Still, players hoped for a "better" ending, and for quite a while a rumor circulated online that Aeris could be resurrected. It all started with a post on a newsgroup by an American player who played the Japanese game and completely misunderstood a scene at the end of the second disk to mean a failed resurrection of Aeris. Then somebody who went by the name of "Ben Lansing" saw the post and decided to post on the newsgroups claiming that he was a translator at Square USA during the production of the game, and had inside knowledge on how Aeris could be revived. He supported his claims with the supposed changes made to the US version of the game, such as the Underwater materia and the new FMV sequence which he said was that of Aeris' resurrection (it was actually for the Diamond Weapon monster). He also pointed to many places in the game where the relevance to the story was unclear (such as the sick man in Midgar) which he wove into his elaborate instructions for the revival process. The whole story was too complicated to describe in detail here, but the release of the American version finally revealed many of his claims to be false. Despite many inconsistencies in his claims, many people believed him, and there were even staunch supporters who claimed to have successfully revived Aeris using his instructions. Anyway, "Ben Lansing" eventually posted that the whole thing was just a hoax, and laughed at the general stupidity of American players.
For example, under Mac OS X the user does not have root privileges by default. Instead the user needs to authenticate himself every time he performs any changes to the root system or anything else outside of his own user account for that matter. This makes it very difficult and much less likely that a virus could get root privileges.
Try opening up Terminal and running the following command:
# sudo sh
It's not that hard to gain root in Mac OS X, even with superuser disabled in NetInfo.
See the thing is, you've provided a bad example. Sure, Internet Explorer is installed by default. However, guess what all web pages, links, etc. open in by default? That's right, Safari. What's on the dock? Safari.
Sure, you can dig through to use Internet Explorer, but for the crowd of people towards whom Apple is marketing(people who care about a system that "just works"), they'll use the default browser, Safari.
The only difference between Apple and Microsoft in this case is that Apple provided a meaningless gesture and illusion of "choice", which you bought hook, line, and sinker.
You can see my response regarding Safari. Another questionable program is iChat... many people say that its because iChat AV is an interface to iSight, but we all know iChat pre-AV was also brushed metal. What's the reason? The contact list is again, a source list.
Didn't realize pointing out your lack of understanding regarding the AHIG would hurt your feelings, but your second paragraph is again, addressed in it. If you actually think about what you're doing when you use configuration panels, you'll notice that if the program conforms to the AHIG, the functionality makes sense.
A lot (and a I mean a lot) of third party developers do not even bother to skim the AHIG: how is that the fault of the system? Apple merely puts the tools in the hand of the developers, and makes a list of recommendations. Short of only allowing Apple-approved programs run on the system (akin to what Microsoft seems to be doing with Longhorn), you can't possibly force developers to follow the AHIG.
Press Command + Option + B. Note the source list to the left. I thought of the Safari issue when I had worded my response, but it still follows the guidelines.
You can use a brushed metal window if your application:
Provides an interface for a digital peripheral, such as a camera, or an interface for managing data shared with digital peripherals--iPhoto or iSync, for example
Strives to re-create a familiar physical device--Calculator or DVD Player, for example
Provides a source list to navigate information--for example, iTunes or the Finder
I think that's pretty strict, and it provides a great way to distinguish between iLife-type applications from other non-"life experience" (that's a technical term) applications. Additionally, I challenge you to find an Apple-made program using brushed-metal that doesn't conform to the above guideline.
Overall, if you actually read the AHIG, you'll find the guidlines make sense and serve a specific purpose; they aren't just some willy-nilly part of the system that changes at the whim of Steve Jobs or some apparently AD/HD influenced designers.
I for one welcome our Apple Human Interface overlords.
Dear god no. It was only written 60 years or so ago; public domain lasts for 95 years if the copyright is renewed regularly; Christopher Tolkien and the Tolkien Estate have been doing so ever since J.R.R. Tolkien's death.
For someone who uses a tag of "may the maths be with you", you seem to have a little numeracy problem: $1.1 trillion is in the close neighborhood of the entire federal budget.
According to the Queen's English trillion is used for the american equivalent of a billion, and billion is used for the american equivalent of a trillion. So, if in America, 1.1 trillion is the annual budget, a Briton would say the annual budget is 1100 trillion, or 1.1 billion. The English-speaking world is not Americentric.
Those clouds of gas, as you call them, are believed to be methane, which is supposedly the primary ingredient of its atmosphere. If you could light a match on Titan, the whole moon would be engulfed in fire faster than you could say "who farted?"
Titan is believed to be one of the most inhospitable worlds in the solar system: I wouldn't go planning your vacation just yet.
