That's the distinction between reporting on violence, and glorifying it.
Did you sleep through all the "Look at all those fantastic explosions" reports in the two Gulf Wars? There were body parts mixed in with those fireballs, you know. Repeat after me: this is not Hollywood; those are not stunt people; they will not be fine after a cup of coffee.
"Come in May will you?" Is still clearer than "Come in May will you?", the commas help when taken totally out of context, but in context the capital would probably be enough since someone called "May" might have been mentioned already. Even if they had been the non-capitalised version would still be jarring and unclear. Not beyond the ken of Man to understand, but enough to slow down a reader.
You are trying to claim that the issue of capitalisation is separate from commas. It is not. The system of puncuation and typographical conventions in our writing is just that: a system. It has evolved ad-hoc, sure, and because of that there are parts which are a bit naff, but it is still evolving and will get better. Dropping capitals has been tried dozens of times (thousands if you count people like yourself) and it has never caught on for the same reason that the distinction between minuscules and capitals was developed in the first place: it actually helps; it is not ornamentation.
Capitals and full-stops, which you also don't understand, are a good example of this and are linked, as can been seen when dealing with a person called Irene Tailor ("I. Tailor" or "i tailor", which is clearer? The second one looks like an existential declaration of some sort). Just as an aside, I knew a tailor called Tailor, and obviously there are have been lots of coopers called Cooper, bakers called Baker (my own mother was an example of this one). The usefulness of capitals is obvious in these examples.
It is not reasonable to pick on one part in isolation, just as you can't just say that an exhaust pipe on a car is a waste of metal because there's an exhaust hole on the side of the engine that could do the job. It is part of a system.
Yeah, right. How many secular countries have a flag with the text "God is Great" written across it?
America has "In God We Trust", although it is not a Christian country in the technical sense, although it's much closer to it in reality than Iraq was to being an Islamic state. The UK is very secular but mentions god all over the national anthem. These are fossils from previous generations. Saddam inherited the flag when the US installed him after they assassinated the previous leader. Saddam left the flag alone because he didn't care enough to change it. Why cause trouble with the religious nutters? Saddam knew there was no god (any decent god would have struck him down years before), so it cost him nothing, it could have said "Banjo is great" for all he cared.
WTF? They don't even have a government, but we've managed to set up a whole oil industry where "$6.25bn" is considered an operating loss?
It's better than that: they can't give any figure for the number of Iraqi's killed by the invasion so far but they can damn well for sure tell you how much money they've lost in revenue. Not hard to guess which matters more to them, is it?
Which is clearer (and for bonus points some fun with commas):
come in may will you?
come in may, will you?
Come in May will you?
Come in May, will you?
Come in, May, will you?
The first two are confusing but the third has at least revealed that "May" and "will" are unconnected, while in the last two it is instantly clear that "May" refers to a month and a person's name respectively; the difference being conveyed by the placing of the commas. Such subtlties are what makes for efficient reading, and for the cost of pressing a couple of extra keys, a process which is automatic and easy as opposed to the effort I suspect you require to type against a knowledge of how writing is done properly which has probably been ingrained by millions of examples for most of your life.
Sorry to break it to you, but Jihad started long before America was involved with either Afghanistan or Iraq.
Jihad had nothing to do with Iraq which was not an Islamic country, it was a secular country opposed to the islamists who were a threat to Saddam's leadership.
And if you think a hasty withdrawal from even the entire region will end all the problems you have your head in the sand my friend.
Problems largely caused and totally enlarged to crisis proportions by American foreign policy. "Oh, you can't tell us to leave now that we've set fire to your house because we're the ones putting the fire out. Aren't we nice?"
Your very first comment about "WARNING: This never happens" has discredited pretty much everything you had to say.
Rumsfeld has been discredited so many times in his life that anyone that still accepts what he says without assuming that he is lying is just asking to be walked all over.
How are you going to counter that?
