No, it's just the kind of subtle manipulation this administration has perfected. They probably realized that if they pulled all kinds of documents from the web site that it'd appear as if they were limiting access to the public record.
It's all still there for all to see, but it's not as easy to find. So they can say "We're not hiding anything." while they actually hide it.
Things that become inconvenient or embarrassing after the fact are hard to hide. At the time this quote by Dick seemed reasonable: link
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Now maybe less so. Also, re: the Uranium production in Africa, Fleisher sounds like a complete fool.
This is the first example of the Bush administration confronting the forged Iraq/African Uranium document. This is from March, 14th 2002.
On March 17th 2002 Bush gives Hussein 48 hours to leave Iraq and on the 19th he launched "Operation Iraqi Freedom".
So for at least a week -before- the shooting started the Bush administration had reporters at press conferences asking questions about the forged uranium documents. The mainstream press didn't pick up on this story until July.
Q Ari, the President said in his State of the Union address, the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. And since then, the IAEA said that those were forged documents --
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm sorry, whose statement was that?
Q The President, in his State of the Union address. Since then, the IAEA has said those were forged documents. Was the administration aware of any doubts about these documents, the authenticity of the documents, from any government agency or department before it was submitted to the IAEA?
MR. FLEISCHER: These are matters that are always reviewed with an eye toward the various information that comes in and is analyzed by a variety of different people. The President's concerns about Iraq stem from multiple places, involving multiple threats that Iraq can possess, and these are matters that remain discussed.
Fleischer stalls for time by pretending that he didn't understand the source of the quote (as if "President" and "State of the Union" in the first sentence were unclear), then comes up with a moronic bit of doublespeak. No wonder he quit. Read his last sentence in that press conference aloud. That's sentence is the official line one week before the war. Lots of confidence there.
If the whitehouse can make it a little more difficult for reporters or their opponents to dig up embarrassing quotes or timelines you can bet your last dollar they will.
-dameron
I saw a documentary once where women rated the "date-ability" of men they observed through a one way mirror. All the men were judged to be above average in appearance based on headshots alone.
When viewed in context a taller than average men outranked the smaller men with remarkable consistency. One, identified as having an extensive criminal record, always outscored shorter men. To get the women to accept the shortest (around 5'3") bachelor as "date-able" the researchers had to say he was a doctor who loved to travel on his private jet all over the world and was independently wealthy.
The question isn't whether or taller people are better workers who earn more money through merit, rather it's whether we're still tied to longstanding biological instinct when evaluating people, even in an business context.
'I don't want to be the guy that creates any kind of chilling effect on research,' SunnComm's CEO Peter Jacobs said.">
This should read:
'I don't want to be the guy that fucks up this whole DMCA thing,' SunnComm's CEO Peter Jacobs said."
Actually, we need this kind of idiotic ligitation so the problems with the DMCA can become obvious to everyone, and so the courts can act to strike down this piece of shit legislation.
The man who makes the tool that beats the guy without the tool wins.
Guy with gun beats guy with sword, guy with sword beats man with fist. Man with fist beats armless dude.
Simple enough for you?
This isn't a question of man vs. machine. This is man vs. man.
The "machines" are created by man as a collection of chess knowledge and principle. Essentially they're chess by committee, a very fast, giant, and efficient committee, but a committee nonetheless. Flaws in their understanding of the game will be reflected, and the imperfect compromises intrinsic to such aggregate systems will manifest themselves. (see: every funny Dilbert)
BTW, the dude actually playing vs. the software engineers and hardware developers ('cause that's who he's really playing against, they, and the chess "experts" who help them) might have a recital to attend, simultaneously he might have an itch, a touch of alcoholic dementia, gas, a football match, shingles, or a really profound comment that should appear here...
Likely not.
Show me a computer with shingles and a penchant for "Old Hickory" and I might accept this whole man vs. machine business...
>>Scientists find 1 explanation for 1 spooky phenomena, and all paranormal happenings are written off as rubbish?
>Scientists - 1,000,001..... Crackpots - 0
Because as soon as a "Crackpot" proves his case he magically becomes a "Scientist". Unfortunately this scoring method can never really accurately reflect the contribution "Crackpots" have made to "Science".
Onced the sun and stars revolved around the earth, we'd discovered all the large apes in the world, giant squid were legends, the Tazmanian Tiger was extinct, people who report out of body experiences were kooks, people who felt strange in "haunted" places were suggestable and superstitious, and mood and temperment couldn't possibly impact health...
Yesterdays kooks get appropriated by science so the score is always perfect.
Try this: get a scientific "debunking" manual from twenty, thirty, and fourth years ago and read them. Make a note of what percentage of "impossible" and "fantastic" things actually turn out to be true and "scientific" and how long it takes for this to happen.
I recall often hearing the term in the mid eighties in our local university's computer lab. People who would spool their print jobs over and over again because they hadn't printed yet were said to be "Spamming the que". Also, overloading a buffer, particulary when repeating commands over and over because your terminal hadn't gotten any feedback, and watching as the past dozen or so commands input registerd all at once was called "spam in the buffer".
I thought it was pointing to what spam might do to your bodily processes like arteries and bowels, block things up 'til they start causing problems.