But, to answer your question, from the ESA: Diameter (atmosphere): 5550 km Diameter (surface): 5150 km Mass: 1/45 that of Earth Average density: 1.881 times liquid water Surface temperature: 94K (-180 degrees C) Atmospheric pressure at surface: 1500 mbar (1.5 times Earth's) Atmospheric composition: Nitrogen, methane, traces of ammonia, argon, ethane
My number was hyperbole, but people think Debian is behind the times because the last "stable" release, Woody, came out in 2002. A lot has happened in the Linux community since then (Woody came out when Linux kernel v.2.2 was still all the rage). However, they neglect to realize that you use the stable branch if you want a rock-solid platform, not a platform with the latest software versions.
For everything else, you should use the unstable branch, not stable. Unstable tends to have releases all the way up to the day the source was released for most packages.
Sometimes I wonder if it would be better for Debian to call the stable branch "frozen" instead. It'd disspell a lot of the myths about how Debian is 4 years behind the times.
But then again, some of the Debian core developers think the world should conform to them, not the other way around...:-/
The installer was redesigned in Sarge, and should be much easier to use.
And you don't have to download all 14 CDs: only do so if you a) have a penchant for pain or b) are obsessive with hard copies of things.
You only need the first CD to have a working stable system, and Debian sorts its packages based on popularity, so most likely, you'll find what you need within the first 4 CDs.
You could also just use apt-get and an http or ftp source, but I guess that would be too convenient.
I agree with parent. A perfect example of what the starter of this argument was trying to convey can be best exemplified by Plato's argument for garnering respect for the state of Athens:
We owe a great deal of respect and gratitude for our parents because they have provided us with many goods and have protected us when we could not, thus, a fortiori, we owe an even greater deal of respect and gratitude for the state because they have provided us with even more goods and have protected us moreseo than our parents.
The idea is that the argument for showing respect for our parents is implicit: everyone is assumed to know that this is a sound or accepted argument. Where the grand parent is having problems is seeing that this is not the argument being presented. The argument being presented is that the state of Athens is of the same type as parents, and thus, the argument still holds.
To go back to the original argument, the movies cited are of the same kind as Fahrenheit 9/11, and if they are to be considered documentative works, a fortiori so should Fahrenheit 9/11. He makes no explicit argument about the cited movies, and assumes that we can all agree that they are indeed documentative works.
I think the grandparent really needs to go back and read all of the responses, as I don't think he is truly grasping what was originally said.
Well, asking that question is a fallacy to questioning, therefore I win.
But in all seriousness, the whole idea of pointing out a fallacy is to show that simply, the conclusion given does not follow from the premises given or implied. It's a small mind who thinks that an argument can be refuted by invoking a fallacy, and I believe the fallacy of an argument from ignorance fits this scenario nicely: an argument may assume that since something has not been proven true, it is therefore false.
It provides a false dilemna: the invoker immediately assumes that there are only two possible outcomes: 1) that the target of the invocation has a sound argument, and his conclusion is true, and 2) that the target of the invocation doesn't have a sound argument, and thus, his conclusion is false.
He is neglecting several other outcomes, one of which is that the target of the invocation may in fact have an unsound argument, but nevertheless the conclusion he presents is still true.
There is a word for someone who practices this kind of doubletalk in argumentation: sophist. The sophist and orator care not about what's correct, but winning the argument. He invokes rules of argumentation like they are tools in a belt, rather than actively seeking out the truth. It's quite sad.
Hello! I'm your friendly pseudophilosophy bullshit meter. I rate my parent post at a 9.8 out of a possible 10!
F911 is 100% documentary.
Argument by assertion.
Grandparent was initiating his response with a statement of contrary belief. It's not an argument. Not only is it okay, its the correct way to begin a critique.
If you deny that, you don't know what a documentary is,
Ad hominem.
Again, this clause is not an argument, nor does it attempt to unjustifiably make fun of you. He is stating, by his argument, that if you do not believe Fahrenheit 9/11 to be a documentary, then you do not understand what it is to be a documentary. It's the same as saying "If you do not think the world revolving around the sun is heliocentricity, then you do not know what heliocentricity means."
Now, if you read the rest of his post, you'd find his argument. His argument is that the movies cited are widely accepted as being documentaries, and since Fahrenheit 9/11 displays more characteristics of a documentary than these movies, a fortiori, it is a documentary.
If you want to attack his argument, that's it. Throwing around incorrect uses of informal fallacies isn't going to help you much.
It seems you don't understand how government works. Let's say the legislative body doesn't do this favor for the executive (whether it be Jeb or George W.). Well, the next time, when the legislative body just barely gets a law passed (let's say 61% majority), the executive will veto it. There's no way the law will get the extra 6% needed to override the veto, so the law is effectively axed.
Political levereging is the core foundation of our governmental system. Perhaps you were sick that day?
