I have no problem with the language, not in the least fucking bit; it is appropriate to the topic.
It is also the submitter's and the slashdot editors' responsibilities to be professional. This is a work friendly site, and I like to opportunity to choose to go into the uncensored discussions.
There was a story a few months ago where goddamn was used in the story description on the front page. I commented on it, got called a religious zealot fuckhead idiot (i'm none of those (to me at least)) and got modded insightful, troll, insightful, overrated, troll and flamebait.
The players are expected to sell for between about $700 to $800.
If I can't stick this thing in my pocket, I'll keep my laptop. If I can stick it in my pocket, the screen's too small. For that money, I'll get an iPod and a used iBook.
There are 13 stories on the front page right now. Of these, only one of them has extra commentary from the slashdot staff, and it's only to point out an earlier story!
Now if we can just keep the bias-out-of-the-dept dept, we'll be set.
By unrealistic, I hope you mean 'unreal' or fantastic because it actually was possible. It took a little more than AppleScript, though, and Apple took a little flack for that.
I agree that the communicator style won't (or shouldn't, imho) bode well for public communication.
From the hardwired rotary of the past to the 24th century communicator, we're evolving from both sides into something ~almost, but not quite entirely~ like the phones we have today. You're suggesting a small phone with voice dialing almost perfectly.
I remember an Apple Quadra commercial from 1990 or 91 where a little kid says, 'Computer, call Grandma.' The only different thing 14 years later is the form factor.
An 80' meteorite caused Meteor Crater at 4000 feet across. The original asteroid was much larger. I suppose 'Meteor Crater' has a better ring to it than 'meteorite crater.'
A meteor is simply the light display of a meteoroid entering the earth's atmosphere. Meteor == shooting star.
Correction, part two: Asteroid: the object before it touches our atmosphere; a large meteoroid. Meteorite: The rock after it hits the ground. Meteor: The light display of a meteoroid entering the earth's atmosphere.
...and even quitting in protest of the new policy.
Ask to be an exception to this rule. If they don't make the exception, quit or deal with it. If you quit, post the name of your employer; i'm sure more than one local slashdotter would ~love~ your job, even with this *ahem* horrible new policy in place.
The expansion of space doesn't make our viewable area smaller. It makes fewer things viewable.
If we're accelerating away from some galaxy at c or greater, that galaxy will fade out of our view. We can still see that specific distance and beyond, just not that particular object. If a car drove away from us at c for 5 minutes, we couldn't see it, but it can still be within our viewable area.
They're simply 'too fast to see.' Our horizon isn't shrinking, it is growing at a speed (a measly c) that might be less than the speed at which objects move away from us.
We're not seeing older things than previously possible because of the speed of light. The distances we can survey is 500 light years more than 500 years ago. This distance is trivial and negligible. You're figuratively trying to figure in continental drift to find your car. We are simply spending more time to get the exposure on better equipment. Thanks, however, for the troll; I thought the sun turned off each night.
The fact is, we're seeing 186,000 miles further every second,...
No, no, no! We are NOT seeing 186,000 miles further every second. If that was true, it would take us a few minutes to see the sun every morning; the moon would fade in when we looked up at night; it would take us a few years staring the same direction to see any other stars!
What we ~are~ doing is gathering light for longer amounts of time on sensitive equipment. We are at the end of one amazingly narrow band of light. We need lots of that light to get images, thus more time. Your 'fact' is simply very, very far off base.
March 4, 2004 How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web By DON VAN NATTA Jr. and DESMOND BUTLER
ONDON, March 2 -- The terrorism investigation code-named Mont Blanc began almost by accident in April 2002, when authorities intercepted a cellphone call that lasted less than a minute and involved not a single word of conversation.
Investigators, suspicious that the call was a signal between terrorists, followed the trail first to one terror suspect, then to others, and eventually to terror cells on three continents.
What tied them together was a computer chip smaller than a fingernail. But before the investigation wound down in recent weeks, its global net caught dozens of suspected Qaeda members and disrupted at least three planned attacks in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, according to counterterrorism and intelligence officials in Europe and the United States.
The investigation helped narrow the search for one of the most wanted men in the world, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who is accused of being the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, according to three intelligence officials based in Europe. American authorities arrested Mr. Mohammed in Pakistan last March.