By NOT acting like them.
I'd rather bring this issue to a head now than wait another 10 years for another 9/11.
Which had nothing to do with Iraq.
If you believe that we caused it in its entirety then it is you who has fallen victim to their propaganda
How can the Iraq war in any way be someone else's fault than America's? They installed Saddam. They armed him. They supported him while he filled the mass graves solely because he opposed Iran. They sold him WMD. They choose to invade Iraq. Where is the blame left over to lay on anyone else?
which, but the way, is the birthplace of Islamic extremism
Its also the birthplace of jewish extremism and christian extremism. So what?
Has America lost the moral highground? Maybe. In what sense?
Mass arrests without trial, torture, kidnapping, bombing the crap out of people for financial gain, supporting dictators because they happen to be working against your enemy of the week, ignoring worse dictators because their country doesn't have oil. Suppression of free speech. Breaking the laws it says its fighting to support. That sort of thing.
So the issues are not as easy as you want them to be.
A lot of people in the American government have worked very hard to make sure they're not. That way they get to keep themselves in jobs for a long time to come. Rumsfeld has a long history of doing that, so does Dick Chaney; more than a quarter of a century each. It's not my fault you won't look at these people's records before believing what they tell you. I'm sure they have a good laugh every now and then over it.
There is no solid evidence that the United States is in Iraq because of oil.
How much do you want? ) There's no other reason for being there, 2) Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld wrote several documents and made numerous speeches in the 1990s specifically saying, not in a subtle or vague way - plain English, that Iraq should be invaded at the first oppertunity to secure its oil for America (that oppertunity was 9/11 of course), and 3) the division of the oil fields to American companies was decided and printed out before the invasion started; that document which was leaked to the press and was being followed before the fighting was even over. All this is in the public record. In fact it is a sign of just how confident that Wolfie and co are that no one can touch them for it, that they have left the details on the Web. They don't care. They know that if they just get on with it people like yourself will get so bored with hearing the truth that they'll start complaining that it's "getting old" now.
With an electorate that uninformed there's nothing they can't get away with.
It would have nothing to do with their nuclear ambitions.
Which matter because...? Pakistan has nukes and apparently we approve of that military dictatorship. Iran is legally entitled to nuclear power as part of their reward for signing the non-proliferation treaty. This is a crisis entirely manufactured in America by Americans.
vb.net is case insensitive. c# is case sensitive. case adds no extra value,
Computer languages are vastly inferior to natural languages in terms of their efficiency for communicating ideas. The fact that case sometimes carries information in a computer language has no bearing on whether or not it does in a human language, just as the fact that Chinese uses pictures has no bearing in whether or not Java should be written in ideograms.
If it's any help, I think all programming languages should be case-insensitve to reduce simple errors. But that's because computer programming is very simple compared to even a casual conversation in English. In English writing there is a useful nuance to be carried, in programming it is much more likely that the programmer has made a mistake.
we in the west are losing the war of ideas with facist islam.
No. What is happening is that when you reduce yourself to the level of your opponent, as the US and increasingly the UK have done, it becomes impossible to take the moral high ground for the simple reason that you are no longer on the moral high ground.
such as Al Qeada and similar groups in Iraq
And there entirely because of American actions. Iraq was not an islamist state; Saddam and OBL hated each other with some passion. Even the term "Al Qeada" was in fact invented by the US and was not used outside until after 9/11.
So how do we convince others that our way is better? We're going to have to talk to them.
WRONG! Show them. Stop bombing and invading countries for their oil and stop locking people up for years without carge, never mind trial, on the say-so of a bunch of bounty hunters with no interest in justice, just in a nice pay-cheque. Not too hard, is it?
I'm surprised that people on slashdot would bash Rumsfeld for saying these things since ensuring a free expression of all ideas is supported by almost all slashdotters!
If he meant a word of that then perhaps. But he doesn't.
