I think that saying "I don't believe in that." is an acceptable response in this case, or perhaps " I think your certainty in the existence of dark matter is excessive in the light of the seemingly sparse data for its existence."
We have Microwace radiation studeies that no one would feel strongly in saying are conclusive, and gravity lensing experiments which seem to me another way of stating the fact that gravity is stronger than we would expect in these cases.
The correct answer is that we are not sure and we are doing our best to find out.
I would love it to be a general relativity effect.
# The Algebraist by Iain M. Banks (Orbit) # Iron Council by China Miéville (Del Rey; Macmillan) # Iron Sunrise by Charles Stross (Ace) # Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell by Susanna Clarke (Bloomsbury) # River of Gods by Ian McDonald (Simon & Schuster)
...Is that it doesn't work. No doubt it is morally superior in concept than capitalism, in practice, the guy doing the distribution always ends up with the most.
Abortion may well be morally abhorent, it is however none of anyone's business except the mother.
The hypocracy is that the gung-ho pro-lifers are almost always the judgemental dingbats who drive women to abort fetuses rather than owning up to having had sex. And for that matter want to make sure that unwed mothers don't get welfare or medical coverage out of thier tax dollars.
It comes from the mental contortions required by religious belief.
I wouldn't be shocked if they stored the passwords.
This CCO login is a REALLY old system. It was the first html based login I ever used, and I havent changed my password since 1994, becaue I let all my co-workers use it to download IOS for patches, read bug reports, etc.
It didn't use to matter as it used to only be cisco's weak attempt to lock down new versions of IOS to customers with a service contract. To thier credit, Cisco never went nuts trying to shut out users who didn't change them.
Because this password is the one you use to download new versions of IOS, so if you are unlucky enough to be running an old version of IOS with IPv6 enabled (ie you are in the east aisia market) then you can not get the patched version of code needed to protect yourself from the defcon vulnerabilities.
I think what pisses off Christians about Mormons is the obviously manufactured set of belief.
But it comes in a fancy, nicely embroidered book and they have real nice places of worship and they are good kind people.( Except the polygamists who frankly seem to be pedarests and genuine freaks.)
Perhaps it might have had something to do with the different religions common throughout the former colonies? The fact that many of the states were formed by adherents of persecuted religions?
We will need to go into the senate debate records to know for sure... This is from Leonard Levy, The Establishment Clause: Religion and the First Amendment (New York: MacMillan, 1986) which you may dismiss as leftist tomfoolery if you are the sort who wants to make my kids pray to Jesus.
[81] The Senate began debate on the House amendments on September 3 and continued through September 9. The debate was conducted in secrecy and no record exists but the bare [82] account of motions and votes in the Senate Journal. According to the record of September 3, three motions of special interest here were defeated on that day. These motions restricted the ban in the proposed amendment to establishments preferring one sect above others. The first motion would have made the clause in the amendment read: "Congress shall make no law establishing one religious sect or society in preference to others..." After the failure of this motion and of another to kill the amendment, a motion was made to change it to read: "Congress shall not make any law infringing the rights of conscience, or establishing any religious sect or society." The final defeated motion restated the same thought differently: "Congress shall make no law establishing any particular denomination of religion in preference to another..." The Senate then adopted the language of the House: "Congress shall make no law establishing religion..."
The failure of these three motions, each of which seemed to express a narrow intent, and the adoption of the House version prove that the Senate intended something broader than merely a ban on preference to one sect. Yet, if anything is really clear about the problem of "meaning" and "intent" it is that little is clear; when the Senate returned to the clause six days later, it altered the House amendment to read: "Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion..." Like the three previously defeated motions, this one had the unmistakable meaning of limiting the ban to acts that prefer one denomination over others or that, to put it simply, establish a single state church.
