Anyone else starting to get the impression that politicians across the country (especially federal ones) LIKE playing Russian Roulette with their careers lately?
I say vote them out... if you don't represent ME and MY FELLOW constituents, then you have no business holding your office. To such politicians I say, "Consider yourself fired."
I actually wouldn't mind a 12.1" LCD on a laptop running 2560x1600... when coding it helps A LOT to have as much real estate as possible w/o having a massive laptop to lug around.
I know you're kidding, but the sad thing is that this is probably just company lawyers trying to justify their jobs. Most TI engineers are likely to not care or love the hacks for the geek factor. TI ought to capitalize on this, not suppress it.
1. Laboratory conditions. Check. 2. "The new findings map out a series of simple, efficient chemical reactions that could have formed molecules of RNA..." Check. 3. Proof of abiogenesis. Not a chance. 4. Someone with a time machine that can verify it. Nope.
Abiogenesis still remains philosophical at best, NOT science.
I grew up in Texas... I dunno about other states, but this isn't the first time some goofballs in the state thought messing with the ecosystem by introducing outside life was a good idea. They put "elephant ear" plants in the water in San Marcos and the things took over.
Maybe Bill Engvall is right and we do need signs on these people... and a place to where we can export them:-)
You get what you pay for. When I use popular open source, I trust that developers are competent and the software will work with few glitches, if any. But, I don't expect that I am entitled to sue for damages if it causes problems. That is, unless I paid Redhat, Novell, or someone else who promises specific guarantees against damages. Otherwise, I'm just glad for backups and start over.
Just some unsolicited advice (not like that happens much on/.... </sarcasm>):
Treat it like going to a car dealership... If they want to know if you're paying cash or financing before you even test drive the car, politely tell them you'll worry about that later. In the case of the caddy, I'd say I'm considering purchasing one and just want to know more about it and the price. If they want to look up the serial number or anything, remind them that you are just looking and considering at this point. If you like the pitch you can buy one or come back another time and buy one. If they're stupid enough to not want your business, then let them keep their merchandise and lose a sale. As much as I believe in strong morals and ethics in all areas of life, it's a pretty stupid salesman that refuses a sale on a "what if" assumption.
I understand the concern, but I'm not that worried about it... they are not using them in missiles, aircraft, ships, etc. They are using them as supplements for calculations, video players, and remote controls for small robots. While there could be problems, they are likely to be on the smaller scale. And knowing how strict the military is on specs, I imagine they tested at least a few before mass distribution.
I mock religion all the time. I have to hold science and scientists up to the same standard. I'd be a hypocrite to accept unprovable scientific mumbojumbo, interdimensional whatnots and all. at face value while discounting unprovable religious mumbojumbo all the time.
I agree that if something is not testable then it is not science. I also agree that we should not accept things as true without adequate evidence. But, I've noticed a trend of people who seem to just about (if not whole-heartedly) deify science and I guess I don't fully understand why.
What I mean is that if something cannot be proven scientifically it is claimed either (1) it does not exist or (2) should not be accepted unless and until it can be proven scientifically. Since when does science answer everything? Science has a limited domain in which it operates. If you try to apply it outside of that domain it breaks down.
For instance, to quote from: here... "Science never will be able to observe or explain such concepts as love, hate, sorrow, or joy. Science never will be able to explain why a man in a foxhole during a war throws himself on a hand grenade to save his fellow soldiers."
I have never seen, tasted, touched, smelled, or heard love. I have observed the effects and expression of love, but not love itself. If I were to apply science only, I would say love does not exist. Love is not something that is testable. Yet, we know that love does exist as much as hate, sorrow, and joy. In such cases, we use logic and reasoning, without the scientific method, and still come to a valid and truthful conclusion.
The same follows in a court of law. Science can aide in solving a crime and bringing about an innocent or guilty verdict based on that evidence. But there are times where the truth is not ascertained by science, but by eye witness testimony. If 100 people confess to seeing a crime, and their stories match up very closely, then through logic and reasoning, the truth is discovered. There are no scientific hypotheses or tests performed.
