When will people stop asserting blanket statements as though they were fact - and then backing up their 'facts' with anecdotal evidence??
People will never stop asserting blanket statements. That's a fact. I know several people who do this frequently and no matter how much I tell them the plural of anecdote is not "facts" they persist.
Nobody suggested everyone does. But this is Harvard we're talking about. The commonly held view (stereotype) is that Harvard is more about who you know than what you know.
I use Windows 7 on my work desktop. I have dual monitors. I use UltraMon and get basically the setup requester is looking for: separate desktops that I can drag (or quickly hit the "move to other monitor" button) between screens.
I also use nomachine which tunnels compressed X sessions over SSH to remotely manage Linux servers in far away places and VirtualBox to run local Linux VMs.
You assert Windows 7 sucks but have nothing in your post's body to suggest why you assert this. I would like to know what's so bad about Windows 7 (other than it being a closed-source proprietary operating system).
Because...I hate Microsoft's business practices. I hate the unethical behavior of the company's directors and executives. I hate many of their products because many of their products are de facto industry standards despite being demonstrably garbage. But I'm running Windows 7 Pro x64 now and you know what? I hate that I like it so much. Unlike the vomit-inducing Vista, Win7 does everything I want and feels as good with resources as XP, runs all the Windows specific apps I need without anally raping me with a bottle of WINE, drives multiple monitors without a hitch, has a sensible audio subsystem, a clipboard system that isn't all over the place, and runs VirtualBox with any and every Linux guest OS I need without as much as a hiccup.
Sure, YMMV but IMHO 64-bit Windows 7 is absolutely the best operating system ever to come out of Redmond, WA. Is it perfect? Of course not. There's no such thing as a perfect OS. But I think it's pretty damn good. And this disturbs me.
OK, I wasn't perfectly clear but I meant it's not the Constitution that's defective in this particular case. Sure, it's not perfect. Agreed. But it's pretty damn good. And the bigger problem is giving corporations the same rights as people.
It's not the Constitution that's defective. It's the Supreme Court ruling in 1886 that effectively gave corporations personhood. THAT is what needs to be overturned.
It's the same thing holding back lots of things: greed. Microsoft would standardized on e-mail encryption support in Exchange/Outlook if it were THEIR "standard" that either locked users in or locked other providers out. So would Apple and damn near every other company out there.
Lots of encryption is in place where companies stand to lose money (eg., DRM, banking, etc.) But where they stand to lose money DUE to encryption, it's not widespread...imagine that. If the security of your data isn't going to lose (or make) a company money, the people running that company don't care a whole lot about the security of your data.
Hopefully that's because the human race is evolving to be less beastly and more civilized. But we'll never get beyond this incidental killing. Hell, even in the advanced fictional civilization of the United Federation of Planets in Star Trek, the guy in the red shirt kept getting killed and nobody cared.
I think the better example for "why the morality of killing is situational" is this:
Suppose somebody murdered your mother. Your mother's dead. That was wrong.
Now, back up the clock. Suppose someone is trying to kill your mother but there's a struggle and in the course of defending herself she ends up killing them. They are dead. That was okay.
All killing is not equal. It's generally accepted that killing in self defense is justified. One of the problems with Americans dropping bombs indiscriminately on houses in Afghanistan and suicide bombers blowing themselves up in malls is they believe they are acting in self defense so it's justifiable.
Umm, I'd wager the majority of Netflix users are probably still getting regular old DVDs (I am) which typically are 720x480 which is what 480p is. This would be just like putting the DVD in and watching it, only not having to deal with mailing DVDs.
More and more things are coming out on Bluray but the HD catalog still is dwarfed by DVDs.
If he really had "electromagnetic allergies" he could've painted his whole house (walls, floors, ceilings, everything) with this stuff and been fine. He's just an attention seeker, a possible nutbag, and like I said, a moron.
If the photography, lighting, and touch-up are removed and the swimsuit models drop from a "10" to a "7", most slashdotters would still be on board, literally.
That is supply and demand. The motives for people buying the goods at a given price is irrelevant - it could be mind control from the planet Zog , it makes no difference. The fact that they are willing to do so is all that matters.
Well, that's demand anyway. The idea of "Supply and Demand" is that prices fluctuate based on shifts in either. But MP3s on Amazon or iTunes are in unlimited supply so according to supply and demand the price for them (regardless of demand) should approach $0.
I'm not suggesting that supply and demand don't factor into real world prices of physical products. But I am suggesting that the reason buying an MP3/AAC "album" on iTunes/Amazon is still priced close to the same cost as buying the physical CD *and* why the price for a newly released CD is still $9.99 - $13.99 (on average) even though the cost to manufacture them has dropped significantly since the early days of CDs is NOT supply and demand but due to price anchoring. Hell, Amazon still shows "list prices" of almost all CDs and has them CROSSED OUT so you can see how much "you save" when you buy it even though NOBODY is paying $18.98 for a new Taylor Swift CD. And that IS price anchoring.
Ahh, gotcha. I usually re-encode directly from the disc rather than copy it multiple times.
I would just copy the ISO but I typically only want the movie and one audio track. I strip all the extras, ads, "non-skippable" crap, and things like French/Spanish subtitles and extraneous audio tracks.
If I ever want to listen to the director's commentary, I just go back to the disc.
Slashdot Mirror
But then I'm behind 7 proxies.
Apparently Google employees have mod points today.
Notion Ink Adam
I hope so.
When will people stop asserting blanket statements as though they were fact - and then backing up their 'facts' with anecdotal evidence??
People will never stop asserting blanket statements. That's a fact. I know several people who do this frequently and no matter how much I tell them the plural of anecdote is not "facts" they persist.