For two years, investigators now say, they were able to track the conversations and movements of several Qaeda leaders and dozens of operatives after determining that the suspects favored a particular brand of cellphone chip. The chips carry prepaid minutes and allow phone use around the world.
Investigators said they believed that the chips, made by Swisscom of Switzerland, were popular with terrorists because they could buy the chips without giving their names.
"They thought these phones protected their anonymity, but they didn't," said a senior intelligence official based in Europe. Even without personal information, the authorities were able to conduct routine monitoring of phone conversations.
A half dozen senior officials in the United States and Europe agreed to talk in detail about the previously undisclosed investigation because, they said, it was completed. They also said they had strong indications that terror suspects, alert to the phones' vulnerability, had largely abandoned them for important communications and instead were using e-mail, Internet phone calls and hand-delivered messages.
"This was one of the most effective tools we had to locate Al Qaeda," said a senior counterterrorism official in Europe. "The perception of anonymity may have lulled them into a false sense of security. We now believe that Al Qaeda has figured out that we were monitoring them through these phones."
The officials called the operation one of the most successful investigations since Sept. 11, 2001, and an example of unusual cooperation between agencies in different countries. Led by the Swiss, the investigation involved agents from more than a dozen countries, including the United States, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Britain and Italy.
Cellphones have played a major role in the constant jousting between terrorists and intelligence agencies. In their requests for more investigative powers, Attorney General John Ashcroft and other officials have repeatedly cited the importance of monitoring portable phones. Each success by investigators seems to drive terrorists either to more advanced -- or to more primitive -- communications.
During the American bombing of Tora Bora in Afghanistan in December 2001, American authorities reported hearing Osama bin Laden speaking to his associates on a satellite phone. Since then, Mr. bin Laden has communicated with handwritten messages delivered by trusted couriers, officials said.
In 2002 the German authorities broke up a cell after monitoring calls by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who has been linked by some top American officials to Al Qaeda, in which he could be heard ordering attacks on Jewish targets in Germany. Since then, investigators say, Mr. Zarqawi has been more cautious.
even though the NYT link works! (thanks google partnership)
_____________________
March 4, 2004
How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web
By DON VAN NATTA Jr. and DESMOND BUTLER
ONDON, March 2 -- The terrorism investigation code-named Mont Blanc began almost by accident in April 2002, when authorities intercepted a cellphone call that lasted less than a minute and involved not a single word of conversation.
Investigators, suspicious that the call was a signal between terrorists, followed the trail first to one terror suspect, then to others, and eventually to terror cells on three continents.
What tied them together was a computer chip smaller than a fingernail. But before the investigation wound down in recent weeks, its global net caught dozens of suspected Qaeda members and disrupted at least three planned attacks in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, according to counterterrorism and intelligence officials in Europe and the United States.
The investigation helped narrow the search for one of the most wanted men in the world, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who is accused of being the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, according to three intelligence officials based in Europe. American authorities arrested Mr. Mohammed in Pakistan last March.
For two years, investigators now say, they were able to track the conversations and movements of several Qaeda leaders and dozens of operatives after determining that the suspects favored a particular brand of cellphone chip. The chips carry prepaid minutes and allow phone use around the world.
Investigators said they believed that the chips, made by Swisscom of Switzerland, were popular with terrorists because they could buy the chips without giving their names.
"They thought these phones protected their anonymity, but they didn't," said a senior intelligence official based in Europe. Even without personal information, the authorities were able to conduct routine monitoring of phone conversations.
A half dozen senior officials in the United States and Europe agreed to talk in detail about the previously undisclosed investigation because, they said, it was completed. They also said they had strong indications that terror suspects, alert to the phones' vulnerability, had largely abandoned them for important communications and instead were using e-mail, Internet phone calls and hand-delivered messages.
"This was one of the most effective tools we had to locate Al Qaeda," said a senior counterterrorism official in Europe. "The perception of anonymity may have lulled them into a false sense of security. We now believe that Al Qaeda has figured out that we were monitoring them through these phones."
The officials called the operation one of the most successful investigations since Sept. 11, 2001, and an example of unusual cooperation between agencies in different countries. Led by the Swiss, the investigation involved agents from more than a dozen countries, including the United States, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Britain and Italy.