(hint to all americans: western-style logic does not apply to the Middle East
Hint to American government: locking people up with evidence is not going to win you friends. Just as installing a power-mad dictator into a country and supporting him with guns, planes, and bioweapons while he slaughters his own people will not make those people grateful when you come twenty-five years later to remove that dictator in order to secure the country's oil supply for your own use.
I do understand the Middle East,
You hide it well.
Maybe we can influence the cooler Islamic heads
Perhaps we should stop the billion-dollar recruitment drive for the other side then.
That is what Rumsfeld is talking about.
No, what Rumsfeld is talking about is what Rumsfeld always talks about: keeping Donald Rumsfeld in a position of power. He was doing it in the eighties when he made up the crap about invisible Russian submarines, he was doing it when he sold WMD to Saddam (receipts are all on file in the Senate Banking Commitee records, in public), and he was doing it when he acted to prevent the UN completing its search for those same WMD because he knew that, against all expectation, Saddam had in fact disposed of them all (partly by dropping them on the Iranians with help from "calibration teams" from the CIA under Bush Sr.)
Rumsfeld is an old liar who's been caught out again and again. But he's one of America's aristocracy and just can't be got rid of. He knows he, and Rice, can talk about democracy until the day they die but they'll never have to face an election if they don't want to. Hardy a glowing example of the superiority of the Western system of government.
again: communication is what is important. if i can recreate the idea in your head with the minimum of effort required, i've done my job. everything else, ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING ELSE, is superfluous and unnecessary
That is true but unfortunately you do not understand what is superfluous or unnecessary. As I pointed out above, the things you are denegrating do have a function and do help minimise effort.
There was a time before capitals, periods, semi-colons and the rest. They were added because they help, just as removing them hinders communication. That you are too fixed into your own (very dull and childish) pattern of thinking to grasp such simple ideas is neither my problem nor a fault with with language.
they need to communicate. these needs are nver going away,
A classic example of the smug "I'm on the cutting edge of language, I just look dumb" crowd that spurn clear communication as old-fashioned. Capitals, and most typographic conventions, add information to your writing for a tiny, tiny amount of extra effort. Throwing away (which is not the same as developing) a system which has been honed by centuries of trial and error is a sign of foolishness and an inability to grasp complex ideas rather than any some special talent to be proud of.
The reason that we don't have spelling and grammar checkers built into the OS is because it is assumed that anyone who can afford a computer has already passed a level of advanced education and literacy
Also, computer grammar checkers are shit.
By the way, where's the spelling checker on this Slashdot comment box?
On mine it's right-click and choose the bottom option. Opera v8.51 Linux.
His goal was to rid the government of soviet communist spies. Hmm, seems like a good idea, right?
Well, he seemed to have a go at pretty well all walks of life, not just government. The problem is that McCarthy's definition of "soviet communist spy" really boiled down to "people I don't like". So, just like camp x-ray today, people that had never even considered opposing America had their lives ruined for nothing, while giving a huge propaganda tool to the real enemies of America.
but the little known fact is that hmm.. he was RIGHT.
So you think all those script-writers who where blacklisted because of him were really spies? All those actors that were hauled before him? To his supporters, of course, everyone he accused was a spy on the grounds that, er, McCarty had accused them. Again, like Guantanamo today, the propaganda is that you must be guilty because otherwise you wouldn't have been accused. That this flies in the face of everything America was supposed to stand for is, and was, ignored. Trials are seen as a waste of taxpayer's money; evidence is collected in secret by the very people who's careers are benefiting from a high performance in locking up "enemies". Same with McCarthy: the basis of civilised life is thrown away for the advantage of a small group of rabble-rousers intent on the goal of personal power.
