Odd, my doctor told me that the fancy split keyboards are actually worse for CTS. They make your wrists bend upwards while typing. I found comfort with my wrist braces and having one gell-filled rest in front of the keyboard. The best way to type is supposedly to have the keyboard tilting town and away from you so your wrists fall onto it in a natural position.
I also got 2 cortisone injections which makes things better, and I only have to wear the braces when I'm doing heavy typing. I'm also much more careful with things, because you can only have 3 injections before they start talking surgery.
Do you have a free ISP? Do you demand that ISPs work for free? (even the old 'free' ISPs forced adds on you as a 'charge').
From what I got out of the article, it would allow you to sign on to your wireless ISP or corporate VPN from anywhere in the country (that gets a signal, that is...) You pay the ISP, they pay this corp.
What I do is make the CSS invisable to NS4, and make the page still look okay without it. That way NS4 people will look at in and be happy they can read it, and everyone else gets to see the formating.
(of course, IE doesn't seem to understand the 'float' command, so they see the formating slightly off - but nothing horrid).
Right, like epic battle sequences involving human and non-human combatants...
I liked how they tried to not use fancy CG stuff in FotR when they didn't need to, and used things like forced perspective. There was a lot less CG than I originally thought there was. Most of the effects that they did was color grading.
I agree that I hope that directors will soon start saying "wow, I can use this to tell a great story." Not "wow, I can use this to make some big battle." Although I'll still be interested in the technology used to make the big battle in the middle of the great story.:-)
I used the same BRAIN program several times, and each time I get a slightly different result. My wife also has a slightly different result when she reads the book. Interesting...
Well, considering that he mentioned that his "preference is 'discrete' speech." I don't think that he is pissed off because of not being able to do "Star Trek style" vr. He wants to use a PDA to be able to write stuff down, not just navagate his contact list.
There's too much in that to debunk in one message, but I'll just take one piece of your pie...
Hitler was a devout Catholic
Yeah... that's why the people at concentration camps used to send tellegrams to Hitler on his birthday telling him that priests were killed in his honor. And why his generals had to stop him from ordering the Vatican bombed (they said that the uprising that would cause in Italy would destroy them). He may (I'm not a Hitler biographer) have been rasied Catholic / had a Catholic parent(s) but he was by no means a "devout Catholic" while he was in power.
Please, your arguments (especially about being rational) would go over a lot better if you checked your facts.
Ummm... maybe you should think about helping friends because they're your friends and not because you can get something out of it? Someone recently asked me for help with some homework that was in my field - I said no problem. Someone else asked me to help them with their computer - again no problem. I often am then given things out of the goodness of their hearts in thanks, but that's a lot better than charging a friend (which, I would guess, usually ends up in loosing said friend).
Turning to the gospels themselves, which were composed between 170-180 C.E
The reason for this? Our first copies of the texts are dated then. Of course, they're dated from then from distant places far from where Christianity started, meaning they need time for travel. Even if you then put it earlier, such a basic piece of analysis would show some credibility. This is even before we get to archlogicial evidence unearthed in recent years pushing biblical dates back futher.
Furthermore, she tries to use the fathers of the church as showing things changing - but ignores St. Ignatius of Antioch because he would counteract her arguments (esp. since he died between 98-110 CE)
Furthermore, one sees nothing but "similarities to this other thing, and to that other thing" without quotes or evidence except to other modern authors. This reaks of the isomorphic falasy - i.e. just because things look the same doesn't mean they are the same.
The article is way to long for a line by line refutation, but she seems to not even follow any sort of academic ideals in the article.
First off, I am rational. I have rational reasons for believing in God. I, for one, find the causal arguments quite compelling, especially those put down by St. Thomas Aquinas. I remain a believer in God and in science, as does my wife who is a biologist. There is nothing in my mind that conflicts with a scientific wordview and a God-believing worldview.
Furthermore, just because I believe in God, you start attacking me with "religious zealots stop trying to invade our homes with their tripe and force their lifestyles through legislation down our throats... when one of them feels compelled to troll for validation, sympathy, or 'respect'." You assume that I am a 'religious zealot' who is trying to force you to believe something that you don't. I have respect for each persons beliefs. I am willing to discuss such beliefs rationally, I am willing to not force my beliefs on another. I respect the atheist, but it seems that you do not respect the theist.
Yes I do consider the use of Santa Clause as was done in the post an attack. It was not "I don't believe in God, for this logical reason" it was "I don't believe in God and anyone who does, no matter for what reason, is silly and stupid."
I belive in God for logial, rational reasons. Not all do, but don't make assumptions on others.
Also, that you paid so little attention to the article to miss that the writer is a SHE, not a HE, and she is a well respected scholar.
Nothing in the article could make one assume that. The name "Acharya S" is not distincivly female. Nor is there anything that I could easily find that says anything about her other scholarship, printed papers, etc.
Let's see a good argument, from someone who at minimum holds a PhD, as the author of that article does.
So you cannot argue properly unless you have a PhD? That is one of the most elitist pieces of bull I've ever heard.