Cellphones have played a major role in the constant jousting between terrorists and intelligence agencies. In their requests for more investigative powers, Attorney General John Ashcroft and other officials have repeatedly cited the importance of monitoring portable phones. Each success by investigators seems to drive terrorists either to more advanced -- or to more primitive -- communications.
During the American bombing of Tora Bora in Afghanistan in December 2001, American authorities reported hearing Osama bin Laden speaking to his associates on a satellite phone. Since then, Mr. bin Laden has communicated with handwritten messages delivered by trusted couriers, officials said.
In 2002 the German authorities broke up a cell after monitoring calls by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who has been linked by some top American officials to Al Qaeda, in which he could be heard ordering attacks on Jewish targets in Germany. Since then, investigators say, Mr. Zarqawi has been more cautious.
"If you beat terrorists over the head enough, they lear
Email is not the next killer app; it is the killer app. I just emailed by boss and a client about a bad account number. Those people may not be in the office now. I've never met the client and I'm not about to ask for his Yahoo! ID.
I sent new documentation to a dozen of my coworkers yesterday; same story there.
I'm glad IM works exclusively for you. While IM use is growing rapidly, email use is as well.
I get no spam at work after 8 years. I get plenty at home, of course. If my company had it's own internal IM that didn't require public servers out of our control, it may be feasible, but our information will NOT be stored on MSN or Yahoo servers, PERIOD. There is simply no substitute for email. Yet. It will be the client and not the core concept that gets updated.
That's fine. I hope to see more people using this jargon and 133+ 5p34| Bob asked, "Where are we?" No one suspects you're asking a question.
Bob said, "Oh my gosh, that hurt!" We understand Bob's emphasis from context.
Your way isn't better. It is different and incorrect. I honestly don't care which you use. There is a difference between a Slashdot post and a CEO's public communication, true. I simply find it funny (as opposed to insightful) that gentlemoose is calling us asshats and saying, "Look at that black kettle." There are circumstances where punctuation can fall outside quotes, although you haven't presented one. "Logical quoting" is no more easily understood than proper grammar.
While I realize the bulk of you asshats can't spell your way out of a paper bag, one might expect that the CEO of nearly any corporation would care enough about his company's public image to run a public statement by *somebody* with an eye for grammar and spelling before publishing it on the net.
I would like to suggest that most of us asshats know not to put a space before quotes and not to put punctuation outside quotes. I also suspect most of us would try to put three different concepts in more than one sentence. You may call us asshats as you like.
I agree with your point, however; communications, especially corporate communications, should reflect professionalism. Misspellings and poor grammar (like yours and this CEO's) belong in grade school.
How can you insult and accuse the majority of us, fail the gentlemoose-knows-best test, and get moderated +5, Informative?
e:Minimize CPU usage, Maximize distance drivel
on
Quieting Your G5?
·
· Score: 1
what's +5 informative about 'distance your mic and computer?' this is an odd question? quit other programs? PLEASE. if you have (in your words) a small studio and you need advice like this, you're a LONG way from quality amateur recording. i was going to tear apart such gems as 'make sure it's close to your face,' but will instead offer advice that might actually help. other posters suggesting naively to run longer computer cables are no help either.
Run a mic cable under the door into another room. not only is that practiced by nearly every studio in the history of recording, it happens to be your cheapest fix. for more tips like this and a gazillion more, google on home recording studio help. you might find something that way.
there are dozens and dozens of books that address basic stuff like this. the best advice you'll get today is... ready for it?... go to the bookstore. a quick trip to a bookstore will do you a WORLD better than the +5, informative you'll find here. chances are, you'll answer the next 10 questions you'll have before you leave the store $20 lighter.
sorry for troll-ish behaviour, but i can't take the statement 'use final cut express' and find advice anywhere in it.
Why show the whole desktop (complete with terminal windows and task bars) that is 66% dead space when showing off one app that isn't a task bar or a terminal window?
Unfortunately, they couldn't figure out how to use the new selection tools.
Re:comes with the territory.(Score:4, Insightful)
by Salsaman (141471) on Wednesday February 18, @06:04AM (#8314389) I have never lied in my work. ...snip...