Contrary to popular belief the world is not nurb432-centric. Many other people (including myself) care about SANs, and can afford a small licensing fee (2200 USD is small compared to other solutions like XSan, which is 5000 USD, but as other people have said, if you want it for free, you can download the source, just forget any level of support).
I'm sorry you're not exposed to ERP and enterprise-level work, but many of us are. Slashdot's plugs are not exclusively for free-as-in-beer projects.
We use such a system for our company. All of our time tracking is done by an ASP, and our flagship product is another ASP used it several large corporations.
Slashdot Mirror
It was the main premise behind Final Fantasy Tactics.
From Coming to America: The making of Final Fantasy VII and how Squaresoft conquered the RPG market (Section Title: Let's just kill Aeris... Drama is everything):
Joke's on you, buddy.
Try opening up Terminal and running the following command:
# sudo shIt's not that hard to gain root in Mac OS X, even with superuser disabled in NetInfo.
See the thing is, you've provided a bad example. Sure, Internet Explorer is installed by default. However, guess what all web pages, links, etc. open in by default? That's right, Safari. What's on the dock? Safari.
Sure, you can dig through to use Internet Explorer, but for the crowd of people towards whom Apple is marketing(people who care about a system that "just works"), they'll use the default browser, Safari.
The only difference between Apple and Microsoft in this case is that Apple provided a meaningless gesture and illusion of "choice", which you bought hook, line, and sinker.
You can see my response regarding Safari. Another questionable program is iChat... many people say that its because iChat AV is an interface to iSight, but we all know iChat pre-AV was also brushed metal. What's the reason? The contact list is again, a source list.
Didn't realize pointing out your lack of understanding regarding the AHIG would hurt your feelings, but your second paragraph is again, addressed in it. If you actually think about what you're doing when you use configuration panels, you'll notice that if the program conforms to the AHIG, the functionality makes sense.
A lot (and a I mean a lot) of third party developers do not even bother to skim the AHIG: how is that the fault of the system? Apple merely puts the tools in the hand of the developers, and makes a list of recommendations. Short of only allowing Apple-approved programs run on the system (akin to what Microsoft seems to be doing with Longhorn), you can't possibly force developers to follow the AHIG.
Press Command + Option + B. Note the source list to the left. I thought of the Safari issue when I had worded my response, but it still follows the guidelines.
From the Apple Human Interface Guidelines:
I think that's pretty strict, and it provides a great way to distinguish between iLife-type applications from other non-"life experience" (that's a technical term) applications. Additionally, I challenge you to find an Apple-made program using brushed-metal that doesn't conform to the above guideline.
Overall, if you actually read the AHIG, you'll find the guidlines make sense and serve a specific purpose; they aren't just some willy-nilly part of the system that changes at the whim of Steve Jobs or some apparently AD/HD influenced designers.
I for one welcome our Apple Human Interface overlords.
Additionally, a movie version could not be made over the "usual" channels: the movie rights are definitely owned by the studio.
Dear god no. It was only written 60 years or so ago; public domain lasts for 95 years if the copyright is renewed regularly; Christopher Tolkien and the Tolkien Estate have been doing so ever since J.R.R. Tolkien's death.
Grandparent was referring to this.
For someone who uses a tag of "may the maths be with you", you seem to have a little numeracy problem: $1.1 trillion is in the close neighborhood of the entire federal budget.
According to the Queen's English trillion is used for the american equivalent of a billion, and billion is used for the american equivalent of a trillion. So, if in America, 1.1 trillion is the annual budget, a Briton would say the annual budget is 1100 trillion, or 1.1 billion. The English-speaking world is not Americentric.
Of course, that's why I said if you could light a match :)
Those clouds of gas, as you call them, are believed to be methane, which is supposedly the primary ingredient of its atmosphere. If you could light a match on Titan, the whole moon would be engulfed in fire faster than you could say "who farted?"
Titan is believed to be one of the most inhospitable worlds in the solar system: I wouldn't go planning your vacation just yet.
But, to answer your question, from the ESA:
Diameter (atmosphere): 5550 km
Diameter (surface): 5150 km
Mass: 1/45 that of Earth
Average density: 1.881 times liquid water
Surface temperature: 94K (-180 degrees C)
Atmospheric pressure at surface: 1500 mbar (1.5 times Earth's)
Atmospheric composition: Nitrogen, methane, traces of ammonia, argon, ethane
My number was hyperbole, but people think Debian is behind the times because the last "stable" release, Woody, came out in 2002. A lot has happened in the Linux community since then (Woody came out when Linux kernel v.2.2 was still all the rage). However, they neglect to realize that you use the stable branch if you want a rock-solid platform, not a platform with the latest software versions.
For everything else, you should use the unstable branch, not stable. Unstable tends to have releases all the way up to the day the source was released for most packages.
