You know, I just tried that, and it flat-out isn't true. I suspect you a.) didn't configure a dual-core system, and b.) forgot to include the monitor, since HP's systems don't include them by default. When I configured a system with roughly the same hardware (and software, you probably left out that too, since you do get iLife with a new iMac) it came out to $1800 - $200MIR = $1600. And it was still missing a few things (though it had a few extras, like a memory-card reader). This was trying to equal the $1299 iMac.
Later, Robert
Re:Its only the bad things we head about?
on
Safari vs. KHTML
·
· Score: 1
BTW, I'd be very interested to see a this Linux browser based on Webcore, have you got a link (or even a name?)).
That would be too easy, as they say. Man... the one time I don't read the article, I end up looking like an idiot. Isn't that always the way?
When I set out to write my comment, I meant for it to actually ask the question, as I wasn't sure things were being interpreted correctly by the predominantly PC/. crowd. I suppose I should have read the article.
Wait a minute here... I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding. Decoding a.hqx or MacBinary file is NOT the same thing as running the resulting executable! It doesn't even have to be an executable... any file can be encoded as BinHex or MacBinary. It's just a method of "flattening" the resource fork and data fork into one file. Stuffit's.sit format has done the equivalent (plus compression) for a couple versions now. I don't have the latest IE yet (waiting for my Student ADC copy of 10.1...), but I'm 99% sure it doesn't automatically run any executables, it just harmlessly decodes the encoded files into their original form.
Um, you do realize that extensive user testing has shown that multiple buttons are in fact inferior from a usability standpoint? Other studies have shown that the vast majority of Windows users don't even realize the right-click does anything until they are told. All-in-all, multiple button mice are a hideously bad usability mistake. "Hidden" interfaces are never good, all functionality should be visible to the user, so contextual menus are bad (but handy for the power user who knows what he wants). I suggest you subscribe to Apple's Human Interface list if you want to argue more about this subject.
Actually, I saw a statistic stating that crime (at least in NYC, this may or may not apply elsewhere) has been down 33% since the attacks. Of course, 500 people murdered is still a lot... but the calculus of the dead is never fun.
War is a well-defined term of international law, and this is not it
As has been stated many, many times, international law is completely irrelevant. It has no enforcement mechanism, it is itself only loosely defined by treaty and custom, and the US has a long and distinguished history of ignoring both. So, yes, it is a war just because we say it is! Also, there is no requirement that war be conducted between nation-states. The United States once went to war with the Barbary Pirates, who most certainly did not constitute a nation-state.
The next point I want to make ties into this:
Has there been any evidence that anybody ordered these people to sacrifice themselves?
I have not seen such evidence with my own eyes, if that's what you mean. I have been told by the media (who were told by the US government) that such evidence exists and is plentiful. If you believe they are lying, then we have no common intelligent platform on which to discuss. I have not seen the WTC, ever, I have only been told it once existed (and seen pictures, but we all know what Photoshop can do). I know no one who died or is missing. But I believe that the WTC existed, and I believe 5,500 people died in the attack, and I believe the attack happened. I also believe it was planned and executed with the knowledge, funding, and possibly explicit consent of a nation-state. Which means: even by the formal definition of practically non-existent "international law," the attacks constituted an armed attack on the United States of America, and thus were an Act of War not a crime.
Well, this is a war not a crime, but since people seem to like applying crime metaphors...
If you order a hit on someone, you are considered *more* responsible for the murder than the hitman who pulls the trigger. He's just doing his job, *you* are the real villian, as far as the law is concerned.
So, no, the people who are *responsible* for doing this almost certainly are *not* dead.
>I just can't abide somewhere where the 4th and 5th
>ammendments have largely been destroyed.
So, instead, you want to live somewhere where they never existed. I see. Makes perfect sense...
