...someone did it right. Now somebody needs to go back and digitally alter the original film so that Flynn is entering legitimate Unix commands into the terminal instead of the made up BS they put in there.
We can protest, but for the most part, we're unqualified to have an opinion on the matter and are just respouting someone else's talking points..
Don't foist your ignorance on the rest of us. If you can't be bothered to educate yourself you have no business voting for anyone. Economics is not so hard to understand once you know how to filter out the propaganda.
This is a common misunderstanding. It's a giant pull switch with the word INTERNET spelled out in big letters on top. You have to break the glass panel that surrounds it before pulling the switch.
I was once told by a representative in our HR department that in a sexual harassment lawsuit the defendant bears the burden of proof. This was justified on the grounds that it protects the "victim" in some way. I tried to point at that you can't have a victim without first demonstrating the crime. They didn't want to hear it.
In general commercials are not louder than program content, although often times they are noisier. Some commercials seem louder because the audio is more compressed and maintain more consistent levels where as program content has much wider range with many lulls in the audio. Also, when your program gets loud you tend to be more psychologically receptive to it compared to commercials which are generally unwelcome no matter how loud they are.
In those cases where a commercial really is too loud it's almost always a mistake. These mistakes have become somewhat more prevalent in recent years due to more prevalent file based delivery where ingest operators have little to no control over audio levels when commercial files get loaded on to the playout server. Still, it's largely a non-existent problem. Government regulation will only cause a huge waste of time and money to correct minor fluctuations in audio levels and potentially decrease audio quality due to excess sound processing.
Booms and busts are due to the Fed lowering and raising interest rates. They claim to do this in order to even out the business cycle but in reality get in the way of the market's self correction mechanisms.
It's the apps, stupid. Which one has a richer appstore?
So count my vote for Apple, because at the end of the day I want to get my work done, not just play around with a shiny toy.
Yeah, because it's so hard to get any work done without an appstore.
Re:Wants US government to establish Official Relig
on
Bruce Schneier vs. the TSA
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
This article is a joke. The writer twists Ron Paul's words around. Ron Paul has never supported government imposed religion. He recognizes that the First Amendment is an injunction against the government.
Show me a quote where Ron Paul says, "I want the government to impose religion on people." You can't because it does not exist.
The data show that your risk of an accident increases while 4x when you're on the phone.
Freedom can get a little messy sometimes but it's far preferable to statism. I know you just want make people safe because you know what's best for other people but the more mature mind realizes that just because you don't like something does not mean it needs to be outlawed.
just because it's a popular idea doesn't mean it's in any way factually correct.
The idea that the government CAN create jobs is the one that's popular. Most people buy the politicians rhetoric about creating jobs hook, line and sinker.
The government can certainly hire people to do work but the money to do so ultimately has to come from tax dollars. This is money that people would have put to other uses had it not been taken from them by the government. Therefore the government cannot create jobs without ultimately sacrificing private sector jobs in the process.
Furthermore, even though the government prints the money, it's the workers and entrepreneurs who give it its value.
It's not that the government never does anything useful but out of all your examples only the "national highway system" has any credibility. Computers? They're a natural progression from the transistor which was developed in the private sector. IBM developed the integrated circuit and would have eventually done so no matter what the government was up to. The internet? I guess no one would have ever thought to hook 2 computers together had it not been for the government. The space program? It was a by product of the cold war which (talk about wasteful spending!) led to a hugely inflated military budget and the current problems we have in the Middle East.
Also, deficit spending is seriously irresponsible and leads to the long term decline of the economy.
Let's just keep in mind that spending is bad no matter who does it. And it's not okay to spend money on something just because it amounts to less than the military budget. Let's not dig ourselves deeper into the hole.
This is BS. The Los Angeles city council admitted that they were installing stop light cameras to make up for budget short falls. When it it did not generate the expected revenue the failure was widely reported.
That ax must be pretty sharp by now.
Who cares about legal right to use the name? Hyperion's updated AmigaOS is a direct lineage from the original. You are the one who is trying confuse the issue.
If Commodore had never gone out of business and kept making Amigas all these years, I doubt the latest models would resemble the original much at all by this point.
It has nothing to do with the Constitution. Congress passed a law back in the mid 1800s which says no one other than the USPS can deliver first class mail for less than 5 dollars a unit. This is what gives the USPS a effective monopoly over the mail.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't remember a 'kill -9' in the original movie.
...someone did it right. Now somebody needs to go back and digitally alter the original film so that Flynn is entering legitimate Unix commands into the terminal instead of the made up BS they put in there.
Woah. Hold it. No one said anything about *three* slashes!
I'd gladly part that 'freedom' of mine, in order for a world-wide change like this.
I'm wondering if there's some way you can part with your freedom while the rest of us retain ours.
