I saw something bizarre in an ad for (some generic reality TV import from America -- can't remember which) recently. The shot was in a supermarket, and everything on the shelves was blurred, leaving roughly half the shot distinctly visible, and the rest like some impressionist painting. Looked very weird.
Wikipedia has a link to a mirrored AP story from 2000; maybe someone with access can check newspaper archives to see if that's valid? BTW, the AP report states that it was in fact her boyfriend's car that she hit, and that he died as he was "thrown from his doorless Jeep", implying that he wasn't wearing a belt either. Sounds like he was at least partially to blame for being dead rather than injured, then.
Art should make you see things in ways you weren't already seeing them (and art that doesn't do this is barely worthy of the name). Whether that is shocking or not depends partially on the artist and partially on the viewer, although if either or both are at extremes (relatively speaking) then it's pretty much guaranteed.
A lot of people seem to think that I'm boosting the clones, I'm not, just saying that their effect on the market was obviously not one that Apple was prepared for. Thus the refusal to license the OS any longer.
(Also, Apple's cash reserves weren't that bad that they couldn't have bought those licenses out themselves, were they? I think that the most important part of the Microsoft settlement was the agreement by MS to continue shipping Office and IE for the Mac, which certainly helped to shore up the stock price. If they'd tried to close down their competition while at the same time seeing people who needed MS products deserting the platform, the stock would have gone through the floor and Apple would have been a prime takeover target.)
The Right have been in a strong position for so long that what used to be Centre is Right and mainstream Left is barely Left at all. To try and vote for anyone actually Left is to be branded as a tree-hugging hippy, or dismissed as a communist.
Also, I find it interesting that anyone using the term "human rights" these days seems to be branded a socialist or worse... after all, that's what I thought all these wars we fought were about, weren't they? Freedom and justice for all?
Oh, look, I have no problem ranking the major parties at election time.
I do. Labor sucks up just as much when it's in power -- we'd still be in Iraq, although the decision would have been more anguished, if Labor were in power. (Mainly due to Australia's defence policy re: Indonesia being "let the Yanks take care of it").
But the thing I'm basing my vote on is the detention of asylum seekers; it's really hit me to see people I know treated as subhuman purely to gain votes, and both major parties have the same policies on the issue. I thought this country had moved on from its racist days, but Pauline Hanson led Howard back into it, and most politicians seem to have been happy to play around there since.
Not trying to convince you, just explaining why I vote the way I do.:)
Yes, I agree, society is too corporately controlled, but it has been ever thus; our chances of changing that are pretty low.
The clone-makers made their money, in the short term anyway, and Apple missed out on those customers, as well as the overall brand reputation dropping. All of this might have been worthwhile if it had doubled the MacOS userbase percentage (can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs, after all), but that didn't seem to be happening. Too late in the game.
As Microsoft have proven over many years, it often doesn't matter what you produce, it's what you pre-announce that will determine your (short-term) success in the market, or at least lessen the threat of competition. Of course, you can go too far and Osborne yourself...
I think it was likely too late by that point. Apple already had the perception of being the designers' ghetto, and most people buying Macs were previous customers. If they had followed the software-only path, the brinkmanship from the clonemakers regarding licensing fees etc. would likely have been much harder on them than it was on Microsoft... who were charging per-CPU throughout the 90s, whether or not the boxmaker was shipping an MS OS with that CPU or not.
I think what we found out when Apple did allow clones was that people who wanted to run the Mac didn't have to have the coolest looking machines with the liquid cooling, flip open doors (okay neither of those existed back then, but...). They just wanted something that was affordable. That's something the clone makers could do. Make something for cheaper and, in the case of Power Computing, cheaper. Apple couldn't keep up and they started to lose market share to the Mac clones (heck, I bought several clones during that time period). Heh, instead of competing with them, they shut down the cloning business.
I think Apple was actually upset that the clones were competing on the basis of being faster & cheaper. Power, for example, were shipping machines with recently announced PPCs faster than Apple could manage to, and were thus eating into Apple's high-end sales, rather than just competing at the low end, where Apple wouldn't have minded losing some market share in order to build the total user base for the OS. Much more of a hit to profits that way.
we are not involved in widespread criminal activity, well not yet anyway
(Speaking generally here, of course:)
Malpractice is civil, not criminal (I think -- maybe not in particularly serious cases, or would you be charged with something else there?), but you'd likely still find yourself in court and your documents being read. One reason for the precautions... well, there's that and patient confidentiality, which I'd hope most doctors still support.
where said marines are not likly to be properly equiped... to fight wars at night. We in the Space Marines expect all our wars to be fought in well-lit conditions!
Makes economic sense, assuming RJR can make more money from advertisers and the services of their (not totally sincere) counsellors than they already do from the customer; after all, non-smokers don't need to stop smoking, do they?
I don't hold out great hopes for direct democracy; people tend to vote themselves bread and circuses, and I think that the representative republic is providing enough of those already. Most political systems seem to work best (i.e. greatest good for the greatest number) on a small scale, but power naturally aggregates to a small core of a much greater mass.
Slashdot Mirror
I saw something bizarre in an ad for (some generic reality TV import from America -- can't remember which) recently. The shot was in a supermarket, and everything on the shelves was blurred, leaving roughly half the shot distinctly visible, and the rest like some impressionist painting. Looked very weird.
Wikipedia has a link to a mirrored AP story from 2000; maybe someone with access can check newspaper archives to see if that's valid? BTW, the AP report states that it was in fact her boyfriend's car that she hit, and that he died as he was "thrown from his doorless Jeep", implying that he wasn't wearing a belt either. Sounds like he was at least partially to blame for being dead rather than injured, then.