So, I have a question to which I would appreciate some honest answers. Despite the tone of this post, I am not trying to start a flamewar. I really would like to understand some alternative viewpoints.
Why is it we readily accept things proven scientifically, yet reject those things that cannot be proven scientifically, but can be proven with other valid means (e.g., logic and reasoning)?
All this short URL stuff sounds like some phishing scam if you ask me. Short cryptic URLs obviously exist to make me transpose a couple of letters or numbers and end up at some fake bank site. No, give me large detailed URLs so I can see those dead giveaways like pid=poor_sucker&sid=steal_credit_card_info !
Short URLs indeed... no thank you Nigerian scammers... I won't be transferring any large sums today!
I agree with those who say it is a good thing that students think critically so as to come to the truth. I just don't agree with the conclusion that Creationism has no scientific evidence in support of it and that it is all theological.
And I was well aware before I even looked at one comment what the majority of posters would think of evolution vs. Creationism. Too many/. articles have already shown me how easy it is to predict the type of responses that'll occur.
However, I would like to ask a rhetorical question or two... For those who insist Creationism has no scientific evidence, that it's hypothetical or slight of hand or based on bad science or misrepresenting science...
How much research have YOU actually put into researching what Creationists have to say scientifically speaking? And I'm not talking about what some Creationist zealot told you about it. Nor am I talking about what the media or some professor told you about it. How much have YOU PERSONALLY researched on the matter from those considered authorities and educated in Creationism?
We all know there are evolutionist zealots who support evolution without really understanding what it says or by their own study of the theory. The same goes for Creationism. So, I implore you to ask yourself honestly and put on your critical thinking caps and ask yourselves if YOU have REALLY researched and used critical thinking skills *OR* if you are parroting what someone else told you. And if you are parroting, is your disbelief in Creationism your own or by proxy? The same goes for evolution... is your belief in it because you KNOW it is truth, or is it a proxy belief?
I say all this because I've seen plenty of people who claim to be Christians, but are little more than Christians by proxy. I have no doubts whatsoever that there are evolutionists by proxy. Now whether you reply to me or not is not the point. The point is do you believe evolution by proxy? Are you being academically honest or not?
I may agree about GM marketing and the like, but I disagree on GM's ability to build a car...
The Malibu was (and maybe still is?) the best selling car in North America and the only car really selling for quite a few months.
I also have a friend who's an ASC certified master mechanic who says he sees A LOT of Toyotas in the shop vs. GM vehicles for more than trivial matters. One guy, for instance, needed an all new motor on his brand new $15k Toyota car b/c the fuel pump got backed up & blew due to some other faulty design. He's also told me that Toyota (along with Honda and Nissan) tend to have lots of electrical issues. I care not who has the best car in initial quality. That means squat when the car is 5-10 years old... tell me what will last for the long haul.
While I don't agree with everything GM does or decisions its up echelons make, when it comes to quality I'd take a GM anything over a Toyota!
Albeit, I'd also take a Subaru as those are supposed to be reliable as well.
I know there are plenty of people who have trouble with calculus and other higher forms of math. But, it's scary to think that the difference between $0.002 and 0.002c is well understood!
No wonder the guy posted the phone call on YouTube.
I know there are plenty of people who have trouble with calculus and other higher forms of math. But, it's scary to think that the difference between $0.002 and 0.002c is well understood!
No wonder the guy posted the phone call on YouTube.
I had that thought too. If we're going to give money to individuals at all, it should be to their debts (homes, student loans, etc.). And it should go to those who have a track record of working hard, but just ran into tough times beyond their abilities. It still helps them, without the temptation to waste money on non-essentials. If we're going to spend our grand-children and great grand-children's tax dollars, we owe it to them to at least do something intelligent with the money.
AGREED! Science is not something to be decided in a committee regardless of your belief in God or lack thereof.