As someone who studies religions academically... that was the biggest confusion of mistranslations, unsupported quotes, and large sweeping uses of the isomorphic falacy that I've ever seen.
don't ever imply that religious beliefs might be on the same order of silliness as a belief in Santa Clause!
Saying "that's the same order of silliness as a belief in Santa Clause" is an attack. Saying "I have several reasons of my own that I don't believe in what you believe in" is a statement of fact. Attacks on people are, in general, not good for dialogue.
I, for one, think that belief in God makes metaphysical sense, and that to not believe in God doesn't.
I actually tried to do this when I had a cable installer, but I'm too nice to really push it. He told me that if it didn't work his job would be on the line, so I desided to be nice and let him do his stuff. I had just installed a fresh Win98SE on a system so that he could just through his trash on there and then I would wipe it out. It ended up that the computer was 'too old' (it was the P100 that I got when I went to college back in '96) and that they didn't support anything that old. Now, all of my computers (old win98, win2kpro, linux, FreeBSD) work fine through a router!
and you of course read all your end user agreements in full right? riiiiight....
Yes, I do. What kind of idiot makes an agreement without reading the terms? Nobody's being "duped" into anything -- they're being told exactly what's going on.
Any you understand legalize? I often don't fully understand what was being said in an EULA when I do read it.
Just walking into a renter's place without 24-hour (or more) notice is illegal in most places that I know of (granted, I really only have experience with Oregon law, but I'd expect something simillar in most places.
If you engage in an activity, you must accept the possibily of any consequences that may occur because of your desicion.
Now, back to our discussion, if you take reasonable percautions to remove a potential negative result (or a result that's viewed to be negative) but those precautions don't work: you may be upset (understandably), you may wish that the consequences had never happened, but you can't change the fact that they happened. If one engages in sexual intercourse, then by engaging in that activity one may get pregnant (if female) or get an STD. (even after taking precautions against pregnancy and/or STDs). You knew what you were getting into, and you have to deal with the natural consequences of you actions.
Recent studies show that there is no 100% effective method in preventing STD transmission if you're having sex with someone with and STD. Condoms are completely ineffective against some virus, like HPV.
If you engage in an activity with potential consequences, then you are consenting to those consequences.
Slashdot Mirror
I also got 2 cortisone injections which makes things better, and I only have to wear the braces when I'm doing heavy typing. I'm also much more careful with things, because you can only have 3 injections before they start talking surgery.
I keep a book with me when watching TV. Commercials come up, so does book. Works pretty well.
The wires aren't publicly owned resources, but the public right-of-ways that they use to lay the cable are.
Do you have a free ISP? Do you demand that ISPs work for free? (even the old 'free' ISPs forced adds on you as a 'charge').
From what I got out of the article, it would allow you to sign on to your wireless ISP or corporate VPN from anywhere in the country (that gets a signal, that is...) You pay the ISP, they pay this corp.
It takes about 30 seconds to test in another browser. Just follow these steps:
1. Open NS/Moz/Opera
2. Open the web page
3. Look to see if it is displaying okay
4. ???
5. Profit!
As long as you're using good HTML, it shouldn't be that big of a deal.
(of course, IE doesn't seem to understand the 'float' command, so they see the formating slightly off - but nothing horrid).
Right, like epic battle sequences involving human and non-human combatants...
:-)
I liked how they tried to not use fancy CG stuff in FotR when they didn't need to, and used things like forced perspective. There was a lot less CG than I originally thought there was. Most of the effects that they did was color grading.
I agree that I hope that directors will soon start saying "wow, I can use this to tell a great story." Not "wow, I can use this to make some big battle." Although I'll still be interested in the technology used to make the big battle in the middle of the great story.
I used the same BRAIN program several times, and each time I get a slightly different result. My wife also has a slightly different result when she reads the book. Interesting...
Well, considering that he mentioned that his "preference is 'discrete' speech." I don't think that he is pissed off because of not being able to do "Star Trek style" vr. He wants to use a PDA to be able to write stuff down, not just navagate his contact list.
The guy who wrote the article in question seems to be the system administrator for the district. My guess is when something goes wrong, _he_ fixes it.
When I worked for a school doing tech stuff, I fixed most things, and I went on the internet and _looked_stuff_up_ if I didn't know the answer.
I'm not sure if this is MS at work, or if the people on those forums are (for the most part) blathering idiots.
There's a difference?
There's too much in that to debunk in one message, but I'll just take one piece of your pie...
Hitler was a devout Catholic
Yeah... that's why the people at concentration camps used to send tellegrams to Hitler on his birthday telling him that priests were killed in his honor. And why his generals had to stop him from ordering the Vatican bombed (they said that the uprising that would cause in Italy would destroy them). He may (I'm not a Hitler biographer) have been rasied Catholic / had a Catholic parent(s) but he was by no means a "devout Catholic" while he was in power.
Please, your arguments (especially about being rational) would go over a lot better if you checked your facts.