Did it ever occur to you that cellphones and email *didn't exist* when those ammendments were written? And therefore they *aren't protected* anyway?
later,
Shadow Knight
Re:New Kind of War? Old Kind of Errors
on
A New Kind of War
·
· Score: 1
First, this is not a crime, it's a war. It doesn't matter what you think about it. There is no such thing as international law. This was an attack by foreign agents (agents of a large multinational organization, for sure) upon American lives and military targets (the Pentagon). That is not crime, it is war. Stop wishing for things to be otherwise.
OK, perhaps I was to vague. What I meant was this: Osama bin Laden is not an American citizen, so the laws of the USA do not apply to him. There are no international laws that actually mean anything. So they do not apply to him. The Saudi's revoked his citizenship, so Saudi Arabian laws do not apply to him. I suppose the laws of Afghanistan apply to him. What do they say about the subject? I suspect they say he is not guilty of any crime... what then, are we to do if we follow the rule of law? Leave him alone?
I am not a lawyer, but I read a post from one once;)
And he said that there is no such thing as "international law," in reality. It's just a convenience that the winner of the most recent war (that would be the United States, right now) uses to justify its actions. In a very real sense, international law is whatever we claim it is. The US has a long and distinguished history of breaking and ignoring treaties, so clearly they don't define any form of international law. Since there is no international law, and Osama bin Laden is not a citizen, the rule of law does not apply to him.
On another note, "international law" does *NOT* *NOT* *NOT* limit war to conflict between states. The United States once declared war on the Barbary Pirates, who most certainly did not constitute a state! In fact, there are a lot of parallels between that and the current conflict with large terrorist organizations.
Attacking the Pentagon is an act of war, not a crime. And if you think individuals cannot prosecute a war, I think you should look up the Barbary Pirates. The US declared war on them, and they weren't a nation-state. Individuals very much can commit an act of war, especially when backed by nation-states, as is the case here. You talk about a free society, but Osama bin Laden does not live in such. He is not an American citizen, he is not subject to Constitutional guarantees of a trial. Also, it now seems that his organization is quite large enough to mean it when they declare war, which Osama bin Laden has explcitly done (he has declared a Jihad on the US).
So, it's war, not crime. Get it straight. Protest the war if you must, but do not deny the fact that the US is at war.
You have failed to understand, and you are being racist. If we make all the Islamic Fundamentalists in the world happy, we will piss off someone else. And, having sent the message that killing innocent Americans gets you what you want, they will decide to kill innocent Americans. Other races and creeds can be terrorists. Changing our policies will not solve the problem, it will only change the identity of the enemy.
I meant, I guess, that we cannot change the *nature* of our policies. That is, we must not suddenly decide that Saddam Hussein is a great guy after all, or that the Palestinians are right and the Israelies wrong, etc.
As a side note, I'm all for stopping the training and supplying of our enemies like Osama bin Laden...
>The only way to stop terrorism is to stop the
>acts that cause its proponents to act so rashly.
Thus guaranteeing that the world sees terrorism works. Sure, so then we end Islamic terrorism. Well, some other group of people remembers how well it worked for the Islamic Fundamentalists (who are now quite happy, in this hypothetical situation), and decides that terrorism will fix *their* problem too. This is not acceptable. I don't know what *is* an acceptable solution, but saying "terrorism works" is *NOT*.
No matter what, this is *absolutely* the wrong solution. No matter *how* evil American policies have been in the Middle East, we *CANNOT* afford to change them now! This attack has locked us permanently into our current policies. Why? If we changed them now, it is an explicit admission that terrorism works. To change our policies now in any way that favors Islamic Fundamentalism is to almost literally say "Look, terrorism works perfectly! Come blow us up again next time you have a problem!"
*That* is a message we *MUST NOT* send no matter what action we take.
The reason we were attacked is irrelevant. Sure, the US has some horrible foreign policies. But guess what? We are now locked into them. We cannot now *afford* to change our foreign policies. To change now would be an explicit admission that terrorism works. It would almost literally be announcing to the world "Terrorism works great! Come blow us up again next time you have a problem!"
