But the order is somewhat there (in the one telling of creation), which is kind of amazing I think.
Of course, there are those that believe somehow someone can perfectly interpret the word of God, and write it down, and then others can perfectly understand what they wrote and translate it. And if they fail to do it right, there will be a plague upon them (this is from an actual conversation I had). Therefore the Earth must have literally been made in seven days.
A looser
0) there was nothing 1) there was stars 2) there are planets 3) Planets form continents and Oceans 4) don't really know 5) Sea creatures anyway, I think we'd dispute about birds being this early 6) land creatures
This is contrary to people coming first, then the animals to name. Also Man and Woman are created the same day, different than the story of Eden.
I am personally somewhere between and atheist and a Deist depending my mood, but I find the first telling of creation a remarkably accurate way to describe the big bang "let there be light" through the rise of man, in a nice shorthand without using science.
I would load the content with CSS display: hidden, use javascript to reveal it (using a span or a div with the class set to spoiler.
This would not deny anybody from an content (it would be in the source at the very least), somebody could write a wikipedia reader that handled the spoiler class if wanted.
And since the spoilers can easily be hidden, only to be revealed by a user interaction (such as a click) there is no reason to not do such. Wikipedia has advantages over a printed publication, and should take advantage of that. Just as the crowd sourcing is taken advantage of.
With proper tagging of the spoiler, it could be up to a printer how it would be peinted, and they could require extra effort for web readers as they wanted. I think that's kind of the point of separating display from content.
And there is more to life than length. People that are concerned about things (even legitimate concerns) may indeed have shorter lives because of said concern. It may also make them better (or more beneficial) members of society.
Losing control with regularity is likely not a recipe for a good life, but it does not mean it isn't a recipe for a longer one. Though the article implied that "moderate" drinkers had the longest life, which in my mind means a very rare loss of control much beyond something like lack of sleep would cause.
I would honestly think there are more causative effects than correlative ones that cause the longer life. Such as thinner blood (isn't that why aspirin helps people), or simply talking to people more with a slightly lowered inhibition (isn't that supposed to reduce stress and lead to longer life).
I would also bet that "complete morons" live happier lives, and perhaps longer when controlled for things such as income.
There is a smaller reason in that I've seen a lot of people, including friends, do... inadvisable things while drunk. The thought of not being in possession of my faculties and not being able to tell scares me.
This sounds not carefree. Considering the OPs premise was non-drinkers are less care free it is kind of supporting OP.
This is not to say start drinking, especially with a concern about addiction, but simply you could be a mild case of supporting OPs premise about the correlation, but not causation of drinking and longer life.
To be the 'accepted authority on the meaning and history of words.' it better track that.
Or at least the 2 year meaning of words that are still used. It's 150 lbs. of books, it has a lot of detail.
One needs the slang definition of out of use words more than common use definitions. The point is to look up a word that one doesn't know, find out where it comes from, and when it was used.
That way if someone for example wants to know what the "fresh prince" meant, they can see it meant cool, and not talk backy, or opposite of stale.
And miraculously, it came out great. A rare MS treat, where i think they truly took what was available (3-D desktops), and innovated it in a way that makes things better.
It's kind of like Apple with the iPod (specifically their circular touch pad), but a rare case where it was MS.
Hackers writing actual exploits that are new, and sending crash reports to MS.
And Script Kiddies downlowding and running scripts, which they tend to test on microsoft.com.
The second group are probably low risk, as they are using known code/exploits, the actual hackers on the other hand may actually be revealing some new bugs, with the bug reporting tool. heck, maybe it's intentional.
I really like how in Win 7 when you mouse over the preview it shows the window with ever other window made clear, so it is super easy to see where it is, and where it will be if you to click to raise it.
I find zipping through windows that way even better than expose style window switching.
Slashdot Mirror
But the order is somewhat there (in the one telling of creation), which is kind of amazing I think.
Of course, there are those that believe somehow someone can perfectly interpret the word of God, and write it down, and then others can perfectly understand what they wrote and translate it. And if they fail to do it right, there will be a plague upon them (this is from an actual conversation I had). Therefore the Earth must have literally been made in seven days.
A looser
0) there was nothing
1) there was stars
2) there are planets
3) Planets form continents and Oceans
4) don't really know
5) Sea creatures anyway, I think we'd dispute about birds being this early
6) land creatures
This is contrary to people coming first, then the animals to name. Also Man and Woman are created the same day, different than the story of Eden.
I am personally somewhere between and atheist and a Deist depending my mood, but I find the first telling of creation a remarkably accurate way to describe the big bang "let there be light" through the rise of man, in a nice shorthand without using science.
I would load the content with CSS display: hidden, use javascript to reveal it (using a span or a div with the class set to spoiler.
