Or, for that matter, the old adage, "The plural of anecdote is not data."
Anecdote n. Data I don't like.
And did you ever stop to think that, just maybe, the reason that Consumer Reports consistently rates them highly, while you hear of a few people saying they're junk, is because the junk ones are the exception, rather than the rule?
I've never met an actual Apple Mac user who was happy about the flakiness of the hardware and the cost of getting it fixed; and this is going back to the original Mac. I - and they - would still rather own a PPC Mac than an Intel box, I just don't have any reason to believe that they are the bullet-proof units that they are claimed to be.
I don't think that Apple do not care about quality, but I think they care more about appearances; if they didn't they would have overrun Microsoft years ago and we'd all look momentarily blank at the name "Bill Gates".
Then how do they always end up with the top spot for reliability for their machines?
Zealots ghost-filing surveys. Apple hardware simply isn't high-reliability and it's expensive to replace/fix through Apple. It does look lovely, though.
Microsoft has alleged that the gcc compiler is deliberately designed so that programs compiled with it do not run as efficiently under Windows as they do under Linux.
If price of cpu's were really such a big factor, AMD might have been alot more willing to offer discounts than Intel.
Indeed. Going with Intel, who are far far behind AMD now, indicates to me that whatever the reasons for the move, intelligence and logic were not involved. The discount argument is just an excuse.
a US soldier following all procedures accidentally killing civilians with an errant round
Or just shooting an unarmed wounded enemy because they'd be too much hassle to take in? Yeah, real different intent there.
The leaders on both sides of this are the same; there's nothing realative about it. Both want power, both are happy to have other people die for it while they're far away and safe. The rest of us are stuck in the crossfire.
WWII is NOT the same as this phoney "War on Terror". WWII was about something bigger than oil or getting a ring around China in case they start out producing the good ol' US of A. It was about fighting evil (which might be why America was so slow in getting involved). This is a mangy grubby little fight over who gets first dibs on the oil when push comes to shove later in the century.
Since most people that take pride in their work and want to produce quality software simply won't work for a bunch of cowboys like MS. When they come around the universities it's only the students that don't care about anything except money (and the crap ones who apply to everyone) that talk to them.
A look at their product line and history shows the result.
Gee, your getting in a few political points for your side too, aren't you?
Fuck off. What say I pay someone to kill your family and then tell you that you should vote for me because I'll have them locked up? That's what Bush is doing, and I hope someday he hangs for it, though I know he won't. His sort never do.
Yeah, I think it's pretty well a non-starter now too.
given that Tonly Blair has referenced Islamists in his last speech after he's had a detailed briefing, I think there would probably be evidence to point to islamists that he has been made aware of.
Well, other than anti-G8, who else is there apart from the Islamic fringe? The IRA has been quiet for a long time and I don't think they'd be up for trouble at the moment. But a splinter group is a possibility, I suppose.
Also, it is strange that only a single bus was attacked.
Looks like two, now.
Whatever, as usual us sheep will just have to mill around and see what advantage our political masters can find for their own careers in all of this. Bush is already harping on about how it proves that his silly War on Terror(TM) is vital and not, as it might appear, the main cause of this sort of thing.
At least Paul Wolfowitz has got his Iraqi oil, and I guess that's all that matters.
Funny, isn't it, how we're all supposed to be aghast and condem the terrorists who strike at our way of life, but it's next to treason to ask why the UK government goes around provoking this sort of thing in order to further a foreign country's interests in the Middle East.
Or, for that matter, to so much as mention the huge political benefits to Bush and Blair from this action. Don't mention those, but don't think for a moment that either of them won't take those benefits and run with them. Which I see Bush is already doing, without even a final body-count he's too excited at the chance to exploit the bombs to keep his mouth shut even for 24hrs, the disgusting little bastard.
I thought the government's statements had been pretty good on that front
The "AQ" word has been bandied about in a few press briefings, it seems, rather than by our glorious leader himself.
As for the number of deaths, the less the better obviously, but I can't help remembering how slowly we got a realistic count on 9/11.
That's true, but oddly in the other direction: started high and went low. I'm still amazed at how few people were killed in 9/11; I remember looking at the pictures through the window of a bar and thinking that there were something like 50000 people in each tower. To "get away" with less than 3000 deaths was astounding, really.
Firstly, the number of reported deaths is a lot lower than the true figure - eyewitness reports (and seeing the aftermath) make it look unlikely that anyone on the top deck of that bus survived, and there are certainly more deaths to be counted from the underground attacks.