Sometimes I wonder if it would be better for Debian to call the stable branch "frozen" instead. It'd disspell a lot of the myths about how Debian is 4 years behind the times.
:-/
But then again, some of the Debian core developers think the world should conform to them, not the other way around...
The installer was redesigned in Sarge, and should be much easier to use.
And you don't have to download all 14 CDs: only do so if you a) have a penchant for pain or b) are obsessive with hard copies of things.
You only need the first CD to have a working stable system, and Debian sorts its packages based on popularity, so most likely, you'll find what you need within the first 4 CDs.
You could also just use apt-get and an http or ftp source, but I guess that would be too convenient.
Hey man, let's not get ahead of ourselves here. I can barely afford this internet connection. :-)
I agree with parent. A perfect example of what the starter of this argument was trying to convey can be best exemplified by Plato's argument for garnering respect for the state of Athens:
We owe a great deal of respect and gratitude for our parents because they have provided us with many goods and have protected us when we could not, thus, a fortiori, we owe an even greater deal of respect and gratitude for the state because they have provided us with even more goods and have protected us moreseo than our parents.
The idea is that the argument for showing respect for our parents is implicit: everyone is assumed to know that this is a sound or accepted argument. Where the grand parent is having problems is seeing that this is not the argument being presented. The argument being presented is that the state of Athens is of the same type as parents, and thus, the argument still holds.
To go back to the original argument, the movies cited are of the same kind as Fahrenheit 9/11, and if they are to be considered documentative works, a fortiori so should Fahrenheit 9/11. He makes no explicit argument about the cited movies, and assumes that we can all agree that they are indeed documentative works.
I think the grandparent really needs to go back and read all of the responses, as I don't think he is truly grasping what was originally said.
Well, asking that question is a fallacy to questioning, therefore I win.
But in all seriousness, the whole idea of pointing out a fallacy is to show that simply, the conclusion given does not follow from the premises given or implied. It's a small mind who thinks that an argument can be refuted by invoking a fallacy, and I believe the fallacy of an argument from ignorance fits this scenario nicely: an argument may assume that since something has not been proven true, it is therefore false.
It provides a false dilemna: the invoker immediately assumes that there are only two possible outcomes: 1) that the target of the invocation has a sound argument, and his conclusion is true, and 2) that the target of the invocation doesn't have a sound argument, and thus, his conclusion is false.
He is neglecting several other outcomes, one of which is that the target of the invocation may in fact have an unsound argument, but nevertheless the conclusion he presents is still true.
There is a word for someone who practices this kind of doubletalk in argumentation: sophist. The sophist and orator care not about what's correct, but winning the argument. He invokes rules of argumentation like they are tools in a belt, rather than actively seeking out the truth. It's quite sad.
Hello! I'm your friendly pseudophilosophy bullshit meter. I rate my parent post at a 9.8 out of a possible 10!
Grandparent was initiating his response with a statement of contrary belief. It's not an argument. Not only is it okay, its the correct way to begin a critique.
Again, this clause is not an argument, nor does it attempt to unjustifiably make fun of you. He is stating, by his argument, that if you do not believe Fahrenheit 9/11 to be a documentary, then you do not understand what it is to be a documentary. It's the same as saying "If you do not think the world revolving around the sun is heliocentricity, then you do not know what heliocentricity means."
Now, if you read the rest of his post, you'd find his argument. His argument is that the movies cited are widely accepted as being documentaries, and since Fahrenheit 9/11 displays more characteristics of a documentary than these movies, a fortiori, it is a documentary.
If you want to attack his argument, that's it. Throwing around incorrect uses of informal fallacies isn't going to help you much.
By the way, did you ever notice the lack of multimedia even on this site? Why might that be? Hmmm...
Because high bandwidth multimedia has no place on this type of news site; because it's unbelievably annoying; ...
Well, the whole point of his endeavor was to send the same fax to 75 people. With one fax machine, that could be painful.
It seems you don't understand how government works. Let's say the legislative body doesn't do this favor for the executive (whether it be Jeb or George W.). Well, the next time, when the legislative body just barely gets a law passed (let's say 61% majority), the executive will veto it. There's no way the law will get the extra 6% needed to override the veto, so the law is effectively axed.
Political levereging is the core foundation of our governmental system. Perhaps you were sick that day?
Contrary to popular belief the world is not nurb432-centric. Many other people (including myself) care about SANs, and can afford a small licensing fee (2200 USD is small compared to other solutions like XSan, which is 5000 USD, but as other people have said, if you want it for free, you can download the source, just forget any level of support).
I'm sorry you're not exposed to ERP and enterprise-level work, but many of us are. Slashdot's plugs are not exclusively for free-as-in-beer projects.
We use such a system for our company. All of our time tracking is done by an ASP, and our flagship product is another ASP used it several large corporations.