And why does anyone have a problem with evolution's "strengths and weaknesses" being taught? If it is proven fact, as many say or heavily imply, then why have a problem teaching both? If it is truth then no one should be afraid to question it because the truth will hold up. No, I surmise that many (if not most) evolutionists know they are standing on shaky ground and are afraid the truth will prove otherwise for them. Many scientists have turned and are turning to ID for a reason. They see flaws in evolutionary theory. And many of those same scientists do not believe in God. They just know something is fishy in evolution land.
I say to be truly objective, teach evolution's strengths and weaknesses and put ID in the curriculum (strengths and weaknesses) too.
I submit "modern science" is not very objective at all and that scientists of past centuries would shake their heads to see how subjective the studies & conclusions have become.
I test drove a Cobalt SS back around Christmas time. It's rated at 22/30 as is my 2000 Saturn LS1. The LT version of the Cobalt is rated at 25/37.
Yes, foreign cars may be efficient, but give GM some credit... their cars are competitive in fuel economy these days.
On another note, I agree with the people having 10-20 year old cars b/c that's what they can afford. That's why I bought my Saturn last year. I know the thing will last and even if I have to fork over $$ for fixes (e.g., my blower motor is going out - $250 to replace), it's still cheaper than paying 5 times as much on a newer car with similar specs. The feds program may help *some*, but for people like me, it means nothing.
First tip: Consider learning styles... I remember learning Pascal under Turbo Pascal 7 in 10th grade... I am a visual hands-on learner and *hated* being forced to sit and listen to the teacher explain it on the board and wanting us to read about it. I ended up ignoring most of it and just learning as I went. So, please consider that, gifted or not, you'll need to cater to different styles of learning.
Second tip: Don't underestimate how far these kids can go. Teach them the basics in whatever language / environment you decide, but be ready for more advanced techniques if they surprise you.
Third tip: Avoid any language that is too far removed from the hardware. They may not be ready for assembler, but using Perl, PHP, Java, or anything else that does a lot of under-the-hood stuff for you won't really help them.
You can mod me flamebait or troll if you want, but I could care less what Biden's record is. Obama proved to me long ago that he is not capable of being an effective and trustworthy president. For that matter, McCain is not getting my vote either, and I usually vote Republican.
Frankly, both candidates have strengthened my desire to vote... for someone else!
What about this?... one day as non-volatile memory based on carbon nanotubes becomes more prevalent and cheaper they'll slap that on the "CPU" die as well... Remember this company? Nantero. What you'll have in the mobile market is a CPU core, a GPU core, and probably a good 512MB non-volatile memory all in one die. Also, with stuff like the PPC chip PA Semi is working on, see here, we'll probably see pcie, sata, gigabit ethernet controllers built-in as well. So what do you have?... quite the small system with low latency and power consumption. And for a bonus, you'll probably eventually have carbon-nanotube memory off-die as well in place of a hard drive. So those "yeah, that's fake" computers we see in movies that look like a medical tricorder with gigs of storage, will actually be real. Now, of course, this is years off, but I like the direction. I especially like the idea of 10's to 100's of gigs in a single carbon-nanotube based DIMM (or whatever is out then) or flash-drive replacement. Then we can finally shed hard drives, optical drives, and the like for purely non-mechanical devices (w/ the exception of course that tape-backups and such will likely still be present, but less so for the consumer market).
I would like to think that Ciders would be ported to Linux (x86/x86-64 of course) for Linux gamers. This might be enough to get more people to try out Linux... I have Ubuntu 6.06 on my 15" Powerbook and my wife has no problems using it (she's not a techie at all).
When we were selling our athlon64 and going down to a dual P2 450 (needed the $$), I went through some non-sense with winxp pro's activation stuff on the dual P2 box. My wife then asked me why we didn't just use Linux instead (I was shocked, but glad)... If I had had time to mess w/ setting up Wine I might have been able to skip Windows altogether. But for now the machine is still a dual boot box, only for the games!
Long story short: windows / online flash games are the only real thing holding us to Windows. Otherwise she, and much of the upcoming generations (we're in our late 20's), could handle the switch. And agree or not, Vista + its DRM stuff + its delays, is just stupid enough to push a few more people towards Linux (every bit counts).