Probably, although given that the first underground incident was a full hour before the bus, I'd have expected fatalities to have been mentioned earlier if there were some. Eyewitnesses from that had been very clear that no one was killed or even seriously injured.
But the number of explosions seems to indicate a careful plan. But what does that prove? I just think that we need to be careful about following the government's knee-jerk reaction that it must be "al-Qaeda" (and that's an term the CIA/FBI invented too).
It seems to me more likely, at this point, that a group of anti-G8 people are responsible than some super-duper terrorist group:
Small, weak bombs. So small that on a crowded bus or tube train only a couple of people are killed. Compare to Madrid.
Day G8 starts in Gleneagles. A serious group would surely have stuck at Gleneagles with a suicide bomb. Much more impact on Bush etc.
G8 protesters have on a number of occasions said that their aim is to make the G8 conference "too expensive" to hold. This seems to me the sort of thing they might mean; how many countries will now wonder about the sense of allowing a G8 conference in one of their cities now?
London has had much worse attacks than this in my life time; it's a blip unless we make it more than it is.
Maybe its time for the terrorist groups to ask themselves whether they are doing the right thing by killing totally unrelated people who have nothing to do with Iraq.
Well, that just puts them on the same footing as our governments who are killing people in Iraq that had nothing to do with Saddam (Saddam comes to you courtesy of the CIA's tyrant placement scheme), and torturing people that have done nothing more evil than having stood beside the wrong person when the US troops swept through their town.
Maybe Wolfowitz's "economic security" (ie, oil supplies) are more trouble than they're worth?
We SEE the results of their gravitation (and not just with the galactic rotation, but you cannot really do cosmology ignoring them),
The gavitational effects are more likely to have something to do with a hole in the gravitational theory; perhaps a sign of quantum effects in gravity/acceleration? Dark matter is just plain silly.
The other implication of dark matter theory that really points to it being wrong is that the age of distant galaxys is too great (in terms of stellar evolution and population mix) to fit with the very low age of the universe that comes out of simulations, such as this one, that assume the reality of dark matter/energy. The observed universe simply does not support that interpretation of the gravitational anomalies you refer to. The anomalies are real, the explanation simply does not work. Even on the small scale of globular clusters dark matter fails to explain what we see through our telescopes.
Do you even know what a "religious fundamendalist zealot" is? I've yet to read about Bush hanging Laura in the name of God for some minor mistake she made.
If Bush is religious I wonder what religion it is. Satanism perhaps; there's certainly no sign of Christian values in his actions.
Perhaps, and I'm going out on a limb here, he only says all that stuff about God because there's votes in it and religious people will believe any old shit (eg, the bible/koran/tora/dianetics)?
Slashdot Mirror
Anecdote n. Data I don't like.
And did you ever stop to think that, just maybe, the reason that Consumer Reports consistently rates them highly, while you hear of a few people saying they're junk, is because the junk ones are the exception, rather than the rule?
I've never met an actual Apple Mac user who was happy about the flakiness of the hardware and the cost of getting it fixed; and this is going back to the original Mac. I - and they - would still rather own a PPC Mac than an Intel box, I just don't have any reason to believe that they are the bullet-proof units that they are claimed to be.
I don't think that Apple do not care about quality, but I think they care more about appearances; if they didn't they would have overrun Microsoft years ago and we'd all look momentarily blank at the name "Bill Gates".
TWW
Zealots ghost-filing surveys. Apple hardware simply isn't high-reliability and it's expensive to replace/fix through Apple. It does look lovely, though.
TWW
That's all I have to say
You might have had a point if that was true.
TWW
Someone told me that some C++ compilers or extensions added garbage collection, I was wondering if it had ever been added to the language definition.
Apparently, the C++ programmers here think that's a rude question, so I suppose the answer is "no".
TWW
TWW
Indeed. Going with Intel, who are far far behind AMD now, indicates to me that whatever the reasons for the move, intelligence and logic were not involved. The discount argument is just an excuse.
TWW
"Frankly, we resent the air our programmers use up; how come that's not mentioned in thet Coyote agreement thing we hear about?" said a spokesman.
In other news, it was found that people like to be given free money and have sex with beautiful people.
TWW
TWW
As Microsoft themselve have proven over and over again, perception is much more important than reality.
TWW
Yeah, right. A gun nut thinks I'm sad. Oh, dear. Whatever shall I do?
TWW
Or just shooting an unarmed wounded enemy because they'd be too much hassle to take in? Yeah, real different intent there.