[83] The Senate's wording provoked the House to take action that made its intent clear, as the next step in the drafting of the amendment revealed. In voting on the Senate's proposed amendments, the House accepted some and rejected others, including the Senate's article on religion. To resolve the disagreement between the two branches, the House proposed a joint conference committee. The Senate refused to recede from its position but agreed to the proposal for a conference committee. The committee, a strong and distinguished one, consisted of Madison as chairman of the House conferees, joined by Sherman and Vining, and Ellsworth as chairman of the Senate conferees, joined by Paterson and Carroll. Four of the six men had been influential members of the Constitutional Convention. The House members of the conference flatly refused to accept the Senate's version of the amendment on religion, indicating that the House would not be satisfied with merely a ban on preference of one sect or religion over others. The Senate conferees abandoned the Senate's version, and the amendment was redrafted to give it its present phraseology. On September, Ellsworth reported to the Senate that the House would accept the Senate's version of the other amendments provided that the amendment on religion "shall read as follows: Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." 0n the same day, the House sent a message to the Senate verifying Ellsworth's report. On the next day, September 25, the Senate by a two-thirds vote accepted the condition laid down by the House.Congress had passed the establishment clause.
I agree. Every company that had ridiculously puffed up earnings and business models based on an unending growth market suddenly announced that because of 9/11 they wouldn't make thier numbers and started balancing the books again.
Thats crazy talk. Why the inclusion of doublespace in the dos 6.22 didn't kill stacker...umm well the improved system tools hasn't hurt norton utilities.... Bad example. Well trumpet winsock still reigns supreme even though TCP is a default netware stack after windows 98...
Okay they are screwed.
But I see a difference between putting a desperately needed tool into the OS like an AV verses the blatantly uncompetitive way they used to cripple Lotus 123 and the hack job they did on Stacker.
Of course if their OS wasn't so wide open they wouldn't need an integrated AV.
Slashdot Mirror
Man what a shit job.
Have him hold the line and call it. Stings.
I think that saying "I don't believe in that." is an acceptable response in this case, or perhaps " I think your certainty in the existence of dark matter is excessive in the light of the seemingly sparse data for its existence."
We have Microwace radiation studeies that no one would feel strongly in saying are conclusive, and gravity lensing experiments which seem to me another way of stating the fact that gravity is stronger than we would expect in these cases.
The correct answer is that we are not sure and we are doing our best to find out.
I would love it to be a general relativity effect.
Law class isn't that big.
How about all theose 18-24 year old WOMEN you ar calling girls? They are adults and can make thier own choices.
Just make sure you don't take it too literally.
I have had the what layer is tcp argument quite a few times...
rewriting old code for insane cash.
This is done more often than not by many net admins.
Its is almost done by some US backbones....
Of course the nominees all rock....
# The Algebraist by Iain M. Banks (Orbit)
# Iron Council by China Miéville (Del Rey; Macmillan)
# Iron Sunrise by Charles Stross (Ace)
# Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell by Susanna Clarke (Bloomsbury)
# River of Gods by Ian McDonald (Simon & Schuster)
Fan voting.... DUH!!!
...Is that it doesn't work. No doubt it is morally superior in concept than capitalism, in practice, the guy doing the distribution always ends up with the most.
Abortion may well be morally abhorent, it is however none of anyone's business except the mother.
The hypocracy is that the gung-ho pro-lifers are almost always the judgemental dingbats who drive women to abort fetuses rather than owning up to having had sex. And for that matter want to make sure that unwed mothers don't get welfare or medical coverage out of thier tax dollars.
It comes from the mental contortions required by religious belief.
Omniscience
Omni-benevolence
omnipotence
Pick Two.
And all my support accounts would come up shutdown when I reload.
I wouldn't be shocked if they stored the passwords.
This CCO login is a REALLY old system. It was the first html based login I ever used, and I havent changed my password since 1994, becaue I let all my co-workers use it to download IOS for patches, read bug reports, etc.
It didn't use to matter as it used to only be cisco's weak attempt to lock down new versions of IOS to customers with a service contract. To thier credit, Cisco never went nuts trying to shut out users who didn't change them.
Because this password is the one you use to download new versions of IOS, so if you are unlucky enough to be running an old version of IOS with IPv6 enabled (ie you are in the east aisia market) then you can not get the patched version of code needed to protect yourself from the defcon vulnerabilities.
and recognizes the fact from the serial numbers when you try to get the battery fixed....
Of course DeWalt puts out a good product as compared to the virusware microsoft puts out.
HDSL is a newer delvey mechanism for t-1.
I think what pisses off Christians about Mormons is the obviously manufactured set of belief.