Funny thing is I used to feel that Windows was "good enough" (especially 2000/XP) to give it the benefit of the doubt. But for the last six months or so, Windows and Microsoft has just really annoyed me to no end... Now I'm really pushing for Linux to take a sizeable chunk of the desktop OS market, so that the world can have stuff that works, is stable, fairly secure out of the box, with all the most needed tools for productivity and entertainment, and FREE (in both senses)!
this kind of thing has been in the works for quite a long time and in much worse ways than mentioned in the article... The USA tends to make laws to fight *symptoms* of problems and not to cure the problems themselves. This is a prime example:
And I know some will scoff at this or think me nuts, that's fine. If you feel you must mod me down, that's fine too. I just want to throw out some food for thought to those who will care...
These kinds of actions (reactionary laws vs. teaching proper morals) along with the recent hurricanes and terrorist attacks all sound to me like God is warning the U.S. to shape up or prepare to face extinction as a nation. This would not be the first time in history He has done so. And I'm not talking about the end of the world or some miraculous event wiping out most of America. No, I'm talking about God's providence working to discipline those who refuse to obey Him.
And for those who are so inclined, read (or re-read) the books of the prophets... Over and over again nations are wiped out (particularly those with the *most* power and arrogance) and replaced by other nations as the dominating force in the world. And for those who are skeptical about the Bible's accounts of these nations, check archaeological history... Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medes & Persians, Greeks, Romans, etc, etc.
Let me be clear... I am not suggesting panic. Nor do I think we need any "John 3:16" signs like at the end of Ghostbusters. Just suggesting some serious reflection and consideration to those on/. who believe in God (and to those who are willing to research God and the Bible with an open mind).
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone else starting to get the impression that politicians across the country (especially federal ones) LIKE playing Russian Roulette with their careers lately?
I say vote them out... if you don't represent ME and MY FELLOW constituents, then you have no business holding your office. To such politicians I say, "Consider yourself fired."
</venting>
I actually wouldn't mind a 12.1" LCD on a laptop running 2560x1600 ... when coding it helps A LOT to have as much real estate as possible w/o having a massive laptop to lug around.
I know you're kidding, but the sad thing is that this is probably just company lawyers trying to justify their jobs. Most TI engineers are likely to not care or love the hacks for the geek factor. TI ought to capitalize on this, not suppress it.
I wouldn't reply to this except it involves a pet peeve of mine...
"The truth isn't just relative" -- the truth is NEVER relative, only one's perceptions of truth are relative.
1. Laboratory conditions. Check.
2. "The new findings map out a series of simple, efficient chemical reactions that could have formed molecules of RNA..." Check.
3. Proof of abiogenesis. Not a chance.
4. Someone with a time machine that can verify it. Nope.
Abiogenesis still remains philosophical at best, NOT science.
I grew up in Texas... I dunno about other states, but this isn't the first time some goofballs in the state thought messing with the ecosystem by introducing outside life was a good idea. They put "elephant ear" plants in the water in San Marcos and the things took over.
Maybe Bill Engvall is right and we do need signs on these people... and a place to where we can export them :-)
You get what you pay for. When I use popular open source, I trust that developers are competent and the software will work with few glitches, if any. But, I don't expect that I am entitled to sue for damages if it causes problems. That is, unless I paid Redhat, Novell, or someone else who promises specific guarantees against damages. Otherwise, I'm just glad for backups and start over.
Just some unsolicited advice (not like that happens much on /. ... </sarcasm>):
Treat it like going to a car dealership... If they want to know if you're paying cash or financing before you even test drive the car, politely tell them you'll worry about that later. In the case of the caddy, I'd say I'm considering purchasing one and just want to know more about it and the price. If they want to look up the serial number or anything, remind them that you are just looking and considering at this point. If you like the pitch you can buy one or come back another time and buy one. If they're stupid enough to not want your business, then let them keep their merchandise and lose a sale. As much as I believe in strong morals and ethics in all areas of life, it's a pretty stupid salesman that refuses a sale on a "what if" assumption.