Art should make you see things in ways you weren't already seeing them (and art that doesn't do this is barely worthy of the name). Whether that is shocking or not depends partially on the artist and partially on the viewer, although if either or both are at extremes (relatively speaking) then it's pretty much guaranteed.
The methadone clinics are an attempt to keep your home insurance bills down (less break-ins). As to how well that works, well, who knows...
Championship Manager 4 requires 1024x768 (although that's very much not an FPS :)).
A lot of people seem to think that I'm boosting the clones, I'm not, just saying that their effect on the market was obviously not one that Apple was prepared for. Thus the refusal to license the OS any longer.
(Also, Apple's cash reserves weren't that bad that they couldn't have bought those licenses out themselves, were they? I think that the most important part of the Microsoft settlement was the agreement by MS to continue shipping Office and IE for the Mac, which certainly helped to shore up the stock price. If they'd tried to close down their competition while at the same time seeing people who needed MS products deserting the platform, the stock would have gone through the floor and Apple would have been a prime takeover target.)
I mean, "vote informally" (for reasons stated elsewhere in this thread).
Ah bugger. I'd still rather vote Donkey than for either major party :(
The Right have been in a strong position for so long that what used to be Centre is Right and mainstream Left is barely Left at all. To try and vote for anyone actually Left is to be branded as a tree-hugging hippy, or dismissed as a communist.
Also, I find it interesting that anyone using the term "human rights" these days seems to be branded a socialist or worse... after all, that's what I thought all these wars we fought were about, weren't they? Freedom and justice for all?
Oh, look, I have no problem ranking the major parties at election time.
:)
I do. Labor sucks up just as much when it's in power -- we'd still be in Iraq, although the decision would have been more anguished, if Labor were in power. (Mainly due to Australia's defence policy re: Indonesia being "let the Yanks take care of it").
But the thing I'm basing my vote on is the detention of asylum seekers; it's really hit me to see people I know treated as subhuman purely to gain votes, and both major parties have the same policies on the issue. I thought this country had moved on from its racist days, but Pauline Hanson led Howard back into it, and most politicians seem to have been happy to play around there since.
Not trying to convince you, just explaining why I vote the way I do.
Yes, I agree, society is too corporately controlled, but it has been ever thus; our chances of changing that are pretty low.
I vote using the Langer method; it's legal, but he was locked up for advocating it.
[1] Greens
[2] Labor
[2] Liberal
(or 2 for another minor party and 3 for both majors, or whatever). They have to throw your vote away when they get to the tied section.
How do you know that's not already happening?
<matrix>There is no gold medal.</matrix>
(Sorry...)
The clone-makers made their money, in the short term anyway, and Apple missed out on those customers, as well as the overall brand reputation dropping. All of this might have been worthwhile if it had doubled the MacOS userbase percentage (can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs, after all), but that didn't seem to be happening. Too late in the game.
As Microsoft have proven over many years, it often doesn't matter what you produce, it's what you pre-announce that will determine your (short-term) success in the market, or at least lessen the threat of competition. Of course, you can go too far and Osborne yourself...
I think it was likely too late by that point. Apple already had the perception of being the designers' ghetto, and most people buying Macs were previous customers. If they had followed the software-only path, the brinkmanship from the clonemakers regarding licensing fees etc. would likely have been much harder on them than it was on Microsoft... who were charging per-CPU throughout the 90s, whether or not the boxmaker was shipping an MS OS with that CPU or not.
I think what we found out when Apple did allow clones was that people who wanted to run the Mac didn't have to have the coolest looking machines with the liquid cooling, flip open doors (okay neither of those existed back then, but...). They just wanted something that was affordable. That's something the clone makers could do. Make something for cheaper and, in the case of Power Computing, cheaper. Apple couldn't keep up and they started to lose market share to the Mac clones (heck, I bought several clones during that time period). Heh, instead of competing with them, they shut down the cloning business.
I think Apple was actually upset that the clones were competing on the basis of being faster & cheaper. Power, for example, were shipping machines with recently announced PPCs faster than Apple could manage to, and were thus eating into Apple's high-end sales, rather than just competing at the low end, where Apple wouldn't have minded losing some market share in order to build the total user base for the OS. Much more of a hit to profits that way.
we are not involved in widespread criminal activity, well not yet anyway
:)
(Speaking generally here, of course
Malpractice is civil, not criminal (I think -- maybe not in particularly serious cases, or would you be charged with something else there?), but you'd likely still find yourself in court and your documents being read. One reason for the precautions... well, there's that and patient confidentiality, which I'd hope most doctors still support.
where said marines are not likly to be properly equiped ... to fight wars at night. We in the Space Marines expect all our wars to be fought in well-lit conditions!
What, 280bpm or something? Coronary on the dance floor!
Warned upfront, which is better than a lot of companies that will drop their products like a hot potato if they don't do too well.
It is a government owned monopoly
51% government owned, 49% publically traded shares.
It has all the bad attributes of a private monopoly, but seems to be as untouchable as the average government department.
Sell the whole lot off, I say, and speed the day when the ACCC or a future equivalent will feel able to smack them down hard.
Makes economic sense, assuming RJR can make more money from advertisers and the services of their (not totally sincere) counsellors than they already do from the customer; after all, non-smokers don't need to stop smoking, do they?
I think the PS2 uses the same CPU as the PS1 as an I/O processor (and uses it as the main processor while running PS1 games).
I don't hold out great hopes for direct democracy; people tend to vote themselves bread and circuses, and I think that the representative republic is providing enough of those already. Most political systems seem to work best (i.e. greatest good for the greatest number) on a small scale, but power naturally aggregates to a small core of a much greater mass.
The PRC has never claimed to be a democracy.