If lying is a part of your job, it's time to quit and find something else.
Let me see if I understand this correctly. You are complaining (on a website published in U.S. English) that a publication from the U.S. did not use the British spelling of 'spelled?' (Notice here that the question mark, like all punctuation, falls inside the quotes.) Your claim that most of the world uses 'spelt' is dubious at the least.
Searched the web for words spelled correctly. Results 1 - 100 of about 161,000. Search took 0.52 seconds. Searched the web for words spelt correctly. Results 1 - 100 of about 25,000. Search took 0.42 seconds.
There is an interesting article from the BBC (which I understand to be British) called Pupils 'struggling' with spelling, where 'spelt' is used once and 'spelled' is used at least six times.
I urge independent research into both ATI and NVIDIA.
Zen is a state of being and awareness. Your complaint shows your unfamiliarity with both Buddhism and Zen Buddhism. Zen as a concept has more in common with 'aware,' 'hungry' or 'green' than it does with Jesus. Zen is an aspect, not THE foundation of Buddhism, and often incidental to many Buddhists.
From Buddhanet.net--Buddhist means belonging to a particular community of people and following a path of life taught by the Buddhas (enlightened beings). Members of the Buddhist community are formally joined by taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma (the teaching) and the Sangha (the community of noble disciples).
What does Roxio's CD authoring software have to do with toast? Is Roxio being disrespectful?
Are you likely to care if a brand of mediocre jeans in China is called Jesus? People do far more insulting things in the name of Jesus than a computer company using a noun like Enlightenment.
the independent contracts i've read (which is a big 3) specifically name 'the collection of works known hereafter as [The Album],...' which does not mention different audio formats. That album in one exact format is handled as one entity as a body of work. This would not include double royalties for.mp3 or.wma or any 'data' format. I don't know if ASCAP or artists' unions think differently on bigger labels.
Slashdot Mirror
I have no problem with the language, not in the least fucking bit; it is appropriate to the topic.
It is also the submitter's and the slashdot editors' responsibilities to be professional. This is a work friendly site, and I like to opportunity to choose to go into the uncensored discussions.
There was a story a few months ago where goddamn was used in the story description on the front page. I commented on it, got called a religious zealot fuckhead idiot (i'm none of those (to me at least)) and got modded insightful, troll, insightful, overrated, troll and flamebait.
I think the right thing was done today.
The players are expected to sell for between about $700 to $800.
If I can't stick this thing in my pocket, I'll keep my laptop. If I can stick it in my pocket, the screen's too small. For that money, I'll get an iPod and a used iBook.
There are 13 stories on the front page right now. Of these, only one of them has extra commentary from the slashdot staff, and it's only to point out an earlier story!
Now if we can just keep the bias-out-of-the-dept dept, we'll be set.
By unrealistic, I hope you mean 'unreal' or fantastic because it actually was possible. It took a little more than AppleScript, though, and Apple took a little flack for that.
I agree that the communicator style won't (or shouldn't, imho) bode well for public communication.
From the hardwired rotary of the past to the 24th century communicator, we're evolving from both sides into something ~almost, but not quite entirely~ like the phones we have today. You're suggesting a small phone with voice dialing almost perfectly.
I remember an Apple Quadra commercial from 1990 or 91 where a little kid says, 'Computer, call Grandma.' The only different thing 14 years later is the form factor.
An 80' meteorite caused Meteor Crater at 4000 feet across. The original asteroid was much larger. I suppose 'Meteor Crater' has a better ring to it than 'meteorite crater.'
A meteor is simply the light display of a meteoroid entering the earth's atmosphere. Meteor == shooting star.
Correction, part two:
Asteroid: the object before it touches our atmosphere; a large meteoroid.
Meteorite: The rock after it hits the ground.
Meteor: The light display of a meteoroid entering the earth's atmosphere.
...and even quitting in protest of the new policy.
Ask to be an exception to this rule. If they don't make the exception, quit or deal with it. If you quit, post the name of your employer; i'm sure more than one local slashdotter would ~love~ your job, even with this *ahem* horrible new policy in place.
slashdot.org is much better. If we needed complete info in TLDs, we'd need slashdot.dupe-and-troll-factory-im-cmdrtaco-i-rule
The expansion of space doesn't make our viewable area smaller. It makes fewer things viewable.
If we're accelerating away from some galaxy at c or greater, that galaxy will fade out of our view. We can still see that specific distance and beyond, just not that particular object. If a car drove away from us at c for 5 minutes, we couldn't see it, but it can still be within our viewable area.
They're simply 'too fast to see.' Our horizon isn't shrinking, it is growing at a speed (a measly c) that might be less than the speed at which objects move away from us.
We're not seeing older things than previously possible because of the speed of light. The distances we can survey is 500 light years more than 500 years ago. This distance is trivial and negligible. You're figuratively trying to figure in continental drift to find your car. We are simply spending more time to get the exposure on better equipment. Thanks, however, for the troll; I thought the sun turned off each night.
The fact is, we're seeing 186,000 miles further every second, ...
No, no, no! We are NOT seeing 186,000 miles further every second. If that was true, it would take us a few minutes to see the sun every morning; the moon would fade in when we looked up at night; it would take us a few years staring the same direction to see any other stars!
What we ~are~ doing is gathering light for longer amounts of time on sensitive equipment. We are at the end of one amazingly narrow band of light. We need lots of that light to get images, thus more time. Your 'fact' is simply very, very far off base.
"What if the Ring wasn't Really destroyed. We could make a sequel!"
Next time you pull something like that, make sure you put A SPOILER WARNING in your subject. Now I don't have to see it at all. Thanks a lot.
March 4, 2004
How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web
By DON VAN NATTA Jr. and DESMOND BUTLER
ONDON, March 2 -- The terrorism investigation code-named Mont Blanc began almost by accident in April 2002, when authorities intercepted a cellphone call that lasted less than a minute and involved not a single word of conversation.
Investigators, suspicious that the call was a signal between terrorists, followed the trail first to one terror suspect, then to others, and eventually to terror cells on three continents.
What tied them together was a computer chip smaller than a fingernail. But before the investigation wound down in recent weeks, its global net caught dozens of suspected Qaeda members and disrupted at least three planned attacks in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, according to counterterrorism and intelligence officials in Europe and the United States.
The investigation helped narrow the search for one of the most wanted men in the world, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who is accused of being the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, according to three intelligence officials based in Europe. American authorities arrested Mr. Mohammed in Pakistan last March.
For two years, investigators now say, they were able to track the conversations and movements of several Qaeda leaders and dozens of operatives after determining that the suspects favored a particular brand of cellphone chip. The chips carry prepaid minutes and allow phone use around the world.
Investigators said they believed that the chips, made by Swisscom of Switzerland, were popular with terrorists because they could buy the chips without giving their names.
"They thought these phones protected their anonymity, but they didn't," said a senior intelligence official based in Europe. Even without personal information, the authorities were able to conduct routine monitoring of phone conversations.
A half dozen senior officials in the United States and Europe agreed to talk in detail about the previously undisclosed investigation because, they said, it was completed. They also said they had strong indications that terror suspects, alert to the phones' vulnerability, had largely abandoned them for important communications and instead were using e-mail, Internet phone calls and hand-delivered messages.
"This was one of the most effective tools we had to locate Al Qaeda," said a senior counterterrorism official in Europe. "The perception of anonymity may have lulled them into a false sense of security. We now believe that Al Qaeda has figured out that we were monitoring them through these phones."
The officials called the operation one of the most successful investigations since Sept. 11, 2001, and an example of unusual cooperation between agencies in different countries. Led by the Swiss, the investigation involved agents from more than a dozen countries, including the United States, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Britain and Italy.
Cellphones have played a major role in the constant jousting between terrorists and intelligence agencies. In their requests for more investigative powers, Attorney General John Ashcroft and other officials have repeatedly cited the importance of monitoring portable phones. Each success by investigators seems to drive terrorists either to more advanced -- or to more primitive -- communications.
During the American bombing of Tora Bora in Afghanistan in December 2001, American authorities reported hearing Osama bin Laden speaking to his associates on a satellite phone. Since then, Mr. bin Laden has communicated with handwritten messages delivered by trusted couriers, officials said.
In 2002 the German authorities broke up a cell after monitoring calls by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who has been linked by some top American officials to Al Qaeda, in which he could be heard ordering attacks on Jewish targets in Germany. Since then, investigators say, Mr. Zarqawi has been more cautious.
"If you beat terrorists over the h
even though the NYT link works! (thanks google partnership) _____________________ March 4, 2004 How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web By DON VAN NATTA Jr. and DESMOND BUTLER ONDON, March 2 -- The terrorism investigation code-named Mont Blanc began almost by accident in April 2002, when authorities intercepted a cellphone call that lasted less than a minute and involved not a single word of conversation. Investigators, suspicious that the call was a signal between terrorists, followed the trail first to one terror suspect, then to others, and eventually to terror cells on three continents. What tied them together was a computer chip smaller than a fingernail. But before the investigation wound down in recent weeks, its global net caught dozens of suspected Qaeda members and disrupted at least three planned attacks in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, according to counterterrorism and intelligence officials in Europe and the United States. The investigation helped narrow the search for one of the most wanted men in the world, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who is accused of being the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, according to three intelligence officials based in Europe. American authorities arrested Mr. Mohammed in Pakistan last March. For two years, investigators now say, they were able to track the conversations and movements of several Qaeda leaders and dozens of operatives after determining that the suspects favored a particular brand of cellphone chip. The chips carry prepaid minutes and allow phone use around the world. Investigators said they believed that the chips, made by Swisscom of Switzerland, were popular with terrorists because they could buy the chips without giving their names. "They thought these phones protected their anonymity, but they didn't," said a senior intelligence official based in Europe. Even without personal information, the authorities were able to conduct routine monitoring of phone conversations. A half dozen senior officials in the United States and Europe agreed to talk in detail about the previously undisclosed investigation because, they said, it was completed. They also said they had strong indications that terror suspects, alert to the phones' vulnerability, had largely abandoned them for important communications and instead were using e-mail, Internet phone calls and hand-delivered messages. "This was one of the most effective tools we had to locate Al Qaeda," said a senior counterterrorism official in Europe. "The perception of anonymity may have lulled them into a false sense of security. We now believe that Al Qaeda has figured out that we were monitoring them through these phones." The officials called the operation one of the most successful investigations since Sept. 11, 2001, and an example of unusual cooperation between agencies in different countries. Led by the Swiss, the investigation involved agents from more than a dozen countries, including the United States, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Britain and Italy. Cellphones have played a major role in the constant jousting between terrorists and intelligence agencies. In their requests for more investigative powers, Attorney General John Ashcroft and other officials have repeatedly cited the importance of monitoring portable phones. Each success by investigators seems to drive terrorists either to more advanced -- or to more primitive -- communications. During the American bombing of Tora Bora in Afghanistan in December 2001, American authorities reported hearing Osama bin Laden speaking to his associates on a satellite phone. Since then, Mr. bin Laden has communicated with handwritten messages delivered by trusted couriers, officials said. In 2002 the German authorities broke up a cell after monitoring calls by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who has been linked by some top American officials to Al Qaeda, in which he could be heard ordering attacks on Jewish targets in Germany. Since then, investigators say, Mr. Zarqawi has been more cautious. "If you beat terrorists over the head enough, they lear
Email is not the next killer app; it is the killer app. I just emailed by boss and a client about a bad account number. Those people may not be in the office now. I've never met the client and I'm not about to ask for his Yahoo! ID.
I sent new documentation to a dozen of my coworkers yesterday; same story there.
I'm glad IM works exclusively for you. While IM use is growing rapidly, email use is as well.
I get no spam at work after 8 years. I get plenty at home, of course. If my company had it's own internal IM that didn't require public servers out of our control, it may be feasible, but our information will NOT be stored on MSN or Yahoo servers, PERIOD. There is simply no substitute for email. Yet. It will be the client and not the core concept that gets updated.
That's fine. I hope to see more people using this jargon and 133+ 5p34|
Bob asked, "Where are we?" No one suspects you're asking a question.
Bob said, "Oh my gosh, that hurt!" We understand Bob's emphasis from context.