I understand the concern, but I'm not that worried about it... they are not using them in missiles, aircraft, ships, etc. They are using them as supplements for calculations, video players, and remote controls for small robots. While there could be problems, they are likely to be on the smaller scale. And knowing how strict the military is on specs, I imagine they tested at least a few before mass distribution.
I mock religion all the time. I have to hold science and scientists up to the same standard. I'd be a hypocrite to accept unprovable scientific mumbojumbo, interdimensional whatnots and all. at face value while discounting unprovable religious mumbojumbo all the time.
I agree that if something is not testable then it is not science. I also agree that we should not accept things as true without adequate evidence. But, I've noticed a trend of people who seem to just about (if not whole-heartedly) deify science and I guess I don't fully understand why.
What I mean is that if something cannot be proven scientifically it is claimed either (1) it does not exist or (2) should not be accepted unless and until it can be proven scientifically. Since when does science answer everything? Science has a limited domain in which it operates. If you try to apply it outside of that domain it breaks down.
For instance, to quote from: here ... "Science never will be able to observe or explain such concepts as love, hate, sorrow, or joy. Science never will be able to explain why a man in a foxhole during a war throws himself on a hand grenade to save his fellow soldiers."
I have never seen, tasted, touched, smelled, or heard love. I have observed the effects and expression of love, but not love itself. If I were to apply science only, I would say love does not exist. Love is not something that is testable. Yet, we know that love does exist as much as hate, sorrow, and joy. In such cases, we use logic and reasoning, without the scientific method, and still come to a valid and truthful conclusion.
The same follows in a court of law. Science can aide in solving a crime and bringing about an innocent or guilty verdict based on that evidence. But there are times where the truth is not ascertained by science, but by eye witness testimony. If 100 people confess to seeing a crime, and their stories match up very closely, then through logic and reasoning, the truth is discovered. There are no scientific hypotheses or tests performed.
So, I have a question to which I would appreciate some honest answers. Despite the tone of this post, I am not trying to start a flamewar. I really would like to understand some alternative viewpoints.
Why is it we readily accept things proven scientifically, yet reject those things that cannot be proven scientifically, but can be proven with other valid means (e.g., logic and reasoning)?
All this short URL stuff sounds like some phishing scam if you ask me. Short cryptic URLs obviously exist to make me transpose a couple of letters or numbers and end up at some fake bank site. No, give me large detailed URLs so I can see those dead giveaways like pid=poor_sucker&sid=steal_credit_card_info !
Short URLs indeed... no thank you Nigerian scammers... I won't be transferring any large sums today!
On a serious note, why is this news exactly?
I agree with those who say it is a good thing that students think critically so as to come to the truth. I just don't agree with the conclusion that Creationism has no scientific evidence in support of it and that it is all theological.
And I was well aware before I even looked at one comment what the majority of posters would think of evolution vs. Creationism. Too many /. articles have already shown me how easy it is to predict the type of responses that'll occur.
However, I would like to ask a rhetorical question or two... For those who insist Creationism has no scientific evidence, that it's hypothetical or slight of hand or based on bad science or misrepresenting science...
How much research have YOU actually put into researching what Creationists have to say scientifically speaking? And I'm not talking about what some Creationist zealot told you about it. Nor am I talking about what the media or some professor told you about it. How much have YOU PERSONALLY researched on the matter from those considered authorities and educated in Creationism?
We all know there are evolutionist zealots who support evolution without really understanding what it says or by their own study of the theory. The same goes for Creationism. So, I implore you to ask yourself honestly and put on your critical thinking caps and ask yourselves if YOU have REALLY researched and used critical thinking skills *OR* if you are parroting what someone else told you. And if you are parroting, is your disbelief in Creationism your own or by proxy? The same goes for evolution... is your belief in it because you KNOW it is truth, or is it a proxy belief?
I say all this because I've seen plenty of people who claim to be Christians, but are little more than Christians by proxy. I have no doubts whatsoever that there are evolutionists by proxy. Now whether you reply to me or not is not the point. The point is do you believe evolution by proxy? Are you being academically honest or not?
