Though I whole-heartedly agree with your sentiment, there are some of us for whom SUVs are a necessary evil. I commute in a Honda Accord but I still need to own an SUV for towing my boat. A truck wouldn't work since I often take friends along. Also, your rental argument doesn't hold for people who need to tow since there are no rental companies that will allow you to tow with their vehicles (trust me, I've searched). I'm not defending people who drive SUVs as urban assault vehicles, just making sure you understand before you judge all SUV owners.
Here's how I know they lied. Who would Iraq's first target be if they had WMD? Israel. And Israel has one of the best intelligence agencies in the world for the simple reason that _all_ of their neighbors hate them with a passion. And their intelligence agency knew Iraq didn't have WMD. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,114045 8,00.html if you don't believe me.
You know, I'm getting really tired of people thinking that I support this war. I think that the outcome of it when all is said and done several years from now will be better for the Iraqi people than where they were 18mo ago.
That said, I think that the US making the decision to preemptively remove a government from power, for whatever reason, is WRONG. If a situation gets bad enough that such actions need to be taken, then the responsibility falls on the UN and the world as a whole to decide that something needs to be done about it. I personally feel that there are many situations where nations can be persuaded to change their ways without having to undertake "nation building wars". Sanctions, diplomatic pressure, etc.
The problem is that all of those things had been tried with Iraq. The US should have been making the case that it was time to get him out, not making a lame-ass excuse about WMD. If that argument to the UN fails, then we have to just say, "Oh well, It's not our problem, but we reserve the right to say I told you so". Bush wanted to get Saddam. It was personal. It wasn't any of our business except for the fact that what's good for the world is good for the US. And the fact that the rest of the world hates us now makes a bigger difference on being good for the US than how Iraq is affecting everyone else.
I live in the blast radius of the White House. Because of Bush, I now actually have to think about that. There's a reason that I'm on my soapbox.
If that's what it takes to get him out of office, then I'll put the freakin' red carpet out for you. In theory though we American's should be able to oust him ourselves, unlike the Iraqis and Saddam.
I'm not mad at the government for taking Saddam out of power. I'm mad at them for lying to me about WMD. I would have supported a war to oust Saddam for the sake of ousting him. He was an evil man who shouldn't have been in power.
The US could have made a case for the war based on that principal, but they didn't. They had to use scare tactics and lying to try to make us do something out of fear instead of doing it because it was the right thing to do. That's why I'm mad.
I think you're missing the point. A machine like this allows stores to carry many more titles than they want to stock on their shelves. It also allows smaller software companies the opportunity to offer their products to the computer store audiences without having to deal with the hassles of producing boxed software.
It's very similar to the model used in iTunes music store and other online music services. You get a big selection at less of a cost to the retailer and small fish like independent artists can get a chance to play too.
4. You want to make high-quality digital recordings.
Apple recently announced the availability of a voice-recorder accessory for the iPod, but there's still no way to use the device to record high-quality audio. DJs who want to record their sets, people who want to encode their vinyl or cassette collections to MP3, or musicians who are looking for a replacement for their DAT recorder need this feature.
For the uses he suggests, almost anyone would just use a computer instead of a portable device. The more likely scenario would be people who record live music (when it's allowed) and what superior quality.
If something jars a hard drive-based player at the precise moment when the hard drive is spinning to load the flash buffer, the player could skip. Some experts say that it's impossible to damage the drive in this way, but I'm not buying that--hard drives spin thousands of times per minute, and they have tiny, fragile parts. Instead, use a small flash player...
So let me get this straight. He says to get a flash player because he doesn't believe experts who say a "jar" at the "precise moment" (once every 3-4 minutes average) wouldn't damage the drive? That's not a very convincing argument for sacrificing the storage and convenience of HD-based players.
Battery and weight, maybe, but his gut feeling just doesn't convince me on that point.
In the short term though Linux will have to endure a little pain and FUD, but that's OK: "whatever doesn't kill me makes me stronger [unless it leaves me a cripped wreck!]"