I don't know what the proper response is, but *ANY* change in foreign policy in favor of the Palestinians or Islamic Fundamentalists is *ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG* response.
>* In fact, if the OS and Apps split did happen my
>guess is that the Apps company might seriously
>rethink it's investment in MS Office for the
>Macintosh. It's almost certainly a significant
>investment for such a small market.
The Macintosh Business Unit is the most profitable unit in Microsoft, in terms of return on investment. Office for Mac isn't going anywhere anytime soon (and please, remember that the Macintosh market as a whole is still many, many, many times larger than the Linux desktop market!). It has been said (by people at MS) that the MacBU is subsidising a great deal of the rest of MS (such as the X-Box...). So, I think they'd be rethinking their commitment to Office on Windows before Office on Mac (if MS was broken up).
later,
Shadow Knight
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
Re:It was drek, but the graphics were amazing.
on
Review: Final Fantasy
·
· Score: 1
You hate most anime, don't you? I'm noticing a theme here... people who "get" anime like the FF movie. People who don't like anime think the FF movie was terrible. Conclusion: the FF movie is anime. Personally, I loved it. The plot had very few holes if you understand the concept of soft sci-fi. It doesn't matter why you can shoot ghosts, you just blast them! Also, if you don't understand or actively dislike the Gaia theory, you'll think the movie has more holes than it does.
But if you don't like anime, nothing will make you like the FF movie. You don't need big eyes and small mouths to have anime!
later,
Shadow Knight
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
Where might I purchase a poster such as you speak of? Pretty please tell me, I want to get one! And respond here, I don't like putting my real email address on/. (plus other people would like to buy the poster, too, I'm sure).
Later,
Shadow Knight
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
I have just a couple questions, though: how much does that Toshiba weigh, what are its dimensions, and how long does the battery last?
Later,
Shadow Knight
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
Re:QT is the best gui toolkit out there
on
Qt for Mac
·
· Score: 1
I'm not a moron, but I can name one GUI toolkit that is at least as good as Qt (if not better), and I love Qt as a Linux/Unix toolkit. What is this magical API? Why, Cocoa/OpenStep, of course! It rocks! You said "name one toolkit," not "name one crossplatform toolkit." And even then, there's GNUstep...
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
Slashdot Mirror
Starting with 10.6 Snow Leopard, Mac OS X has used the base ten interpretation in the GUI display.
That is incorrect. The new Mini has SPDIF digital audio both input and output.
Later,
Robert
You know, I just tried that, and it flat-out isn't true. I suspect you a.) didn't configure a dual-core system, and b.) forgot to include the monitor, since HP's systems don't include them by default. When I configured a system with roughly the same hardware (and software, you probably left out that too, since you do get iLife with a new iMac) it came out to $1800 - $200MIR = $1600. And it was still missing a few things (though it had a few extras, like a memory-card reader). This was trying to equal the $1299 iMac.
Later,
Robert
I found it really quick with Google... Actually, Nokia (!) is working on it http://gtk-webcore.sourceforge.net/.
That would be too easy, as they say. Man... the one time I don't read the article, I end up looking like an idiot. Isn't that always the way?
When I set out to write my comment, I meant for it to actually ask the question, as I wasn't sure things were being interpreted correctly by the predominantly PC /. crowd. I suppose I should have read the article.
later,Shadow Knight
Wait a minute here... I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding. Decoding a .hqx or MacBinary file is NOT the same thing as running the resulting executable! It doesn't even have to be an executable... any file can be encoded as BinHex or MacBinary. It's just a method of "flattening" the resource fork and data fork into one file. Stuffit's .sit format has done the equivalent (plus compression) for a couple versions now. I don't have the latest IE yet (waiting for my Student ADC copy of 10.1...), but I'm 99% sure it doesn't automatically run any executables, it just harmlessly decodes the encoded files into their original form.