But it comes in a fancy, nicely embroidered book and they have real nice places of worship and they are good kind people.( Except the polygamists who frankly seem to be pedarests and genuine freaks.)
And it differs from Christianity by 1800 years.
Ah...Its the Framers Mind-Reading act again.
Perhaps it might have had something to do with the different religions common throughout the former colonies? The fact that many of the states were formed by adherents of persecuted religions?
We will need to go into the senate debate records to know for sure... This is from Leonard Levy, The Establishment Clause: Religion and the First Amendment (New York: MacMillan, 1986) which you may dismiss as leftist tomfoolery if you are the sort who wants to make my kids pray to Jesus.
[81] The Senate began debate on the House amendments on September 3 and continued through September 9. The debate was conducted in secrecy and no record exists but the bare [82] account of motions and votes in the Senate Journal. According to the record of September 3, three motions of special interest here were defeated on that day. These motions restricted the ban in the proposed amendment to establishments preferring one sect above others. The first motion would have made the clause in the amendment read: "Congress shall make no law establishing one religious sect or society in preference to others..." After the failure of this motion and of another to kill the amendment, a motion was made to change it to read: "Congress shall not make any law infringing the rights of conscience, or establishing any religious sect or society." The final defeated motion restated the same thought differently: "Congress shall make no law establishing any particular denomination of religion in preference to another..." The Senate then adopted the language of the House: "Congress shall make no law establishing religion..."
The failure of these three motions, each of which seemed to express a narrow intent, and the adoption of the House version prove that the Senate intended something broader than merely a ban on preference to one sect. Yet, if anything is really clear about the problem of "meaning" and "intent" it is that little is clear; when the Senate returned to the clause six days later, it altered the House amendment to read: "Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion..." Like the three previously defeated motions, this one had the unmistakable meaning of limiting the ban to acts that prefer one denomination over others or that, to put it simply, establish a single state church.
[83] The Senate's wording provoked the House to take action that made its intent clear, as the next step in the drafting of the amendment revealed. In voting on the Senate's proposed amendments, the House accepted some and rejected others, including the Senate's article on religion. To resolve the disagreement between the two branches, the House proposed a joint conference committee. The Senate refused to recede from its position but agreed to the proposal for a conference committee. The committee, a strong and distinguished one, consisted of Madison as chairman of the House conferees, joined by Sherman and Vining, and Ellsworth as chairman of the Senate conferees, joined by Paterson and Carroll. Four of the six men had been influential members of the Constitutional Convention. The House members of the conference flatly refused to accept the Senate's version of the amendment on religion, indicating that the House would not be satisfied with merely a ban on preference of one sect or religion over others. The Senate conferees abandoned the Senate's version, and the amendment was redrafted to give it its present phraseology. On September, Ellsworth reported to the Senate that the House would accept the Senate's version of the other amendments provided that the amendment on religion "shall read as follows: Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." 0n the same day, the House sent a message to the Senate verifying Ellsworth's report. On the next day, September 25, the Senate by a two-thirds vote accepted the condition laid down by the House.Congress had passed the establishment clause.
Remember, office and outlook compatability stop more linux desktop rollouts than a thousand MCSEs.
djb will send you a check for $500 or $5000 for remote security holes in his tools.
I wonder having the developer of qmail and tcpserver know your name is worth the pain he seems to be as a prof.
As I recall... I was a walking hormone.
a dubious not adubious
I agree. Every company that had ridiculously puffed up earnings and business models based on an unending growth market suddenly announced that because of 9/11 they wouldn't make thier numbers and started balancing the books again.
They took it with an RC from MARS. Just admit how ballsy that is.
Thats crazy talk. Why the inclusion of doublespace in the dos 6.22 didn't kill stacker...umm well the improved system tools hasn't hurt norton utilities.... Bad example. Well trumpet winsock still reigns supreme even though TCP is a default netware stack after windows 98...
Okay they are screwed.
But I see a difference between putting a desperately needed tool into the OS like an AV verses the blatantly uncompetitive way they used to cripple Lotus 123 and the hack job they did on Stacker.
Of course if their OS wasn't so wide open they wouldn't need an integrated AV.