I have a digital rebel. I got it about 4 weeks ago. I've been nothing but pleased with it. There's no delay between shutter and picture, the mirror clicks like a regular SLR. It also writes to memory quickly (4 photo burst before it needs to catch up, plus it'll shoot 3 shots/second). I've got a 40x Lexar 512Meg card (holds about 170 full-size pics) and I think the fast card makes a difference.
One note: since it's a genuine SLR, there's no LCD preview like on non-SLR digitals. You have to use the viewfinder. It does show the picture after you take it and it'll playback really nicely. There's also a great feature that senses the orientation and sets the EXIF flag so pictures are auto-rotated for portrait. Very handy.
I used to have a Rebel-S and all my old lenses (telephoto, macro) work perfectly with the new camera. One suggestion: get the lens with the camera ($100+) since the digital modifies effective focal length by 1.6. So the 28mm zoom lens that comes with most other SLRs is actually around 45mm, which is too narrow for most stuff.
My friend has a Nikon D100 which he got about 5 months ago and he's tried both mine and his and doesn't see that much difference (at least not $500 worth). If you like the feel of a traditional SLR and want the control, then in my opinion, the Digital Rebel is the best buy.
The whole thing about Jared losing all that weight eating Subway is true. I subscribe to Men's Health magazine and every month they have a feature where people write in and tell how they lost weight. Then the editors analyze the program, what's good and bad about it, and tell you how it can work for you.
Anyway, a few years ago, Jared wrote something in a college newspaper and it got sent in to MH to tell his story. He said he liked the low fat sandwiches and so he ate them for lunch and dinner every day for a year. He didn't exercise much except for walking regularly.
Long story short, he lost a bunch of weight, someone at Subway read the article and their PR department picked up on it and now he's famous. There's a history thingy here
The problem with this and studies that have tested this in the past is that they miss the major point. It's not about praying versus not praying. It's about positive thinking. People who pray are thinking positively; people who don't usually aren't. If the mind carries a good attitude, then the body's health reflects that.
Ask yourself, "How did that get there?" Keep asking that question, and eventually you'll reach a point where there is no answer to be found. Beyond that, beyond all that we know, lies God.
Here's what I don't get. Who says some sort of supreme being needs to play a role in everyday life? Doesn't it make sense that if God or whatever wants us to "just have faith", then he wouldn't interfere at all? What's the use of giving proof, or even evidence? Reward the faithful in the afterlife, let everything else miss out. Seems like God would like to just see how things come out, let evolution work, let people be. No intervention is necessary and it's counterproductive in his whole faith test thing.
One of things that a lot of people don't consider about astrology is that there is a good reason why people of the same signs may have similar personality traits. People who were born at the same time of the year have had various seasons and events happen at the same key points in early development. So, people born right after Christmas in January may have different perspectives on the importance of family, friends, and holidays (their birthdays being near the holidays) than someone born in June. Also, can anyone say what difference it might make in a child's development if it's snowing when they're learning to walk vs. heat of summer?
I'm not saying this means that you can tell their future based on when they're born, but there may be something to the idea that people of like signs have similar personalities and that relationship compatibility may be tied in to zodiak sign.
To a certain extent, things would be context sensitive on a phone. Dialing a phone number? Then only respond to number presses and ignore the letters. Texting? Ignore numbers except when a modifier is pressed (i.e. shift, control, alt on a full-size keyboard).
before the money trail gets traced back to Microsoft? If you seriously look at this, there is exactly one entity that will benefit from all this: Microsoft. Even SCO is screwed, they could never take on Big Blue. Sun has the problem that PHBs don't understand that Unix is not Linux is not BSD. They see it as Windows or Unix (maybe Apple if they do graphics). They see trouble in the Unix world and that means they look to Microsoft.
To sum up, I think that it's just getting waaaaaay too convenient for MS for all of this SCO stuff to be happening. This begs the question, assuming Redmond is behind all this will the truth ever be found, and if so when? If the truth does come out, how will the business world react, or will they?
I think that what we're trying to say the difference here is that Apple has been putting out products that are better and the other companies are realizing that they can't compete. Adobe and MS aren't withdrawing Premiere and IE because Apple is doing anything to suppress their ability to develop for the platform. Apple is just making better software, plain and simple. MS drives the competition away by bullying OEMs and closing standards. That's why we scream bloody murder.