later,
Shadow Knight
Um, you do realize that extensive user testing has shown that multiple buttons are in fact inferior from a usability standpoint? Other studies have shown that the vast majority of Windows users don't even realize the right-click does anything until they are told. All-in-all, multiple button mice are a hideously bad usability mistake. "Hidden" interfaces are never good, all functionality should be visible to the user, so contextual menus are bad (but handy for the power user who knows what he wants). I suggest you subscribe to Apple's Human Interface list if you want to argue more about this subject.
later,
Shadow Knight
Actually, I saw a statistic stating that crime (at least in NYC, this may or may not apply elsewhere) has been down 33% since the attacks. Of course, 500 people murdered is still a lot... but the calculus of the dead is never fun.
later,
Shadow Knight
War is a well-defined term of international law, and this is not it
As has been stated many, many times, international law is completely irrelevant. It has no enforcement mechanism, it is itself only loosely defined by treaty and custom, and the US has a long and distinguished history of ignoring both. So, yes, it is a war just because we say it is! Also, there is no requirement that war be conducted between nation-states. The United States once went to war with the Barbary Pirates, who most certainly did not constitute a nation-state.
The next point I want to make ties into this:
Has there been any evidence that anybody ordered these people to sacrifice themselves?
I have not seen such evidence with my own eyes, if that's what you mean. I have been told by the media (who were told by the US government) that such evidence exists and is plentiful. If you believe they are lying, then we have no common intelligent platform on which to discuss. I have not seen the WTC, ever, I have only been told it once existed (and seen pictures, but we all know what Photoshop can do). I know no one who died or is missing. But I believe that the WTC existed, and I believe 5,500 people died in the attack, and I believe the attack happened. I also believe it was planned and executed with the knowledge, funding, and possibly explicit consent of a nation-state. Which means: even by the formal definition of practically non-existent "international law," the attacks constituted an armed attack on the United States of America, and thus were an Act of War not a crime.
later,
Shadow Knight
Well, this is a war not a crime, but since people seem to like applying crime metaphors...
If you order a hit on someone, you are considered *more* responsible for the murder than the hitman who pulls the trigger. He's just doing his job, *you* are the real villian, as far as the law is concerned.
So, no, the people who are *responsible* for doing this almost certainly are *not* dead.
Later,
Shadow Knight
>I just can't abide somewhere where the 4th and 5th
>ammendments have largely been destroyed.
So, instead, you want to live somewhere where they never existed. I see. Makes perfect sense...
Did it ever occur to you that cellphones and email *didn't exist* when those ammendments were written? And therefore they *aren't protected* anyway?
later,
Shadow Knight
First, this is not a crime, it's a war. It doesn't matter what you think about it. There is no such thing as international law. This was an attack by foreign agents (agents of a large multinational organization, for sure) upon American lives and military targets (the Pentagon). That is not crime, it is war. Stop wishing for things to be otherwise.
later,
Shadow Knight
OK, perhaps I was to vague. What I meant was this: Osama bin Laden is not an American citizen, so the laws of the USA do not apply to him. There are no international laws that actually mean anything. So they do not apply to him. The Saudi's revoked his citizenship, so Saudi Arabian laws do not apply to him. I suppose the laws of Afghanistan apply to him. What do they say about the subject? I suspect they say he is not guilty of any crime... what then, are we to do if we follow the rule of law? Leave him alone?
later,
Shadow Knight
I am not a lawyer, but I read a post from one once ;)
And he said that there is no such thing as "international law," in reality. It's just a convenience that the winner of the most recent war (that would be the United States, right now) uses to justify its actions. In a very real sense, international law is whatever we claim it is. The US has a long and distinguished history of breaking and ignoring treaties, so clearly they don't define any form of international law. Since there is no international law, and Osama bin Laden is not a citizen, the rule of law does not apply to him.