Ummm... maybe you should think about helping friends because they're your friends and not because you can get something out of it? Someone recently asked me for help with some homework that was in my field - I said no problem. Someone else asked me to help them with their computer - again no problem. I often am then given things out of the goodness of their hearts in thanks, but that's a lot better than charging a friend (which, I would guess, usually ends up in loosing said friend).
Okay, here's one.
Turning to the gospels themselves, which were composed between 170-180 C.E
The reason for this? Our first copies of the texts are dated then. Of course, they're dated from then from distant places far from where Christianity started, meaning they need time for travel. Even if you then put it earlier, such a basic piece of analysis would show some credibility. This is even before we get to archlogicial evidence unearthed in recent years pushing biblical dates back futher.
Furthermore, she tries to use the fathers of the church as showing things changing - but ignores St. Ignatius of Antioch because he would counteract her arguments (esp. since he died between 98-110 CE)
Furthermore, one sees nothing but "similarities to this other thing, and to that other thing" without quotes or evidence except to other modern authors. This reaks of the isomorphic falasy - i.e. just because things look the same doesn't mean they are the same.
The article is way to long for a line by line refutation, but she seems to not even follow any sort of academic ideals in the article.
First off, I am rational. I have rational reasons for believing in God. I, for one, find the causal arguments quite compelling, especially those put down by St. Thomas Aquinas. I remain a believer in God and in science, as does my wife who is a biologist. There is nothing in my mind that conflicts with a scientific wordview and a God-believing worldview.
Furthermore, just because I believe in God, you start attacking me with "religious zealots stop trying to invade our homes with their tripe and force their lifestyles through legislation down our throats... when one of them feels compelled to troll for validation, sympathy, or 'respect'." You assume that I am a 'religious zealot' who is trying to force you to believe something that you don't. I have respect for each persons beliefs. I am willing to discuss such beliefs rationally, I am willing to not force my beliefs on another. I respect the atheist, but it seems that you do not respect the theist.
Yes I do consider the use of Santa Clause as was done in the post an attack. It was not "I don't believe in God, for this logical reason" it was "I don't believe in God and anyone who does, no matter for what reason, is silly and stupid."
I belive in God for logial, rational reasons. Not all do, but don't make assumptions on others.
Also, that you paid so little attention to the article to miss that the writer is a SHE, not a HE, and she is a well respected scholar.
Nothing in the article could make one assume that. The name "Acharya S" is not distincivly female. Nor is there anything that I could easily find that says anything about her other scholarship, printed papers, etc.
Let's see a good argument, from someone who at minimum holds a PhD, as the author of that article does.
So you cannot argue properly unless you have a PhD? That is one of the most elitist pieces of bull I've ever heard.
Translations are copyrightable - but of course fair use (for example: quoting sections) is 100% a okay.
As someone who studies religions academically... that was the biggest confusion of mistranslations, unsupported quotes, and large sweeping uses of the isomorphic falacy that I've ever seen.
don't ever imply that religious beliefs might be on the same order of silliness as a belief in Santa Clause!
Saying "that's the same order of silliness as a belief in Santa Clause" is an attack. Saying "I have several reasons of my own that I don't believe in what you believe in" is a statement of fact. Attacks on people are, in general, not good for dialogue.
I, for one, think that belief in God makes metaphysical sense, and that to not believe in God doesn't.
I actually tried to do this when I had a cable installer, but I'm too nice to really push it. He told me that if it didn't work his job would be on the line, so I desided to be nice and let him do his stuff. I had just installed a fresh Win98SE on a system so that he could just through his trash on there and then I would wipe it out. It ended up that the computer was 'too old' (it was the P100 that I got when I went to college back in '96) and that they didn't support anything that old. Now, all of my computers (old win98, win2kpro, linux, FreeBSD) work fine through a router!
and you of course read all your end user agreements in full right? riiiiight....
Yes, I do. What kind of idiot makes an agreement without reading the terms? Nobody's being "duped" into anything -- they're being told exactly what's going on.
Any you understand legalize? I often don't fully understand what was being said in an EULA when I do read it.
Just walking into a renter's place without 24-hour (or more) notice is illegal in most places that I know of (granted, I really only have experience with Oregon law, but I'd expect something simillar in most places.
If they enter anyway - it's 2 months free rent!
Perhaps consent is the wrong word.
If you engage in an activity, you must accept the possibily of any consequences that may occur because of your desicion.
Now, back to our discussion, if you take reasonable percautions to remove a potential negative result (or a result that's viewed to be negative) but those precautions don't work: you may be upset (understandably), you may wish that the consequences had never happened, but you can't change the fact that they happened. If one engages in sexual intercourse, then by engaging in that activity one may get pregnant (if female) or get an STD. (even after taking precautions against pregnancy and/or STDs). You knew what you were getting into, and you have to deal with the natural consequences of you actions.
Recent studies show that there is no 100% effective method in preventing STD transmission if you're having sex with someone with and STD. Condoms are completely ineffective against some virus, like HPV.
If you engage in an activity with potential consequences, then you are consenting to those consequences.
My family had an Osbourne 1s, which we later stoped using when we got a brand new IBM PC (8088, dual floppies, yeah baby!)