I doubt they'd agree to do this. They have resisted it since the late 90s. Oddly enough the threat then that made them stop licensing the OS to other hardware manufacturers was not that there would be Macs made from cheap components but that there would be Macs made that were better than what Apple was producing. I should know; I still have my Power Computing Power Tower Pro. Apple stopped licensing just in time to block sales of the G3 version of this computer, which would have been faster than anything Apple was offering (with much better hardware in terms of sheer expandability). And don't forget the 4-processor Daystar Millennium. Even MacTell was making cases that whipped Apple's butt. Remember this is before blue computers, before the cube, etc., this was a time when Apple's brilliance in designing boxes was by and large a thing of the past. Bland beige boxes with little creativity and no room for expansion. It's no wonder hardware manufacturers moved in to fill the gap with bland beige boxes with lots of room for expansion (and, in some cases, faster or more processors).
Does this solution give you 5.1 surround sound information? Their website says it includes that information with a G5 but nothing about the mini or other G4. If you had the EyeTV 500 and an M-Audio USB surround sound card is there any reason you couldnt get surround sound through a mini?
You've named one situation where a gun would not help someone defend himself. You're right but so what? Who buys a gun to defend themselves against a surprise targeted sniper attack? Such attacks are not very common at all outside of warfare. And it really has no impact on the argument - it's almost like saying guns are useless because they won't defend you from slipping in the bathtub or electrocution by a toaster. It still is nonresponsive to the question of whether guns can be helpful in self-defense in other situations.
You beat me to it! My first experience with the WWW was retrieving documents through email. I still remember the sense of excitement realizing I could get documents mailed to me by another computer. I didn't know what the web was at the time (this must have been 1992 or 1993; it was well before Mosaic). I don't know if it was the same software (don't recall the name agora) but it was the same trick, and it rocked. I remember being blown away when I learned about lynx; thinking, wow, I don't have to wait for the computer to email it to me!
Bullet wound to the back of the head while her hands were tied behind her back. The body was first discovered by RIAA lawyers, and the death was ruled a suicide.
Sokal is not a literary critic so it's unfair to call his work a joke. His stunt against the ignorant and pompous editors of Social Text was a stupid and sensationalistic waste of time perhaps but I am sure as a physicist his work is not a joke.
People still asks these questions because there isn't a good consensus about what, exactly is art.
yes but the grandparent's point was that "is it art?" is just no longer an interesting question. Just because we haven't conclusively answered it does not mean we need to keep asking the question. Who really cares? If you're the artist, and you can get some museum to put it up, does it really matter if some slashdotter (or some critic in ArtForum for that matter) thinks it's truly "art"? Isn't it more interesting to inquire about what it means or expresses? Even art created by a computer expresses something -- I'd much rather hear a couple art theorists debate what they believe it expresses (a question they still probably won't reach a definitive conclusion on) than debate whether or not it is "art."
calm down, it's ok. Take the blue pill. you'll be fine. feeling better yet? here, sit down. take this mouse in your hand and look at the screen. I know there's only one button, just take it. now look at the screen. look at the soothing symmetrical widgets, and the icons sensibly located on the right side of the screen. See what I mean? feeling better now?
And if you think this is new, check employment conditions around the time of, and just after, the bill of rights was written. If you think employees had more rights then, you need a history lesson desperately. Read Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" if nothing else.
This was written over a century after the Bill of Rights, and it describes working conditions that are a result of industrial practices that did not exist when the Bill of Rights was written! Your basic point is accurate - working conditions in the 18th century likely sucked balls - but slavery would have been a better example than the meat factory.