Actually, very few people fingered by McCarthy were spies and anyway, so what? What actual threat were they even if they were? Remember that the entire Soviet threat to mainland America was basically fiction. For example, the photographs shown by the CIA to Kennedy to "prove" that the USSR was covered with missile silos were later admitted to be all of the same installation taken from different angles, under different lighting conditions and seasons. The reason being that at the time there was only that one silo capable of launching ICBMs in the USSR. The truth was that, thank's to Uncle Joe's insane methods of running the country, the USSR was never a credible threat to America, just like Saddam years later.
The important thing, when you're a power-mad looper Washington, is to have a threat, even if it's not a real one. That's basically the only way you can keep your job. That's why Rumsfeld gave that crazy speech about the Soviets having invisible submarines which were so advanced he couldn't find any evidence of them, thus proving how far ahead of America they were. Turned out, like WMD, that the reason they couldn't see them was that they only existed in Donald's head. But that sort of drivel has kept old Rummy in a series of very high-paid jobs for decades. Most people would have been sacked the first time, but when you're one of the aristocracy the normal rules don't apply and you can fuck up, costing your country billions of dollars and thousands of dead soldiers, over and over and over again.
McCarthy was a similar beast to Rumsfeld, Rice and the rest of the current generation, although he never managed to kill the tens of thousands of men, women, and children they have. McCarthy rode the infamy of his witchhunt and to stay in his new job as a media-star, he had to find spies. If he had to invent them, he did.
am i the only one out there who doesn't go along with liberalist propaganda?
No, but I'd say you're very much in the minority. That happens quite often when you're totally wrong in every aspect of what you are saying.
a great American patriot
McCarthy was a scumbag who should have been taken outside and shot through the back of the head like the common murderer he was. He was a disgrace to the flag and his body should never have been allowed to be burried in the same ground as people like Washington and FDR; you only have to watch film of him to see how much of a kick he was getting out of it all. It may have started as patriotism, but it quickly became a perverted fetish; I'd give good odds he had a hard-on under that desk. Saying he was a patriot is like saying G W Bush is a Christian: y
The point of Godwin's law is people who invoke the Nazis in a situation where such comparisons are out of proportion to the topic (such as best search engine).
It is unreasonable to suggest when the topic is totalitarian regimes who routinely lock people up because of their beliefs and also routinely execute people and harvest them for organs, that comparisons to Nazis are either off-topic or a sign that the argument has been lost.
Jesus, have you ever heard of paragraphs? If you don't like English move the hell out and stop mangling it. I can't decide if its your post or your argument which doesn't make sense (or both).
Two things: firstly I thought you were talking about sending stuff to be printed, at which point 8bits/channel is plenty for colour, but slightly limiting for a small amount of monochrome work. I would agree that having more overhead while manipulating the images would be nice.
However, secondly, people got along fine for years in Photoshop with 8bits so it can't be a killer feature or Photoshop would have been killed by the lack.
The real question is, how often can you tell there's a problem by looking at the output instead of your histograms? Cause the histograms are not what you're getting paid for.
If you want to effectively fight against the RIAA or DRM in any media, please have a legitimate defense or compromise solution.
There is no need of a compromise. I bought the music, I can listen to it anywhere and anyhow I like, but I can't copy it and give it to someone else that hasn't paid for the music. Why should I compromise on that?
The idea that is sometimes floated by the companies is that I bought the CD not the music but that falls apart as soon as you ask what would happen if I got home and found that the CD was blank. Obviously the delivery media is irrelevant. I go to a music store to buy music, not CDs.
As I implied im my original post, however, this is all by the wayside since the record companies can buy whatever law they want and say a big "fuck you" to consumers and voters alike. They have no need for compromises nor do they care about any defense - they don't need any more justification than an envelope stuffed with money delivered to a senator near you.
Just don't buy their products and make sure your politician know that taking their bribes means a vote for someone else (doesn't matter who, pick a name at random, they're all scumbags but the threat of one of the other scumbags getting in might keep the current one in line).
Actually this is a bit of a myth in my experience. I send stuff to printers from Gimp fairly often and CMYK isn't an issue; they just convert it as part of their process.