We can protest, but for the most part, we're unqualified to have an opinion on the matter and are just respouting someone else's talking points. .
Don't foist your ignorance on the rest of us. If you can't be bothered to educate yourself you have no business voting for anyone. Economics is not so hard to understand once you know how to filter out the propaganda.
This is a common misunderstanding. It's a giant pull switch with the word INTERNET spelled out in big letters on top. You have to break the glass panel that surrounds it before pulling the switch.
...Tonight on 'World's Stupidest Judges.'
Now that the merger has FINALLY gone through I would like to take this opportunity to tell you all to suck it.
I was once told by a representative in our HR department that in a sexual harassment lawsuit the defendant bears the burden of proof. This was justified on the grounds that it protects the "victim" in some way. I tried to point at that you can't have a victim without first demonstrating the crime. They didn't want to hear it.
Has anyone else come across this?
There's nothing wrong with ideology. Skepticism is an ideology. Without ideology we wouldn't have the scientific method.
2.9% financing on a Toyota 1-ton! That was my idea too!
In general commercials are not louder than program content, although often times they are noisier. Some commercials seem louder because the audio is more compressed and maintain more consistent levels where as program content has much wider range with many lulls in the audio. Also, when your program gets loud you tend to be more psychologically receptive to it compared to commercials which are generally unwelcome no matter how loud they are. In those cases where a commercial really is too loud it's almost always a mistake. These mistakes have become somewhat more prevalent in recent years due to more prevalent file based delivery where ingest operators have little to no control over audio levels when commercial files get loaded on to the playout server. Still, it's largely a non-existent problem. Government regulation will only cause a huge waste of time and money to correct minor fluctuations in audio levels and potentially decrease audio quality due to excess sound processing.
Booms and busts are due to the Fed lowering and raising interest rates. They claim to do this in order to even out the business cycle but in reality get in the way of the market's self correction mechanisms.
It's the apps, stupid. Which one has a richer appstore?
So count my vote for Apple, because at the end of the day I want to get my work done, not just play around with a shiny toy.
Yeah, because it's so hard to get any work done without an appstore.
This article is a joke. The writer twists Ron Paul's words around. Ron Paul has never supported government imposed religion. He recognizes that the First Amendment is an injunction against the government. Show me a quote where Ron Paul says, "I want the government to impose religion on people." You can't because it does not exist.
The data show that your risk of an accident increases while 4x when you're on the phone.
Freedom can get a little messy sometimes but it's far preferable to statism. I know you just want make people safe because you know what's best for other people but the more mature mind realizes that just because you don't like something does not mean it needs to be outlawed.
We were talking about deficit spending. I guess you couldn't follow along.
just because it's a popular idea doesn't mean it's in any way factually correct.
The idea that the government CAN create jobs is the one that's popular. Most people buy the politicians rhetoric about creating jobs hook, line and sinker.
The government can certainly hire people to do work but the money to do so ultimately has to come from tax dollars. This is money that people would have put to other uses had it not been taken from them by the government. Therefore the government cannot create jobs without ultimately sacrificing private sector jobs in the process.
Furthermore, even though the government prints the money, it's the workers and entrepreneurs who give it its value.
It's not that the government never does anything useful but out of all your examples only the "national highway system" has any credibility. Computers? They're a natural progression from the transistor which was developed in the private sector. IBM developed the integrated circuit and would have eventually done so no matter what the government was up to. The internet? I guess no one would have ever thought to hook 2 computers together had it not been for the government. The space program? It was a by product of the cold war which (talk about wasteful spending!) led to a hugely inflated military budget and the current problems we have in the Middle East.
Also, deficit spending is seriously irresponsible and leads to the long term decline of the economy.
Let's just keep in mind that spending is bad no matter who does it. And it's not okay to spend money on something just because it amounts to less than the military budget. Let's not dig ourselves deeper into the hole.
You think outsourcing human space mining jobs to robots is a joke? He took mah job!! Derp!
Lazy, huh? The link you provided says nothing about gold.
This is BS. The Los Angeles city council admitted that they were installing stop light cameras to make up for budget short falls. When it it did not generate the expected revenue the failure was widely reported.
That ax must be pretty sharp by now. Who cares about legal right to use the name? Hyperion's updated AmigaOS is a direct lineage from the original. You are the one who is trying confuse the issue. If Commodore had never gone out of business and kept making Amigas all these years, I doubt the latest models would resemble the original much at all by this point.
So, you guys are telling me that Apple would do a lot better business if they had a more diverse product line and were available with more carriers?
It has nothing to do with the Constitution. Congress passed a law back in the mid 1800s which says no one other than the USPS can deliver first class mail for less than 5 dollars a unit. This is what gives the USPS a effective monopoly over the mail.