Slashdot Mirror
Dinghys still hold more than one person.
Ever heard of daycare? Put yourself in someone else's shoes before you try to make them look stupid. It just ends up coming back at you.
"...the radio client dewvices..."
Is that what happens to electronics the morning after a night of camping?
I'm going to buy an Xbox every week and throw it away just to hurt microsoft!
Why throw it away? At least build a beowulf cluster of those!.
Though I whole-heartedly agree with your sentiment, there are some of us for whom SUVs are a necessary evil. I commute in a Honda Accord but I still need to own an SUV for towing my boat. A truck wouldn't work since I often take friends along. Also, your rental argument doesn't hold for people who need to tow since there are no rental companies that will allow you to tow with their vehicles (trust me, I've searched). I'm not defending people who drive SUVs as urban assault vehicles, just making sure you understand before you judge all SUV owners.
Here's how I know they lied. Who would Iraq's first target be if they had WMD? Israel. And Israel has one of the best intelligence agencies in the world for the simple reason that _all_ of their neighbors hate them with a passion. And their intelligence agency knew Iraq didn't have WMD. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,114045 8,00.html
if you don't believe me.
You know, I'm getting really tired of people thinking that I support this war. I think that the outcome of it when all is said and done several years from now will be better for the Iraqi people than where they were 18mo ago.
That said, I think that the US making the decision to preemptively remove a government from power, for whatever reason, is WRONG. If a situation gets bad enough that such actions need to be taken, then the responsibility falls on the UN and the world as a whole to decide that something needs to be done about it. I personally feel that there are many situations where nations can be persuaded to change their ways without having to undertake "nation building wars". Sanctions, diplomatic pressure, etc.
The problem is that all of those things had been tried with Iraq. The US should have been making the case that it was time to get him out, not making a lame-ass excuse about WMD. If that argument to the UN fails, then we have to just say, "Oh well, It's not our problem, but we reserve the right to say I told you so". Bush wanted to get Saddam. It was personal. It wasn't any of our business except for the fact that what's good for the world is good for the US. And the fact that the rest of the world hates us now makes a bigger difference on being good for the US than how Iraq is affecting everyone else.
I live in the blast radius of the White House. Because of Bush, I now actually have to think about that. There's a reason that I'm on my soapbox.
How many years before you'll be convinced they aren't there? Makes it somewhat convenient that your side can't be proved wrong by your argument.
If that's what it takes to get him out of office, then I'll put the freakin' red carpet out for you. In theory though we American's should be able to oust him ourselves, unlike the Iraqis and Saddam.
I'm not mad at the government for taking Saddam out of power. I'm mad at them for lying to me about WMD. I would have supported a war to oust Saddam for the sake of ousting him. He was an evil man who shouldn't have been in power.
The US could have made a case for the war based on that principal, but they didn't. They had to use scare tactics and lying to try to make us do something out of fear instead of doing it because it was the right thing to do. That's why I'm mad.
Actually, you can upgrade to a superdrive: http://www.mcetech.com/dvdr8xdt-d.html
Great, now I have to wait a year and some change to bitch about how bad Episode 3 is.
I think you're missing the point. A machine like this allows stores to carry many more titles than they want to stock on their shelves. It also allows smaller software companies the opportunity to offer their products to the computer store audiences without having to deal with the hassles of producing boxed software.
It's very similar to the model used in iTunes music store and other online music services. You get a big selection at less of a cost to the retailer and small fish like independent artists can get a chance to play too.
So let me get this straight. He says to get a flash player because he doesn't believe experts who say a "jar" at the "precise moment" (once every 3-4 minutes average) wouldn't damage the drive? That's not a very convincing argument for sacrificing the storage and convenience of HD-based players.
Battery and weight, maybe, but his gut feeling just doesn't convince me on that point.
Despair, Inc. disagrees.