What IS a killer is spot-colour usage. I have no decent method of working with Pantone or other specialised spot colours, nor is there a good system for handling product shots where a particular colour HAS to be represented correctly, such as a Coke can.
People forget that CMYK can represent less than half the contents of a Pantone swash; it is not the be-all and end-all of colour handling.
If, instead, you are talking about "one dollar, one vote" in actual elections, you are out of your mind.
I was talking about the bribery issue; it hardly matters what way people vote in elections if the politicians can be "induced" to always vote in favour of the rich minority.
Slashdot Mirror
But Unipages are superior to PDF in their ability to hold functionality (Viruses)
Did you sleep through all the "Look at all those fantastic explosions" reports in the two Gulf Wars? There were body parts mixed in with those fireballs, you know. Repeat after me: this is not Hollywood; those are not stunt people; they will not be fine after a cup of coffee.
TWW
Did the stuff about the torture flights get suppressed in the US?
TWW
TWW
You are trying to claim that the issue of capitalisation is separate from commas. It is not. The system of puncuation and typographical conventions in our writing is just that: a system. It has evolved ad-hoc, sure, and because of that there are parts which are a bit naff, but it is still evolving and will get better. Dropping capitals has been tried dozens of times (thousands if you count people like yourself) and it has never caught on for the same reason that the distinction between minuscules and capitals was developed in the first place: it actually helps; it is not ornamentation.
Capitals and full-stops, which you also don't understand, are a good example of this and are linked, as can been seen when dealing with a person called Irene Tailor ("I. Tailor" or "i tailor", which is clearer? The second one looks like an existential declaration of some sort). Just as an aside, I knew a tailor called Tailor, and obviously there are have been lots of coopers called Cooper, bakers called Baker (my own mother was an example of this one). The usefulness of capitals is obvious in these examples.
It is not reasonable to pick on one part in isolation, just as you can't just say that an exhaust pipe on a car is a waste of metal because there's an exhaust hole on the side of the engine that could do the job. It is part of a system.
TWW
America has "In God We Trust", although it is not a Christian country in the technical sense, although it's much closer to it in reality than Iraq was to being an Islamic state. The UK is very secular but mentions god all over the national anthem. These are fossils from previous generations. Saddam inherited the flag when the US installed him after they assassinated the previous leader. Saddam left the flag alone because he didn't care enough to change it. Why cause trouble with the religious nutters? Saddam knew there was no god (any decent god would have struck him down years before), so it cost him nothing, it could have said "Banjo is great" for all he cared.
TWW
It's better than that: they can't give any figure for the number of Iraqi's killed by the invasion so far but they can damn well for sure tell you how much money they've lost in revenue. Not hard to guess which matters more to them, is it?
TWW
come in may will you?
come in may, will you?
Come in May will you?
Come in May, will you?
Come in, May, will you?
The first two are confusing but the third has at least revealed that "May" and "will" are unconnected, while in the last two it is instantly clear that "May" refers to a month and a person's name respectively; the difference being conveyed by the placing of the commas. Such subtlties are what makes for efficient reading, and for the cost of pressing a couple of extra keys, a process which is automatic and easy as opposed to the effort I suspect you require to type against a knowledge of how writing is done properly which has probably been ingrained by millions of examples for most of your life.
TWW
Show me some English and I'll read it. The post in question was not English. Or any clear language of any kind.
As for the paragraph thing, who cares ? My grammar was no the argument.
If I can't untangle your grammar it doesn't matter what the argument was since I can't read it. That's your fault, not mine. Tough luck.
TWW
Jihad had nothing to do with Iraq which was not an Islamic country, it was a secular country opposed to the islamists who were a threat to Saddam's leadership.
And if you think a hasty withdrawal from even the entire region will end all the problems you have your head in the sand my friend.
Problems largely caused and totally enlarged to crisis proportions by American foreign policy. "Oh, you can't tell us to leave now that we've set fire to your house because we're the ones putting the fire out. Aren't we nice?"