Just don't upset the ALPHA overload and you should be fine. Otherwise, he met send you on a one way trip on the Itanic.
I may agree about GM marketing and the like, but I disagree on GM's ability to build a car...
The Malibu was (and maybe still is?) the best selling car in North America and the only car really selling for quite a few months.
I also have a friend who's an ASC certified master mechanic who says he sees A LOT of Toyotas in the shop vs. GM vehicles for more than trivial matters. One guy, for instance, needed an all new motor on his brand new $15k Toyota car b/c the fuel pump got backed up & blew due to some other faulty design. He's also told me that Toyota (along with Honda and Nissan) tend to have lots of electrical issues. I care not who has the best car in initial quality. That means squat when the car is 5-10 years old... tell me what will last for the long haul.
While I don't agree with everything GM does or decisions its up echelons make, when it comes to quality I'd take a GM anything over a Toyota!
Albeit, I'd also take a Subaru as those are supposed to be reliable as well.
I know there are plenty of people who have trouble with calculus and other higher forms of math. But, it's scary to think that the difference between $0.002 and 0.002c is well understood!
No wonder the guy posted the phone call on YouTube.
Doh... I'm going to be my own grammar nazi...
...is NOT well understood!
I know there are plenty of people who have trouble with calculus and other higher forms of math. But, it's scary to think that the difference between $0.002 and 0.002c is well understood!
No wonder the guy posted the phone call on YouTube.
I had that thought too. If we're going to give money to individuals at all, it should be to their debts (homes, student loans, etc.). And it should go to those who have a track record of working hard, but just ran into tough times beyond their abilities. It still helps them, without the temptation to waste money on non-essentials. If we're going to spend our grand-children and great grand-children's tax dollars, we owe it to them to at least do something intelligent with the money.
AGREED! Science is not something to be decided in a committee regardless of your belief in God or lack thereof.
And why does anyone have a problem with evolution's "strengths and weaknesses" being taught? If it is proven fact, as many say or heavily imply, then why have a problem teaching both? If it is truth then no one should be afraid to question it because the truth will hold up. No, I surmise that many (if not most) evolutionists know they are standing on shaky ground and are afraid the truth will prove otherwise for them. Many scientists have turned and are turning to ID for a reason. They see flaws in evolutionary theory. And many of those same scientists do not believe in God. They just know something is fishy in evolution land.
I say to be truly objective, teach evolution's strengths and weaknesses and put ID in the curriculum (strengths and weaknesses) too.
I submit "modern science" is not very objective at all and that scientists of past centuries would shake their heads to see how subjective the studies & conclusions have become.
Agreed!
I test drove a Cobalt SS back around Christmas time. It's rated at 22/30 as is my 2000 Saturn LS1. The LT version of the Cobalt is rated at 25/37.
Yes, foreign cars may be efficient, but give GM some credit... their cars are competitive in fuel economy these days.
On another note, I agree with the people having 10-20 year old cars b/c that's what they can afford. That's why I bought my Saturn last year. I know the thing will last and even if I have to fork over $$ for fixes (e.g., my blower motor is going out - $250 to replace), it's still cheaper than paying 5 times as much on a newer car with similar specs. The feds program may help *some*, but for people like me, it means nothing.
for (;;) {
for (i=1000 ; i ; i--)
printf("meow\n");
cough_up_hairball();
sleep(1000 * 60 * 60 * 18);
}
There, fixed it for you.
First tip:
Consider learning styles... I remember learning Pascal under Turbo Pascal 7 in 10th grade... I am a visual hands-on learner and *hated* being forced to sit and listen to the teacher explain it on the board and wanting us to read about it. I ended up ignoring most of it and just learning as I went. So, please consider that, gifted or not, you'll need to cater to different styles of learning.
Second tip:
Don't underestimate how far these kids can go. Teach them the basics in whatever language / environment you decide, but be ready for more advanced techniques if they surprise you.
Third tip:
Avoid any language that is too far removed from the hardware. They may not be ready for assembler, but using Perl, PHP, Java, or anything else that does a lot of under-the-hood stuff for you won't really help them.