I have a digital rebel. I got it about 4 weeks ago. I've been nothing but pleased with it. There's no delay between shutter and picture, the mirror clicks like a regular SLR. It also writes to memory quickly (4 photo burst before it needs to catch up, plus it'll shoot 3 shots/second). I've got a 40x Lexar 512Meg card (holds about 170 full-size pics) and I think the fast card makes a difference.
One note: since it's a genuine SLR, there's no LCD preview like on non-SLR digitals. You have to use the viewfinder. It does show the picture after you take it and it'll playback really nicely. There's also a great feature that senses the orientation and sets the EXIF flag so pictures are auto-rotated for portrait. Very handy.
I used to have a Rebel-S and all my old lenses (telephoto, macro) work perfectly with the new camera. One suggestion: get the lens with the camera ($100+) since the digital modifies effective focal length by 1.6. So the 28mm zoom lens that comes with most other SLRs is actually around 45mm, which is too narrow for most stuff.
My friend has a Nikon D100 which he got about 5 months ago and he's tried both mine and his and doesn't see that much difference (at least not $500 worth). If you like the feel of a traditional SLR and want the control, then in my opinion, the Digital Rebel is the best buy.
The whole thing about Jared losing all that weight eating Subway is true. I subscribe to Men's Health magazine and every month they have a feature where people write in and tell how they lost weight. Then the editors analyze the program, what's good and bad about it, and tell you how it can work for you.
Anyway, a few years ago, Jared wrote something in a college newspaper and it got sent in to MH to tell his story. He said he liked the low fat sandwiches and so he ate them for lunch and dinner every day for a year. He didn't exercise much except for walking regularly.
Long story short, he lost a bunch of weight, someone at Subway read the article and their PR department picked up on it and now he's famous. There's a history thingy here
"...a peek at the architecture beneath both hypes."
Assuming this is a typo, it's the most appropriate one I've ever seen.
The problem with this and studies that have tested this in the past is that they miss the major point. It's not about praying versus not praying. It's about positive thinking. People who pray are thinking positively; people who don't usually aren't. If the mind carries a good attitude, then the body's health reflects that.
Here's what I don't get. Who says some sort of supreme being needs to play a role in everyday life? Doesn't it make sense that if God or whatever wants us to "just have faith", then he wouldn't interfere at all? What's the use of giving proof, or even evidence? Reward the faithful in the afterlife, let everything else miss out. Seems like God would like to just see how things come out, let evolution work, let people be. No intervention is necessary and it's counterproductive in his whole faith test thing.
One of things that a lot of people don't consider about astrology is that there is a good reason why people of the same signs may have similar personality traits. People who were born at the same time of the year have had various seasons and events happen at the same key points in early development. So, people born right after Christmas in January may have different perspectives on the importance of family, friends, and holidays (their birthdays being near the holidays) than someone born in June. Also, can anyone say what difference it might make in a child's development if it's snowing when they're learning to walk vs. heat of summer?
I'm not saying this means that you can tell their future based on when they're born, but there may be something to the idea that people of like signs have similar personalities and that relationship compatibility may be tied in to zodiak sign.
To a certain extent, things would be context sensitive on a phone. Dialing a phone number? Then only respond to number presses and ignore the letters. Texting? Ignore numbers except when a modifier is pressed (i.e. shift, control, alt on a full-size keyboard).
before the money trail gets traced back to Microsoft? If you seriously look at this, there is exactly one entity that will benefit from all this: Microsoft. Even SCO is screwed, they could never take on Big Blue. Sun has the problem that PHBs don't understand that Unix is not Linux is not BSD. They see it as Windows or Unix (maybe Apple if they do graphics). They see trouble in the Unix world and that means they look to Microsoft.
To sum up, I think that it's just getting waaaaaay too convenient for MS for all of this SCO stuff to be happening. This begs the question, assuming Redmond is behind all this will the truth ever be found, and if so when? If the truth does come out, how will the business world react, or will they?
I think that what we're trying to say the difference here is that Apple has been putting out products that are better and the other companies are realizing that they can't compete. Adobe and MS aren't withdrawing Premiere and IE because Apple is doing anything to suppress their ability to develop for the platform. Apple is just making better software, plain and simple. MS drives the competition away by bullying OEMs and closing standards. That's why we scream bloody murder.