On another note, "international law" does *NOT* *NOT* *NOT* limit war to conflict between states. The United States once declared war on the Barbary Pirates, who most certainly did not constitute a state! In fact, there are a lot of parallels between that and the current conflict with large terrorist organizations.
later,
Shadow Knight
Attacking the Pentagon is an act of war, not a crime. And if you think individuals cannot prosecute a war, I think you should look up the Barbary Pirates. The US declared war on them, and they weren't a nation-state. Individuals very much can commit an act of war, especially when backed by nation-states, as is the case here. You talk about a free society, but Osama bin Laden does not live in such. He is not an American citizen, he is not subject to Constitutional guarantees of a trial. Also, it now seems that his organization is quite large enough to mean it when they declare war, which Osama bin Laden has explcitly done (he has declared a Jihad on the US).
So, it's war, not crime. Get it straight. Protest the war if you must, but do not deny the fact that the US is at war.
You have failed to understand, and you are being racist. If we make all the Islamic Fundamentalists in the world happy, we will piss off someone else. And, having sent the message that killing innocent Americans gets you what you want, they will decide to kill innocent Americans. Other races and creeds can be terrorists. Changing our policies will not solve the problem, it will only change the identity of the enemy.
later,
Shadow Knight
I meant, I guess, that we cannot change the *nature* of our policies. That is, we must not suddenly decide that Saddam Hussein is a great guy after all, or that the Palestinians are right and the Israelies wrong, etc.
As a side note, I'm all for stopping the training and supplying of our enemies like Osama bin Laden...
later,
Shadow Knight
>The only way to stop terrorism is to stop the
>acts that cause its proponents to act so rashly.
Thus guaranteeing that the world sees terrorism works. Sure, so then we end Islamic terrorism. Well, some other group of people remembers how well it worked for the Islamic Fundamentalists (who are now quite happy, in this hypothetical situation), and decides that terrorism will fix *their* problem too. This is not acceptable. I don't know what *is* an acceptable solution, but saying "terrorism works" is *NOT*.
later,
Shadow Knight
No matter what, this is *absolutely* the wrong solution. No matter *how* evil American policies have been in the Middle East, we *CANNOT* afford to change them now! This attack has locked us permanently into our current policies. Why? If we changed them now, it is an explicit admission that terrorism works. To change our policies now in any way that favors Islamic Fundamentalism is to almost literally say "Look, terrorism works perfectly! Come blow us up again next time you have a problem!"
*That* is a message we *MUST NOT* send no matter what action we take.
Later,
Shadow Knight
The reason we were attacked is irrelevant. Sure, the US has some horrible foreign policies. But guess what? We are now locked into them. We cannot now *afford* to change our foreign policies. To change now would be an explicit admission that terrorism works. It would almost literally be announcing to the world "Terrorism works great! Come blow us up again next time you have a problem!"
I don't know what the proper response is, but *ANY* change in foreign policy in favor of the Palestinians or Islamic Fundamentalists is *ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG* response.
later,
Shadow Knight
>guess is that the Apps company might seriously
>rethink it's investment in MS Office for the
>Macintosh. It's almost certainly a significant
>investment for such a small market.
The Macintosh Business Unit is the most profitable unit in Microsoft, in terms of return on investment. Office for Mac isn't going anywhere anytime soon (and please, remember that the Macintosh market as a whole is still many, many, many times larger than the Linux desktop market!). It has been said (by people at MS) that the MacBU is subsidising a great deal of the rest of MS (such as the X-Box...). So, I think they'd be rethinking their commitment to Office on Windows before Office on Mac (if MS was broken up).
later,
Shadow Knight
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
But if you don't like anime, nothing will make you like the FF movie. You don't need big eyes and small mouths to have anime!
later,
Shadow Knight
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
Later,
Shadow Knight
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
Later,
Shadow Knight
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity