Are you implying that one of the two major parties is more likely to do this than the other?
Yes, I am. Look at the way the Democrats supported Clinton during the first two years of his first term, and compare that to the way the Republicans got along with Bush when they were in control. Of course, the Democrats try to enforce the party line; I just think the Republicans are better at enforcement.
True, but when the President in power is from the same party that holds the majorities in the House and the Senate -- especially when it's a party that tends to discipline those members who stray from the party line -- it's more than a little disingenuous to say the President has "nothing to do with this legislation". Perhaps he hasn't commented publicly, but he does have a fair amount of informal power over congress, should he choose to use it.
By your logic, both the Democrats and the Republicans should've been bending over backwards for the past four years courting Nader. I don't remember this happening at all.
I think that third parties ought to start on the grass root level -- start by fielding candidates for local offices, then state-wide ones, then congress...
Another thought I have is that this race is much more important than other presidential elections in the recent past. Four years from now, when it's Hillary vs Giuliani, then you can experiment with a third party...
Note that stars sometimes dim periodically for reasons other than planets passing in front of them - Cepheid variable stars are classical examples. It's quite logical to think that it might take a while to confirm the results.
The thing that I find unethical about this offer is that they neglect to say that their machine can't play songs purchased from the iTunes music store. At least warn people first!
If they're working on WordPerfect for Linux, might they consider doing an OS X version as well? How tough can that be if they've done the hard work of making it run on Linux? Now there's a market...
Yep, I'm running OS 10.2.8, and iCab 2.9.6. iCab crashes on me about once every two weeks. I think I'm fairly hard on it - I have 7 tabs open at the moment, and I usually keep iCab running a week at a time. (I shut down my computer every week.)
I use iCab as my "primary" browser on OS X for several reasons:
1. Sometimes I get a bit paranoid about cookies. iCab gives me much more control over them than Camino, Firebird, or Safari (all of which are "secondary" browsers, used only if iCab is having problems with a site.)
2. iCab has very flexible image-filtering capabilities. It can be tricky to set it up correctly, but once it's working... it's terrific.
3. Kills pop-ups dead, but makes it very easy to let needed ones go through.
The main problem with iCab: it doesn't fully support CSS 2 yet. This makes some otherwise well-behaved sites look yukky.
Isn't our government supposed to
behave near elections?
Sure, but this is a slow news week. Everyone busy getting ready to stuff their faces with Turkey and shop, and nobody's going to notice a story buried in the inner pages of the papers.
That would turn IBM into the Vorlons, who ended up squashing younger races they helped earlier (Linux?) just to get rid of MS^H^HShadow traces.
... only if Sheridan (Linus) goes to Za'ha'dum (Seattle) at tips the balance of power. If not, then there will just be endless cycles of wars between the Vorlons and the Shadows, with neither winning or losing in the long run.
Hmm... it looks like the theoretical maximum RAM for the rev b. iMac is 512 MB, but since I'm not likely to play with the bottom socket, that means less in practice. It looks like I could get a 128MB chip for around $40, bringing the total to 160 - which is what the AC above is using.
Do I want to spend $170 to bring new life to my discarded iMac? (I can tell it's jealous of the G4 iMac I'm using now.)
The machine is a Rev. B iMac (G3 233 MHZ) with 160 MB of RAM. And it runs fine.
Really? By "Fine" do you mean "As fast as OS 9 did on the same machine"? Hmm... This makes me look at the Rev B. iMac I have cowering in the corner in a whole new way... It's a pity it only has 96 MB of RAM. At the moment.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you implying that one of the two major parties is more likely to do this than the other?
Yes, I am. Look at the way the Democrats supported Clinton during the first two years of his first term, and compare that to the way the Republicans got along with Bush when they were in control. Of course, the Democrats try to enforce the party line; I just think the Republicans are better at enforcement.
True, but when the President in power is from the same party that holds the majorities in the House and the Senate -- especially when it's a party that tends to discipline those members who stray from the party line -- it's more than a little disingenuous to say the President has "nothing to do with this legislation". Perhaps he hasn't commented publicly, but he does have a fair amount of informal power over congress, should he choose to use it.
By your logic, both the Democrats and the Republicans should've been bending over backwards for the past four years courting Nader. I don't remember this happening at all.
I think that third parties ought to start on the grass root level -- start by fielding candidates for local offices, then state-wide ones, then congress...
Another thought I have is that this race is much more important than other presidential elections in the recent past. Four years from now, when it's Hillary vs Giuliani, then you can experiment with a third party...
Note that stars sometimes dim periodically for reasons other than planets passing in front of them - Cepheid variable stars are classical examples. It's quite logical to think that it might take a while to confirm the results.
The thing that I find unethical about this offer is that they neglect to say that their machine can't play songs purchased from the iTunes music store. At least warn people first!
If they're working on WordPerfect for Linux, might they consider doing an OS X version as well? How tough can that be if they've done the hard work of making it run on Linux? Now there's a market...
Whoops! Sorry, blame it on the (unfair) moderation - I normally don't view posts which are at -1!
I guess great minds just think alike, eh?
I knew that 1.5 beta was coming out soon, because Apple just released Java 1.4.2.
Sorry, it's still vaporware until I can run it...
on my Linux box!
Yep, I'm running OS 10.2.8, and iCab 2.9.6. iCab crashes on me about once every two weeks. I think I'm fairly hard on it - I have 7 tabs open at the moment, and I usually keep iCab running a week at a time. (I shut down my computer every week.)
I use iCab as my "primary" browser on OS X for several reasons:
1. Sometimes I get a bit paranoid about cookies. iCab gives me much more control over them than Camino, Firebird, or Safari (all of which are "secondary" browsers, used only if iCab is having problems with a site.)
2. iCab has very flexible image-filtering capabilities. It can be tricky to set it up correctly, but once it's working... it's terrific.
3. Kills pop-ups dead, but makes it very easy to let needed ones go through.
The main problem with iCab: it doesn't fully support CSS 2 yet. This makes some otherwise well-behaved sites look yukky.
Sure, but this is a slow news week. Everyone busy getting ready to stuff their faces with Turkey and shop, and nobody's going to notice a story buried in the inner pages of the papers.
That would turn IBM into the Vorlons, who ended up squashing younger races they helped earlier (Linux?) just to get rid of MS^H^HShadow traces.
... only if Sheridan (Linus) goes to Za'ha'dum (Seattle) at tips the balance of power. If not, then there will just be endless cycles of wars between the Vorlons and the Shadows, with neither winning or losing in the long run.
Yes, last week. (I didn't include a link in that comment, though.)
I don't think that our customers are going to believe us if this causes problems with our network.
Damn, so this is what happens when we use "solar flares" too often as an excuse... they didn't teach that in BOFH school!
Hmm... it looks like the theoretical maximum RAM for the rev b. iMac is 512 MB, but since I'm not likely to play with the bottom socket, that means less in practice. It looks like I could get a 128MB chip for around $40, bringing the total to 160 - which is what the AC above is using.
Do I want to spend $170 to bring new life to my discarded iMac? (I can tell it's jealous of the G4 iMac I'm using now.)
The machine is a Rev. B iMac (G3 233 MHZ) with 160 MB of RAM. And it runs fine.
Really? By "Fine" do you mean "As fast as OS 9 did on the same machine"? Hmm... This makes me look at the Rev B. iMac I have cowering in the corner in a whole new way... It's a pity it only has 96 MB of RAM. At the moment.