any earlier anywere else than it did here, especially if we restrict ourselves to the (logical) presupposition that any life out there would look like what we have here.
First, Since there is absolutely no hard evidence that there is anything alive outside of our own Earth, it is silly to say that ours is a "relatively primitive" culture unless you are comparing us to some fantastic culture from your own imagination. I do not mean to say that modern (western, too) society does not have problems or shortcomings, but to imply that there's more advanced cultures "out there" is wildly speculative at best. Even if you believe the modern scientific dogma about evolution, why should any ET culture be further advanced than our own? If the universe is "only" 15-20 billion years old, and those other life forms would be chemically similar to us (hey, that's as reasonable as any other postulate here), they'd require the same elements available, which would mean the same stellar processes (current theories require a few cycles of stellar formation and nova to provide elements above Lithium), and would take the same time to form. If they're out there, it seems more reasonable to think they'd be "only" as advanced as we are.
Furthermore, non-zero bandwidth is required by physical principles. No matter how "advanced" whatever culture anyone has, it doesn't change how the universe operates. Higher data rates always require a wider channel. Yes, we can use coding schemes that encode more than one bit per symbol, such as cramming 56,000 bits into an 8-kHz phone line. These schemes degrade noise immunity and impose tighter tolerances on channel quality as it becomes more difficult to differentiate between symbols. Nothing is free.
Oh-- about your point #1: if somebody fifty lightyears away started receiving I Love Lucy and immediately sent a "hello" message, we'd not get it for another fifty years! C is the same number coming and going!
The Edison Cylinder, for example, was fragile and quickly wore out as it was made of wax. Phonograph albums were easier to store and held more program, but still had the wear problem. I can't tell you how bad a record sounds after spending most of its life getting played on a Sears Silvertone console. Ick. Compact disks sacrificed some of the program duration, and exchange we get a higher fidelity, and in my opinion more durable, recording medium. It's a natural progression in technology.
Don't get me started on the Amiga; suffice it to say I've owned four of them.
I own a reel lawnmower that I bought two years ago at Lowes (it's an American Lawnmower Company model). I don't think that these "died" off due to any flaw in their design; mine does a really good job. They're not even that hard to push. Rotary mowers, however, allow the user to go longer periods between mowings. I know that in the springtime I can't skip a week-- sometimes it needs mowing twice a week. With a gasoline powered rotary mower the engine has enough power to slog through the overgrowth. Reel mowers get bogged down for the same reason that you can't cut a phonebook with scissors: not enough power to close the blades. The ever-increasingly powerful engines allows people to avoid mowing for even longer times resulting in removing more plant than is healthy.
Also, contrary to the article, reel mowers actually cut closer than rotary mowers; mine won't go higher than 2-7/8" high. Reel mowers are also less traumatic on the grass since the mowers cleanly cut the leaves instead of tearing them as with a machete.
Finally, reel type mowers are safer since you can't cut your feet off. Stick a hand or foot under a rotary mower and it gets whacked off. Stick a finger in your reel mower and it's off for a bandage, or at most a stitch or two. Of course, that means that sticks and other yard debris are serious impediments. (Not that you should run over things with rotary mowers-- they make great catapults!)
Or, more correctly, I know of real estate speculators. They buy property based on their projections of what is going to happen to the area in the next ten or so years. If, in those ten years, a lot of people move to the area, their property is worth much more than originally. They can then sell their property at a nice profit (execpt for the specter of capital gains tax, but that's another argument).
Likewise, people that saw the future and acted on it by registering domain names before the "dot-com" rush should be rewarded for their foresight and speculation. It's gambling like everything else.
But that's not the point of the article. The article says that the registrar is hoarding expired domain names. This amounts to insider trading and is wrong. I see nothing evil with registering a domain with the idea that it would be worth more in the future. But if I'm the registrar and arbiter of the process, then I cannot be allowed to participate. The SEC guards against that happening on Wall Street; perhaps we need somebody to keep the registrars in line.
Proponents of domain names claim that it makes business easier to find. They say that it's easier to type "http://www.mybusiness.com/" than "http://www.myserviceprovider.net/~mybusiness" but fail to mention that it's even easier to go to a search engine and type in keywords for what you're looking for.
A similar thing is happening down in Palm Bay, the next town over. A Chevrolet dealer bought the old Builder's Square when it closed and wants to re-open the place as an auto dealership. Currently there's only one dealership in Palm Bay; they'd be the second.
Our local paper is reporting that the dealer wants the name of the road that the site is on changed to "Chevrolet Avenue" or somesuch, reasoning that people would be more able to find their lot. Other people on the street are opposed to it; they're not involved with auto sales. Somebody even wrote the paper demanding that the street they live on be changed to their last name so that friends and relatives would more easily find their house!
Both cases-- domain names and street names-- entirely miss the point. There are better methods than everyone having their own domain: register with the big search engines and have meaningful data in the META tags! Since there is a (large but) limited number of meaningful domain names, that means that they're a scarce resource. If people want to speculate on their value, what's wrong with that? Do you get mad when people "squat" on their investment portfolios? I mean, how dare they hold on to their stock certificates, waiting for them to go up in value when you want and deserve them more!
The whole domain name fetish also is contradictory to the ideals of the "web," where everything is interconnected with links. If your site is useful, people will link to it. If people need to find you, they'll do a search.
That said, if NSI is holding onto names that have expired and should be available again, I would liken that to insider trading. The broker is paid his commission for doing his job; it's unethical for him to hold the merchandise hostage! Imagine going to a real estate agent in a town peppered with "for sale" signs and him telling you that nothing's available!
3O2 + 1uv ---> 2O3
The ionization that you mention already happens daily! It's just done by light rather than by a strong E field.