Nobody suggested everyone does. But this is Harvard we're talking about. The commonly held view (stereotype) is that Harvard is more about who you know than what you know.
I use Windows 7 on my work desktop. I have dual monitors. I use UltraMon and get basically the setup requester is looking for: separate desktops that I can drag (or quickly hit the "move to other monitor" button) between screens.
I also use nomachine which tunnels compressed X sessions over SSH to remotely manage Linux servers in far away places and VirtualBox to run local Linux VMs.
It's not that hard to set up.
That's a joke... I say, that's a joke, son.
Also, Know Your Meme
I'M BEHIND SEVEN PROXIES!!!!
Subject: ASSERTION
Body: NOTHING RELATED TO ASSERTION
You assert Windows 7 sucks but have nothing in your post's body to suggest why you assert this. I would like to know what's so bad about Windows 7 (other than it being a closed-source proprietary operating system).
Because...I hate Microsoft's business practices. I hate the unethical behavior of the company's directors and executives. I hate many of their products because many of their products are de facto industry standards despite being demonstrably garbage. But I'm running Windows 7 Pro x64 now and you know what? I hate that I like it so much. Unlike the vomit-inducing Vista, Win7 does everything I want and feels as good with resources as XP, runs all the Windows specific apps I need without anally raping me with a bottle of WINE, drives multiple monitors without a hitch, has a sensible audio subsystem, a clipboard system that isn't all over the place, and runs VirtualBox with any and every Linux guest OS I need without as much as a hiccup.
Sure, YMMV but IMHO 64-bit Windows 7 is absolutely the best operating system ever to come out of Redmond, WA. Is it perfect? Of course not. There's no such thing as a perfect OS. But I think it's pretty damn good. And this disturbs me.
So please help me hate Windows 7. I feel dirty.
Christopher Robin was unavailable for comment.
OK, I wasn't perfectly clear but I meant it's not the Constitution that's defective in this particular case. Sure, it's not perfect. Agreed. But it's pretty damn good. And the bigger problem is giving corporations the same rights as people.
It's not the Constitution that's defective. It's the Supreme Court ruling in 1886 that effectively gave corporations personhood. THAT is what needs to be overturned.
It's the same thing holding back lots of things: greed. Microsoft would standardized on e-mail encryption support in Exchange/Outlook if it were THEIR "standard" that either locked users in or locked other providers out. So would Apple and damn near every other company out there.
Lots of encryption is in place where companies stand to lose money (eg., DRM, banking, etc.) But where they stand to lose money DUE to encryption, it's not widespread...imagine that. If the security of your data isn't going to lose (or make) a company money, the people running that company don't care a whole lot about the security of your data.
True. I'm running it on Windows 7 64-bit if anybody cares. NoScript plugin works for me also.
Oops, forgot: Minefield
I'm using it already as my predominant web browser of choice. Works like a champ so far. I know it's not even pre-release blah blah. It works for me.
Hopefully that's because the human race is evolving to be less beastly and more civilized. But we'll never get beyond this incidental killing. Hell, even in the advanced fictional civilization of the United Federation of Planets in Star Trek, the guy in the red shirt kept getting killed and nobody cared.
I think the better example for "why the morality of killing is situational" is this:
Suppose somebody murdered your mother. Your mother's dead. That was wrong.
Now, back up the clock. Suppose someone is trying to kill your mother but there's a struggle and in the course of defending herself she ends up killing them. They are dead. That was okay.
All killing is not equal. It's generally accepted that killing in self defense is justified. One of the problems with Americans dropping bombs indiscriminately on houses in Afghanistan and suicide bombers blowing themselves up in malls is they believe they are acting in self defense so it's justifiable.
Umm, I'd wager the majority of Netflix users are probably still getting regular old DVDs (I am) which typically are 720x480 which is what 480p is. This would be just like putting the DVD in and watching it, only not having to deal with mailing DVDs.
More and more things are coming out on Bluray but the HD catalog still is dwarfed by DVDs.
And quite possibly a douchebag.
If he really had "electromagnetic allergies" he could've painted his whole house (walls, floors, ceilings, everything) with this stuff and been fine. He's just an attention seeker, a possible nutbag, and like I said, a moron.
If the photography, lighting, and touch-up are removed and the swimsuit models drop from a "10" to a "7", most slashdotters would still be on board, literally.
That is supply and demand. The motives for people buying the goods at a given price is irrelevant - it could be mind control from the planet Zog , it makes no difference. The fact that they are willing to do so is all that matters.
Well, that's demand anyway. The idea of "Supply and Demand" is that prices fluctuate based on shifts in either. But MP3s on Amazon or iTunes are in unlimited supply so according to supply and demand the price for them (regardless of demand) should approach $0.
I'm not suggesting that supply and demand don't factor into real world prices of physical products. But I am suggesting that the reason buying an MP3/AAC "album" on iTunes/Amazon is still priced close to the same cost as buying the physical CD *and* why the price for a newly released CD is still $9.99 - $13.99 (on average) even though the cost to manufacture them has dropped significantly since the early days of CDs is NOT supply and demand but due to price anchoring. Hell, Amazon still shows "list prices" of almost all CDs and has them CROSSED OUT so you can see how much "you save" when you buy it even though NOBODY is paying $18.98 for a new Taylor Swift CD. And that IS price anchoring.
Ahh, gotcha. I usually re-encode directly from the disc rather than copy it multiple times.
I would just copy the ISO but I typically only want the movie and one audio track. I strip all the extras, ads, "non-skippable" crap, and things like French/Spanish subtitles and extraneous audio tracks.
If I ever want to listen to the director's commentary, I just go back to the disc.
I thought it was just a funny little thing to say. But I must've hit too close to home for some mod.