Your very first comment about "WARNING: This never happens" has discredited pretty much everything you had to say.
Rumsfeld has been discredited so many times in his life that anyone that still accepts what he says without assuming that he is lying is just asking to be walked all over.
How are you going to counter that?
By NOT acting like them.
I'd rather bring this issue to a head now than wait another 10 years for another 9/11.
Which had nothing to do with Iraq.
If you believe that we caused it in its entirety then it is you who has fallen victim to their propaganda
How can the Iraq war in any way be someone else's fault than America's? They installed Saddam. They armed him. They supported him while he filled the mass graves solely because he opposed Iran. They sold him WMD. They choose to invade Iraq. Where is the blame left over to lay on anyone else?
which, but the way, is the birthplace of Islamic extremism
Its also the birthplace of jewish extremism and christian extremism. So what?
Has America lost the moral highground? Maybe. In what sense?
Mass arrests without trial, torture, kidnapping, bombing the crap out of people for financial gain, supporting dictators because they happen to be working against your enemy of the week, ignoring worse dictators because their country doesn't have oil. Suppression of free speech. Breaking the laws it says its fighting to support. That sort of thing.
So the issues are not as easy as you want them to be.
A lot of people in the American government have worked very hard to make sure they're not. That way they get to keep themselves in jobs for a long time to come. Rumsfeld has a long history of doing that, so does Dick Chaney; more than a quarter of a century each. It's not my fault you won't look at these people's records before believing what they tell you. I'm sure they have a good laugh every now and then over it.
TWW
Yes, it dates back to before 1999 in fact.
There is no solid evidence that the United States is in Iraq because of oil.
How much do you want? ) There's no other reason for being there, 2) Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld wrote several documents and made numerous speeches in the 1990s specifically saying, not in a subtle or vague way - plain English, that Iraq should be invaded at the first oppertunity to secure its oil for America (that oppertunity was 9/11 of course), and 3) the division of the oil fields to American companies was decided and printed out before the invasion started; that document which was leaked to the press and was being followed before the fighting was even over. All this is in the public record. In fact it is a sign of just how confident that Wolfie and co are that no one can touch them for it, that they have left the details on the Web. They don't care. They know that if they just get on with it people like yourself will get so bored with hearing the truth that they'll start complaining that it's "getting old" now.
With an electorate that uninformed there's nothing they can't get away with.
It would have nothing to do with their nuclear ambitions.
Which matter because...? Pakistan has nukes and apparently we approve of that military dictatorship. Iran is legally entitled to nuclear power as part of their reward for signing the non-proliferation treaty. This is a crisis entirely manufactured in America by Americans.
TWW
Computer languages are vastly inferior to natural languages in terms of their efficiency for communicating ideas. The fact that case sometimes carries information in a computer language has no bearing on whether or not it does in a human language, just as the fact that Chinese uses pictures has no bearing in whether or not Java should be written in ideograms.
If it's any help, I think all programming languages should be case-insensitve to reduce simple errors. But that's because computer programming is very simple compared to even a casual conversation in English. In English writing there is a useful nuance to be carried, in programming it is much more likely that the programmer has made a mistake.
TWW
WARNING: This never happens.
we in the west are losing the war of ideas with facist islam.
No. What is happening is that when you reduce yourself to the level of your opponent, as the US and increasingly the UK have done, it becomes impossible to take the moral high ground for the simple reason that you are no longer on the moral high ground.
such as Al Qeada and similar groups in Iraq
And there entirely because of American actions. Iraq was not an islamist state; Saddam and OBL hated each other with some passion. Even the term "Al Qeada" was in fact invented by the US and was not used outside until after 9/11.
So how do we convince others that our way is better? We're going to have to talk to them.
WRONG! Show them. Stop bombing and invading countries for their oil and stop locking people up for years without carge, never mind trial, on the say-so of a bunch of bounty hunters with no interest in justice, just in a nice pay-cheque. Not too hard, is it?
I'm surprised that people on slashdot would bash Rumsfeld for saying these things since ensuring a free expression of all ideas is supported by almost all slashdotters!
If he meant a word of that then perhaps. But he doesn't.
(hint to all americans: western-style logic does not apply to the Middle East
Hint to American government: locking people up with evidence is not going to win you friends. Just as installing a power-mad dictator into a country and supporting him with guns, planes, and bioweapons while he slaughters his own people will not make those people grateful when you come twenty-five years later to remove that dictator in order to secure the country's oil supply for your own use.
I do understand the Middle East,
You hide it well.
Maybe we can influence the cooler Islamic heads
Perhaps we should stop the billion-dollar recruitment drive for the other side then.
That is what Rumsfeld is talking about.
No, what Rumsfeld is talking about is what Rumsfeld always talks about: keeping Donald Rumsfeld in a position of power. He was doing it in the eighties when he made up the crap about invisible Russian submarines, he was doing it when he sold WMD to Saddam (receipts are all on file in the Senate Banking Commitee records, in public), and he was doing it when he acted to prevent the UN completing its search for those same WMD because he knew that, against all expectation, Saddam had in fact disposed of them all (partly by dropping them on the Iranians with help from "calibration teams" from the CIA under Bush Sr.)
Rumsfeld is an old liar who's been caught out again and again. But he's one of America's aristocracy and just can't be got rid of. He knows he, and Rice, can talk about democracy until the day they die but they'll never have to face an election if they don't want to. Hardy a glowing example of the superiority of the Western system of government.
TWW
That is true but unfortunately you do not understand what is superfluous or unnecessary. As I pointed out above, the things you are denegrating do have a function and do help minimise effort.
There was a time before capitals, periods, semi-colons and the rest. They were added because they help, just as removing them hinders communication. That you are too fixed into your own (very dull and childish) pattern of thinking to grasp such simple ideas is neither my problem nor a fault with with language.
TWW
A classic example of the smug "I'm on the cutting edge of language, I just look dumb" crowd that spurn clear communication as old-fashioned. Capitals, and most typographic conventions, add information to your writing for a tiny, tiny amount of extra effort. Throwing away (which is not the same as developing) a system which has been honed by centuries of trial and error is a sign of foolishness and an inability to grasp complex ideas rather than any some special talent to be proud of.
TWW
Also, computer grammar checkers are shit.
By the way, where's the spelling checker on this Slashdot comment box?
On mine it's right-click and choose the bottom option. Opera v8.51 Linux.
TWW
Well, he seemed to have a go at pretty well all walks of life, not just government. The problem is that McCarthy's definition of "soviet communist spy" really boiled down to "people I don't like". So, just like camp x-ray today, people that had never even considered opposing America had their lives ruined for nothing, while giving a huge propaganda tool to the real enemies of America.
but the little known fact is that hmm.. he was RIGHT.
So you think all those script-writers who where blacklisted because of him were really spies? All those actors that were hauled before him? To his supporters, of course, everyone he accused was a spy on the grounds that, er, McCarty had accused them. Again, like Guantanamo today, the propaganda is that you must be guilty because otherwise you wouldn't have been accused. That this flies in the face of everything America was supposed to stand for is, and was, ignored. Trials are seen as a waste of taxpayer's money; evidence is collected in secret by the very people who's careers are benefiting from a high performance in locking up "enemies". Same with McCarthy: the basis of civilised life is thrown away for the advantage of a small group of rabble-rousers intent on the goal of personal power.
Actually, very few people fingered by McCarthy were spies and anyway, so what? What actual threat were they even if they were? Remember that the entire Soviet threat to mainland America was basically fiction. For example, the photographs shown by the CIA to Kennedy to "prove" that the USSR was covered with missile silos were later admitted to be all of the same installation taken from different angles, under different lighting conditions and seasons. The reason being that at the time there was only that one silo capable of launching ICBMs in the USSR. The truth was that, thank's to Uncle Joe's insane methods of running the country, the USSR was never a credible threat to America, just like Saddam years later.
The important thing, when you're a power-mad looper Washington, is to have a threat, even if it's not a real one. That's basically the only way you can keep your job. That's why Rumsfeld gave that crazy speech about the Soviets having invisible submarines which were so advanced he couldn't find any evidence of them, thus proving how far ahead of America they were. Turned out, like WMD, that the reason they couldn't see them was that they only existed in Donald's head. But that sort of drivel has kept old Rummy in a series of very high-paid jobs for decades. Most people would have been sacked the first time, but when you're one of the aristocracy the normal rules don't apply and you can fuck up, costing your country billions of dollars and thousands of dead soldiers, over and over and over again.
McCarthy was a similar beast to Rumsfeld, Rice and the rest of the current generation, although he never managed to kill the tens of thousands of men, women, and children they have. McCarthy rode the infamy of his witchhunt and to stay in his new job as a media-star, he had to find spies. If he had to invent them, he did.
am i the only one out there who doesn't go along with liberalist propaganda?
No, but I'd say you're very much in the minority. That happens quite often when you're totally wrong in every aspect of what you are saying.
a great American patriot
McCarthy was a scumbag who should have been taken outside and shot through the back of the head like the common murderer he was. He was a disgrace to the flag and his body should never have been allowed to be burried in the same ground as people like Washington and FDR; you only have to watch film of him to see how much of a kick he was getting out of it all. It may have started as patriotism, but it quickly became a perverted fetish; I'd give good odds he had a hard-on under that desk. Saying he was a patriot is like saying G W Bush is a Christian: y
It is unreasonable to suggest when the topic is totalitarian regimes who routinely lock people up because of their beliefs and also routinely execute people and harvest them for organs, that comparisons to Nazis are either off-topic or a sign that the argument has been lost.
TWW
See, they're doing it all wrong. You're supposed to snort, not blow. No wonder they spend so much on it.
TWW
TWW
However, secondly, people got along fine for years in Photoshop with 8bits so it can't be a killer feature or Photoshop would have been killed by the lack.
The real question is, how often can you tell there's a problem by looking at the output instead of your histograms? Cause the histograms are not what you're getting paid for.
TWW
Bullshit.
TWW
There is no need of a compromise. I bought the music, I can listen to it anywhere and anyhow I like, but I can't copy it and give it to someone else that hasn't paid for the music. Why should I compromise on that?
The idea that is sometimes floated by the companies is that I bought the CD not the music but that falls apart as soon as you ask what would happen if I got home and found that the CD was blank. Obviously the delivery media is irrelevant. I go to a music store to buy music, not CDs.
As I implied im my original post, however, this is all by the wayside since the record companies can buy whatever law they want and say a big "fuck you" to consumers and voters alike. They have no need for compromises nor do they care about any defense - they don't need any more justification than an envelope stuffed with money delivered to a senator near you.
Just don't buy their products and make sure your politician know that taking their bribes means a vote for someone else (doesn't matter who, pick a name at random, they're all scumbags but the threat of one of the other scumbags getting in might keep the current one in line).
TWW
Actually this is a bit of a myth in my experience. I send stuff to printers from Gimp fairly often and CMYK isn't an issue; they just convert it as part of their process.
What IS a killer is spot-colour usage. I have no decent method of working with Pantone or other specialised spot colours, nor is there a good system for handling product shots where a particular colour HAS to be represented correctly, such as a Coke can.
People forget that CMYK can represent less than half the contents of a Pantone swash; it is not the be-all and end-all of colour handling.
TWW
I was talking about the bribery issue; it hardly matters what way people vote in elections if the politicians can be "induced" to always vote in favour of the rich minority.
TWW