Your way isn't better. It is different and incorrect. I honestly don't care which you use. There is a difference between a Slashdot post and a CEO's public communication, true. I simply find it funny (as opposed to insightful) that gentlemoose is calling us asshats and saying, "Look at that black kettle." There are circumstances where punctuation can fall outside quotes, although you haven't presented one. "Logical quoting" is no more easily understood than proper grammar.
... on hand ", I couldn't ...
... with "flair".
While I realize the bulk of you asshats can't spell your way out of a paper bag, one might expect that the CEO of nearly any corporation would care enough about his company's public image to run a public statement by *somebody* with an eye for grammar and spelling before publishing it on the net.
I would like to suggest that most of us asshats know not to put a space before quotes and not to put punctuation outside quotes. I also suspect most of us would try to put three different concepts in more than one sentence. You may call us asshats as you like.
I agree with your point, however; communications, especially corporate communications, should reflect professionalism. Misspellings and poor grammar (like yours and this CEO's) belong in grade school.
How can you insult and accuse the majority of us, fail the gentlemoose-knows-best test, and get moderated +5, Informative?
what's +5 informative about 'distance your mic and computer?' this is an odd question? quit other programs? PLEASE. if you have (in your words) a small studio and you need advice like this, you're a LONG way from quality amateur recording. i was going to tear apart such gems as 'make sure it's close to your face,' but will instead offer advice that might actually help. other posters suggesting naively to run longer computer cables are no help either.
... ready for it? ... go to the bookstore. a quick trip to a bookstore will do you a WORLD better than the +5, informative you'll find here. chances are, you'll answer the next 10 questions you'll have before you leave the store $20 lighter.
Run a mic cable under the door into another room. not only is that practiced by nearly every studio in the history of recording, it happens to be your cheapest fix. for more tips like this and a gazillion more, google on home recording studio help. you might find something that way.
there are dozens and dozens of books that address basic stuff like this. the best advice you'll get today is
sorry for troll-ish behaviour, but i can't take the statement 'use final cut express' and find advice anywhere in it.
Why show the whole desktop (complete with terminal windows and task bars) that is 66% dead space when showing off one app that isn't a task bar or a terminal window?
Unfortunately, they couldn't figure out how to use the new selection tools.
Re:comes with the territory.(Score:4, Insightful)
by Salsaman (141471) on Wednesday February 18, @06:04AM (#8314389)
I have never lied in my work.
...snip...
If lying is a part of your job, it's time to quit and find something else.
I thought your username was salesman!
$7.95?! That can't be right! Here in the US, 64 bits is $8.
Let me see if I understand this correctly. You are complaining (on a website published in U.S. English) that a publication from the U.S. did not use the British spelling of 'spelled?' (Notice here that the question mark, like all punctuation, falls inside the quotes.) Your claim that most of the world uses 'spelt' is dubious at the least.
Searched the web for words spelled correctly. Results 1 - 100 of about 161,000. Search took 0.52 seconds.
Searched the web for words spelt correctly. Results 1 - 100 of about 25,000. Search took 0.42 seconds.
There is an interesting article from the BBC (which I understand to be British) called Pupils 'struggling' with spelling , where 'spelt' is used once and 'spelled' is used at least six times.
I urge independent research into both ATI and NVIDIA.
Zen is a state of being and awareness. Your complaint shows your unfamiliarity with both Buddhism and Zen Buddhism. Zen as a concept has more in common with 'aware,' 'hungry' or 'green' than it does with Jesus. Zen is an aspect, not THE foundation of Buddhism, and often incidental to many Buddhists.
From Buddhanet.net--Buddhist means belonging to a particular community of people and following a path of life taught by the Buddhas (enlightened beings). Members of the Buddhist community are formally joined by taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma (the teaching) and the Sangha (the community of noble disciples).
What does Roxio's CD authoring software have to do with toast? Is Roxio being disrespectful?
Are you likely to care if a brand of mediocre jeans in China is called Jesus? People do far more insulting things in the name of Jesus than a computer company using a noun like Enlightenment.
the independent contracts i've read (which is a big 3) specifically name 'the collection of works known hereafter as [The Album],...' which does not mention different audio formats. That album in one exact format is handled as one entity as a body of work. This would not include double royalties for .mp3 or .wma or any 'data' format. I don't know if ASCAP or artists' unions think differently on bigger labels.