Slashdot Mirror
I doubt they'd agree to do this. They have resisted it since the late 90s. Oddly enough the threat then that made them stop licensing the OS to other hardware manufacturers was not that there would be Macs made from cheap components but that there would be Macs made that were better than what Apple was producing. I should know; I still have my Power Computing Power Tower Pro. Apple stopped licensing just in time to block sales of the G3 version of this computer, which would have been faster than anything Apple was offering (with much better hardware in terms of sheer expandability). And don't forget the 4-processor Daystar Millennium. Even MacTell was making cases that whipped Apple's butt. Remember this is before blue computers, before the cube, etc., this was a time when Apple's brilliance in designing boxes was by and large a thing of the past. Bland beige boxes with little creativity and no room for expansion. It's no wonder hardware manufacturers moved in to fill the gap with bland beige boxes with lots of room for expansion (and, in some cases, faster or more processors).
Bloglines Confirms: AskJeeves is dead.
Answer:
Elitism for the Masses
Does this solution give you 5.1 surround sound information? Their website says it includes that information with a G5 but nothing about the mini or other G4. If you had the EyeTV 500 and an M-Audio USB surround sound card is there any reason you couldnt get surround sound through a mini?
will it run on my car?
To be fair though, you are going to have to bring your car in to the shop every time it crashes.
when Duke Nukem Forever is released, it will only run on Hurd.
The CIA budget is on the order of $30 billion USD. They can afford quite a few spies.
You've named one situation where a gun would not help someone defend himself. You're right but so what? Who buys a gun to defend themselves against a surprise targeted sniper attack? Such attacks are not very common at all outside of warfare. And it really has no impact on the argument - it's almost like saying guns are useless because they won't defend you from slipping in the bathtub or electrocution by a toaster. It still is nonresponsive to the question of whether guns can be helpful in self-defense in other situations.
Which is too bad, coz I could really use some fucking marijuana right about now.
I hate to defend MS Office, but it does have an autosave feature as well. I don't know about other platforms but it's also pretty damn stable on OSX.
Is there any effort to port netBSD to the Newton? It runs on arm so it isn't that much of a stretch. I want a NetBSD-running emate :)
You beat me to it! My first experience with the WWW was retrieving documents through email. I still remember the sense of excitement realizing I could get documents mailed to me by another computer. I didn't know what the web was at the time (this must have been 1992 or 1993; it was well before Mosaic). I don't know if it was the same software (don't recall the name agora) but it was the same trick, and it rocked. I remember being blown away when I learned about lynx; thinking, wow, I don't have to wait for the computer to email it to me!
When you download MP3s, you're downloading rigor mortis.
Bullet wound to the back of the head while her hands were tied behind her back. The body was first discovered by RIAA lawyers, and the death was ruled a suicide.
good joke, but the RIAA is a bunch of lawyers.
Sokal is not a literary critic so it's unfair to call his work a joke. His stunt against the ignorant and pompous editors of Social Text was a stupid and sensationalistic waste of time perhaps but I am sure as a physicist his work is not a joke.
yes but the grandparent's point was that "is it art?" is just no longer an interesting question. Just because we haven't conclusively answered it does not mean we need to keep asking the question. Who really cares? If you're the artist, and you can get some museum to put it up, does it really matter if some slashdotter (or some critic in ArtForum for that matter) thinks it's truly "art"? Isn't it more interesting to inquire about what it means or expresses? Even art created by a computer expresses something -- I'd much rather hear a couple art theorists debate what they believe it expresses (a question they still probably won't reach a definitive conclusion on) than debate whether or not it is "art."
Check out this analysis. The whole book is pretty good; I never looked at Dilbert in the same way after reading this.
I thought so.
Now, what was it you wanted to say?
Uhhh, yeah. That ummmm big anti-HURD ad campaign that Microsoft is running on all the TV stations.
3. There's no step 3. There's no step 3!!!
Sure you do! Just look at Iran! (in two years).
It only took me two seconds to figure out that this book was about the annoying and obsolete HTML tag.
This was written over a century after the Bill of Rights, and it describes working conditions that are a result of industrial practices that did not exist when the Bill of Rights was written! Your basic point is accurate - working conditions in the 18th century likely sucked balls - but slavery would have been a better example than the meat factory.