This would not deny anybody from an content (it would be in the source at the very least), somebody could write a wikipedia reader that handled the spoiler class if wanted.
oops in a <span> or a <div>
If it were in a
or a class="spoiler", the printers could say, see next page for this content, or print it upside down, or ROT-13 or whatever they wanted.
I wish I could have done such without voiding the warranty though, as I have weird touch screen issues at times, that I would like to have fixed.
Or maybe a total Slashdot review win.
I think I actually said that they should include it.
I simply think it should be mildly obscured so that I can for example read about the history of the play without an accidental spoiler.
The year it was written and by who are things I may want to knowknow before watching it.
Comparing historical events to plays, books, and movies in this reguard is just silly.
Already voided my n1 warranty.
And since the spoilers can easily be hidden, only to be revealed by a user interaction (such as a click) there is no reason to not do such. Wikipedia has advantages over a printed publication, and should take advantage of that. Just as the crowd sourcing is taken advantage of.
With proper tagging of the spoiler, it could be up to a printer how it would be peinted, and they could require extra effort for web readers as they wanted. I think that's kind of the point of separating display from content.
Shame on them.
Does that just allow you to run apps with root privilege, or does it allow custom firmware?
Too late for meme either way though.
Well, it is the desktop version only (for Ubuntu, that is free), and Fedora is also primarily for desktops (bleeding edge and all that).
1) So I would say it is more, let tinkerers use it
2) have tinkerers buy it at work
"carefree" was meant as a continuum.
And there is more to life than length. People that are concerned about things (even legitimate concerns) may indeed have shorter lives because of said concern. It may also make them better (or more beneficial) members of society.
Losing control with regularity is likely not a recipe for a good life, but it does not mean it isn't a recipe for a longer one. Though the article implied that "moderate" drinkers had the longest life, which in my mind means a very rare loss of control much beyond something like lack of sleep would cause.
I would honestly think there are more causative effects than correlative ones that cause the longer life. Such as thinner blood (isn't that why aspirin helps people), or simply talking to people more with a slightly lowered inhibition (isn't that supposed to reduce stress and lead to longer life).
I would also bet that "complete morons" live happier lives, and perhaps longer when controlled for things such as income.
I clicked the "+" next to the title, then selected "interesting"
There is a smaller reason in that I've seen a lot of people, including friends, do... inadvisable things while drunk. The thought of not being in possession of my faculties and not being able to tell scares me.
This sounds not carefree. Considering the OPs premise was non-drinkers are less care free it is kind of supporting OP.
This is not to say start drinking, especially with a concern about addiction, but simply you could be a mild case of supporting OPs premise about the correlation, but not causation of drinking and longer life.
No offense meant.
To be the 'accepted authority on the meaning and history of words.' it better track that.
Or at least the 2 year meaning of words that are still used. It's 150 lbs. of books, it has a lot of detail.
One needs the slang definition of out of use words more than common use definitions. The point is to look up a word that one doesn't know, find out where it comes from, and when it was used.
That way if someone for example wants to know what the "fresh prince" meant, they can see it meant cool, and not talk backy, or opposite of stale.
And most providers of mailboxes use imap, pop, and smtp over ssl. For the sake of keeping passwords safe from the spammers.
Not only that, but they value getting it shipped, vs getting the driver right.
I wonder how many things on the chip took more than a clock cycle? Specifically things that in a good design would take one.
I wonder if that's why the Pentium 4 had terrible performance per clock.
Isn't there a real risk of all these applications using the "unused" space stepping on each others toes and all breaking?
It just sounds like a bad idea.
Yeah, a lot of thought went into it.
And miraculously, it came out great. A rare MS treat, where i think they truly took what was available (3-D desktops), and innovated it in a way that makes things better.
It's kind of like Apple with the iPod (specifically their circular touch pad), but a rare case where it was MS.
I think there are two different things going on.
Hackers writing actual exploits that are new, and sending crash reports to MS.
And Script Kiddies downlowding and running scripts, which they tend to test on microsoft.com.
The second group are probably low risk, as they are using known code/exploits, the actual hackers on the other hand may actually be revealing some new bugs, with the bug reporting tool. heck, maybe it's intentional.
I really like how in Win 7 when you mouse over the preview it shows the window with ever other window made clear, so it is super easy to see where it is, and where it will be if you to click to raise it.
I find zipping through windows that way even better than expose style window switching.
My confusion came from believing I linked to this:
http://www.schneier.com/essay-198.html, as a second example, that is not DES at all.
Really?
I would think things like the starkly different taskbar would make it not as smooth a transition at all.
Double Click "my Computer"
Double Click the CD drive that has the name of the program you are trying to install under it
Double click the file named "setup".
That gets XP, I'm not sure about 95-me taking on volume names, but generally the directions are the same as far as i remember.