I had to revert to 2.2.17, which is what I have at home now. When I get the chance I'll grab the latest 2.4 and try again. I'm ever optimistic!
I'd love to test thing more thoroughly. I've written software before and am fully aware of the difficulties. I'm extremely appreciative of the effort that the contributers-- all of them-- have put in. I only wish I had the time to help as well! Right now, however, my (real?) job is draining just about every ounce of energy I've got. By the end of another day fighting with software at work, I'm in no mood to do any real hacking at home :( . Sorry, guys.
On the bright side, I'm very happy with what I've got. I can install new software and my mail client doesn't break like my wife's Outlook 97. I can play around to my heart's content. Whee! Yes, it'd be nice to be able to use that camera that we got for Christmas last year (wife's Win machine is a P100 with no USB, my RH6.2 box has USB) but it's not killing us.
I'm happy that I have a floppy based system that allows my computers to share the modem (LRP). I'm happy to have productivity tools that I can grab and use (StarOffice 5.2). All in all I'm happy with my box!
It's evident that those that are complaining the loudest have done the least when it comes to writing software. Those of us that have done it understand the work involved and are much more happy with what we have! Hey, they are giving it away, you know!
It's too early :( Signing three times like that! Need to snooze!
I remember a while back there used to be a system that pressed a standard VCR into service as a backup system. The data was recorded as a black and white pattern in the video, and that was recorded on the tape. A special cable was attached to the serial port and the data could then be retrieved. At least that's how the Amiga version worked :)
I'm sure it would be possible to make it work; the question would be at what cost (would new hardware be required? Those cameras I don't think were made to accept video from their USB ports, were they?), and the effort involved (Spend a fortune to save a nickel?)
Jeff
Jeff
Before I installed the 1.0 Preview from Codeweavers, I could almost use QD99 with Wine. I could view the registers, but trying to change the data resulted in a crash. Since I installed the Codeweavers preview, it doesn't work at all.
Now I must admit that the Codeweaver installer system is prettier than the RPM I'd been using before, but I'd gotten used to just "rpm -Uh wine-whatever" and having the newest code working. I was getting hopeful of very soon finding success.
This is not meant to bash anyone; I am grateful for all the efforts put in to making Wine work. I can't imagine the time and work involved except to say I know it's immense! I just was disappointed in the Codeweaver preview's seeming lack of utility when compared to older builds.
This, along with those oxygen-free speaker cables and a good tube amiplifier, would be the makings of a top-notch stereo, I think.
The problem would be the liquid He delivery truck that would have to come by every week; that could get expensive!
Just imagine how much better they'd sound!
As a resident of FL, I vote for state representatives. Those state representatives create and pass statutes that are signed by seperately elected governors, much like the way the United States federal government works.
The court's job is not to create law, but to interpret law. What the court did last month is not interpretation, but was usurpation of the legislative powers of the state house.
The court got it exactly wrong, but that's what we get from a bunch of He-Coon justices (for the Florida-impared, the deceased ex-Governor, Lawton Chiles, called himself an old he-coon).
Aren't they the ones that are against the traditional idea of civil liberties and way of doing things? If they're at all consistant, they'll be pro-DMCA.
Here's a link to some things that the ACLU may very well be involved with.
I can see sending money to the EFF, but certianly not the ACLU.
so there!
I've also consistantly checked the box for +1 bonus, too.
Furthermore, thanks to the seventeenth amendment, we also have as our voice the Senate, which was orignally the voice of the several states:
There are no national elections in the United States of America. All elections are held at the state level or down. We do not have national referendums. We don't have national votes for anything.
The legistlature of each state decides how to allocate electors to the electoral college. In modern times it's done by a popular vote in that state. It doesn't have to be, and maybe shouldn't be.
Dad gum it!! It looked FINE when I previewed it! Is Slashcode eating my posts AGAIN?
Secondly, we do not live in a direct democracy. And thank God for that! Mob rule does not sound like a fair or equatible way to govern.
Finally, even smart, intelligent people can behave in foolish ways. I never said that they were stupid. I said their actions were stupid. It is the hight of foolishness to rush through the voting process. Even a PhD could behave this way, and it would be just as foolish and stupid if a moron did. Perhaps more; the PhD should know better!
I never said stupid people shouldn't vote! I said people shouldn't vote stupidly!
The problem is with these slothful and unthinking voters that do one of the following things:
- Do not double-check their ballot before depositing it in the ballot box. Voters finding errors on their ballot are supposed to call the attention of a poll supervisor, and the supervisor will provide the voter a fresh ballot. When the voter is happy with the condition of his votes on the new ballot he can deposit it with pride; his vote went how he wanted and will be counted.
- Finding they marked the wrong candidtate, they do not call a poll supervisor and instead just mark their indended candidate. This is even dumber than not checking your ballot, since the voter leave the voting booth with the full knowledge that their ballot is invalid.
- After voting the way they intended, they leave the poll to go to their victory parties. At the parties they note that their candidate isn't doing as well as they had anticipated. They walk across the room to their local representitave and tell Mr. Wexler that they "accidently" voted for the wrong guy! Mr. Wexler takes the ball and runs with it. They also . Meanwhile, Mr. Wexler repays the voter's allegience by saying that his constituents are all but complete idiots.
In any case, the responsibility lies entirely with the voter to mark his ballot properly. If the voter makes a mistake, it is his responsibility to get a fresh ballot to correct his mistake. Once the voter is satisfied with his choices, he must personally place his ballot in the box. No one can do it for him.As far as voter confusion, if a voter doesn't understand the ballot, it is again his responsibility to find a poll supervisor to explain it.