You can mod me flamebait or troll if you want, but I could care less what Biden's record is. Obama proved to me long ago that he is not capable of being an effective and trustworthy president. For that matter, McCain is not getting my vote either, and I usually vote Republican.
Frankly, both candidates have strengthened my desire to vote... for someone else!
What about this? ... one day as non-volatile memory based on carbon nanotubes becomes more prevalent and cheaper they'll slap that on the "CPU" die as well... Remember this company? Nantero. What you'll have in the mobile market is a CPU core, a GPU core, and probably a good 512MB non-volatile memory all in one die. Also, with stuff like the PPC chip PA Semi is working on, see here, we'll probably see pcie, sata, gigabit ethernet controllers built-in as well. So what do you have? ... quite the small system with low latency and power consumption. And for a bonus, you'll probably eventually have carbon-nanotube memory off-die as well in place of a hard drive. So those "yeah, that's fake" computers we see in movies that look like a medical tricorder with gigs of storage, will actually be real. Now, of course, this is years off, but I like the direction. I especially like the idea of 10's to 100's of gigs in a single carbon-nanotube based DIMM (or whatever is out then) or flash-drive replacement. Then we can finally shed hard drives, optical drives, and the like for purely non-mechanical devices (w/ the exception of course that tape-backups and such will likely still be present, but less so for the consumer market).
OK, time to stop dreaming and get back to work.
I would like to think that Ciders would be ported to Linux (x86/x86-64 of course) for Linux gamers. This might be enough to get more people to try out Linux... I have Ubuntu 6.06 on my 15" Powerbook and my wife has no problems using it (she's not a techie at all).
When we were selling our athlon64 and going down to a dual P2 450 (needed the $$), I went through some non-sense with winxp pro's activation stuff on the dual P2 box. My wife then asked me why we didn't just use Linux instead (I was shocked, but glad)... If I had had time to mess w/ setting up Wine I might have been able to skip Windows altogether. But for now the machine is still a dual boot box, only for the games!
Long story short: windows / online flash games are the only real thing holding us to Windows. Otherwise she, and much of the upcoming generations (we're in our late 20's), could handle the switch. And agree or not, Vista + its DRM stuff + its delays, is just stupid enough to push a few more people towards Linux (every bit counts).
Funny thing is I used to feel that Windows was "good enough" (especially 2000/XP) to give it the benefit of the doubt. But for the last six months or so, Windows and Microsoft has just really annoyed me to no end... Now I'm really pushing for Linux to take a sizeable chunk of the desktop OS market, so that the world can have stuff that works, is stable, fairly secure out of the box, with all the most needed tools for productivity and entertainment, and FREE (in both senses)!
this kind of thing has been in the works for quite a long time and in much worse ways than mentioned in the article... The USA tends to make laws to fight *symptoms* of problems and not to cure the problems themselves. This is a prime example:
d ept_id=7021&newsid=16606489&PAG=461&rfi=9
/. who believe in God (and to those who are willing to research God and the Bible with an open mind).
http://www.troyrecord.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1170&
And I know some will scoff at this or think me nuts, that's fine. If you feel you must mod me down, that's fine too. I just want to throw out some food for thought to those who will care...
These kinds of actions (reactionary laws vs. teaching proper morals) along with the recent hurricanes and terrorist attacks all sound to me like God is warning the U.S. to shape up or prepare to face extinction as a nation. This would not be the first time in history He has done so. And I'm not talking about the end of the world or some miraculous event wiping out most of America. No, I'm talking about God's providence working to discipline those who refuse to obey Him.
And for those who are so inclined, read (or re-read) the books of the prophets... Over and over again nations are wiped out (particularly those with the *most* power and arrogance) and replaced by other nations as the dominating force in the world. And for those who are skeptical about the Bible's accounts of these nations, check archaeological history... Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medes & Persians, Greeks, Romans, etc, etc.
Let me be clear... I am not suggesting panic. Nor do I think we need any "John 3:16" signs like at the end of Ghostbusters. Just suggesting some serious reflection and consideration to those on