The leaders on both sides of this are the same; there's nothing realative about it. Both want power, both are happy to have other people die for it while they're far away and safe. The rest of us are stuck in the crossfire.
WWII is NOT the same as this phoney "War on Terror". WWII was about something bigger than oil or getting a ring around China in case they start out producing the good ol' US of A. It was about fighting evil (which might be why America was so slow in getting involved). This is a mangy grubby little fight over who gets first dibs on the oil when push comes to shove later in the century.
TWW
A look at their product line and history shows the result.
TWW
Fuck off. What say I pay someone to kill your family and then tell you that you should vote for me because I'll have them locked up? That's what Bush is doing, and I hope someday he hangs for it, though I know he won't. His sort never do.
Yeah, I think it's pretty well a non-starter now too.
given that Tonly Blair has referenced Islamists in his last speech after he's had a detailed briefing, I think there would probably be evidence to point to islamists that he has been made aware of.
Well, other than anti-G8, who else is there apart from the Islamic fringe? The IRA has been quiet for a long time and I don't think they'd be up for trouble at the moment. But a splinter group is a possibility, I suppose.
Also, it is strange that only a single bus was attacked.
Looks like two, now.
Whatever, as usual us sheep will just have to mill around and see what advantage our political masters can find for their own careers in all of this. Bush is already harping on about how it proves that his silly War on Terror(TM) is vital and not, as it might appear, the main cause of this sort of thing.
At least Paul Wolfowitz has got his Iraqi oil, and I guess that's all that matters.
More blood, vicar?
TWW
Dell went directly to AMD and got some decent processors.
Funny, isn't it, how we're all supposed to be aghast and condem the terrorists who strike at our way of life, but it's next to treason to ask why the UK government goes around provoking this sort of thing in order to further a foreign country's interests in the Middle East.
Or, for that matter, to so much as mention the huge political benefits to Bush and Blair from this action. Don't mention those, but don't think for a moment that either of them won't take those benefits and run with them. Which I see Bush is already doing, without even a final body-count he's too excited at the chance to exploit the bombs to keep his mouth shut even for 24hrs, the disgusting little bastard.
And they wonder why people don't vote more...
He also says he's a Christian, so I don't think there's much point in listening to what he says rather than watching what he does.
TWW
The "AQ" word has been bandied about in a few press briefings, it seems, rather than by our glorious leader himself.
As for the number of deaths, the less the better obviously, but I can't help remembering how slowly we got a realistic count on 9/11.
That's true, but oddly in the other direction: started high and went low. I'm still amazed at how few people were killed in 9/11; I remember looking at the pictures through the window of a bar and thinking that there were something like 50000 people in each tower. To "get away" with less than 3000 deaths was astounding, really.
TWW
Probably, although given that the first underground incident was a full hour before the bus, I'd have expected fatalities to have been mentioned earlier if there were some. Eyewitnesses from that had been very clear that no one was killed or even seriously injured.
But the number of explosions seems to indicate a careful plan. But what does that prove? I just think that we need to be careful about following the government's knee-jerk reaction that it must be "al-Qaeda" (and that's an term the CIA/FBI invented too).
TWW
London has had much worse attacks than this in my life time; it's a blip unless we make it more than it is.
TWW
Well, that just puts them on the same footing as our governments who are killing people in Iraq that had nothing to do with Saddam (Saddam comes to you courtesy of the CIA's tyrant placement scheme), and torturing people that have done nothing more evil than having stood beside the wrong person when the US troops swept through their town.
Maybe Wolfowitz's "economic security" (ie, oil supplies) are more trouble than they're worth?
TWW
The gavitational effects are more likely to have something to do with a hole in the gravitational theory; perhaps a sign of quantum effects in gravity/acceleration? Dark matter is just plain silly.
The other implication of dark matter theory that really points to it being wrong is that the age of distant galaxys is too great (in terms of stellar evolution and population mix) to fit with the very low age of the universe that comes out of simulations, such as this one, that assume the reality of dark matter/energy. The observed universe simply does not support that interpretation of the gravitational anomalies you refer to. The anomalies are real, the explanation simply does not work. Even on the small scale of globular clusters dark matter fails to explain what we see through our telescopes.
TWW
TWW
If Bush is religious I wonder what religion it is. Satanism perhaps; there's certainly no sign of Christian values in his actions.
Perhaps, and I'm going out on a limb here, he only says all that stuff about God because there's votes in it and religious people will believe any old shit (eg, the bible/koran/tora/dianetics)?
TWW