Wizard, by S.A. Moore and Steven Luedders, and release (eventually) by EA in the mid 1980's is one of the best climbing games ever. It runs like a dream on my 300Mhz Axim with Pocket 64 from clickgamer.com. It's 171K in D64 format and the developers would probably -LOVE- getting a single dollar from this "property". In general C64 games run very well on modern mobile devices and fit the screen dimensions nicely too.
To be honest, I'd rather play a well crafted C64 game (like Wizard's Crown or the abovementioned Wizard, or any text adventure) on my Axim than even think about a modern game that'd use a great deal more memory and resources to battle nicely rendered gorillas...
It's just amazing, really, how much the C64 programmers got out of the hardware, and how effectively the emulator folk have translated that to the mobile market.
Druid: http://www.c64.com/detail.php?gameid=105 1
Is a fantastic game.
Trust me, if you can find a C64 emulator for your platform then by all means explore some of the forgotten gems of the past.
Tom Hanks walks into a store after getting an eye transplant
Is that the same Tom Hanks that dumped that delicious Nicole Kidman? If so, screw him, he needs nother eye transplant or his money back! She's a fox. Oh well, what can you do, he's been a jerk ever since Welcome Back Kotter got canned.
And don't get me started on Battlefield Earth. He wouldn't be squat without Tarantino pulling his career back from the pits of disco hell.
Back in the day music was cheap. Recording companies had few bankable artists and wanted to get these artists as much exposure as possible. This paradigm existed pretty much unchanged from the time of sheet music to the invention of the cd.
Ah, the cd!
The magical bandit that changed music forever. With the introduction of the cd, music distributers realized that people who already own a certain song (i.e. purchased the album or the single) would eventually pay to own that song again, in a slightly better format. I can't tell you how many people I know used to be music collectors. Owning every song ever released by a particular artist, every kind of album cover, misprint album cover, or censored record was a goal. And yet, when these albums, sometimes dozens of them, were re-released on CD, they purchased them all again...
RIAA: OMFG!!!! GOLDMINE!!!
While mp3/ogg/bla aren't as pristine and, in the mind of the audiophile, "better" versions of the same song, people want them because of their convenience and portability. They're the "CD format change" of the 90's to date.
What should concern the "end user" is that what the RIAA really wants to control is music's distribution format. They really want portable, digital (i.e. almost free to distribute) songs available. Their format. Their distribution method. Their profits all over again, every generation, same song, with endless copyright. A license to print money effectively.
You wanna buy the latest and greatest pop song, ok, it's -ALWAYS- gonna be $15 'cause some sappy sod in a business suit decided in 1987 that he just fucking -HAD- to repopulate his Gordon Lightfoot collection with those new fangled "CD"s. People have "proven" that's the going rate for music, and you can bet your ass the RIAA is computing all their "damages" based on the last "transistional" cycle, the "CD revolution".
That's why this is important and why music's expensive. Popular music used to cost $1 or $2/song, back when singles ruled the day. But noooo. Some dumbass had to pony up the big bucks to "upgrade" his collection....
I'm sick of hearing about the "War on" this or the "War on" that. As a civilization we're well past this cheap and easy metaphor. Why "war on" anything? How well have our past "Wars" gone:
LBJ's war on poverty
Nixon's war on cancer
Reagan's war on drugs
W's war on terrorism
To paraphrase the best source for "War" info: remember when we had that war on drugs and now there aren't drugs anymore?
Seems having a "War on" something makes it omnipresent and ustoppable.
"Hysterectomy, literally "cutting the uterus," leads to a discussion of Plato's belief that the uterus was an animal roaming freely within the female body and causing moodiness...
>>...The author states, "a safe assumption is that this notion was proclaimed and promoted, in the main, by men. From this anatomic designation comes the term hysteria."
That's 19th century "science" for you. A moody (i.e. trapped in the 19th century) woman is "hysterical", best remedy: remove her uterus.
21st century science has an analog in chemical (or even physical) castration. If someone is mentally unstable enough to be a sexual predator then off go the man parts. It's not spot on the same kind of thing, because I don't think there's any institutional sexism woven into the chemical/physical castration debate.
http://store.yahoo.com/extremepcgear/fd1128mb.ht ml
128mb usb keychain drive: $32.99
-dameron
Thinkgeek/Slashdot Cross Promotion???
on
Wristwatch USB Drive
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Two of the following are true:
1) Love slashdot.
2) Push nearly everyone I know in IT to read slashdot.
3) Slashdot is still important.
Unfortunately I'm struggling between #2 and #3.
This post is nothing more than an advert for a 128MB USB wrist watch that has been heavily advertised by www.thinkgeek.com. I've seen half a dozen popular web sites today that mention this watch and -every- one mentions thinkgeek yet somehow slashdot manages to find a "submission" that doesn't.
Odd. Yep. Unlikely. Yeppers.
Still, a neat piece of tech, not nearly worth $100. A 128mb keychain is like $30 and few will care if you're keychain is goofy. They're much more likely to notice the geek watch.
I mean, but your friends will dig it, and that's what matters...
A conversation that has happened everywhere from New Mexico to Missouri to Alabama (at least):
Person 1: "I'm gonna go to the store, you wanna coke?"
Person 2: "Yeah."
Person 1: "What kind."
Person 2: "Uh, Seven-Up."
Everywhere I've traveled/lived in the South (AL, LA, MS, TN, AR, TX) this usage as been the norm, and friends from places further afield have verified this usage in other southern and southwestern states.
The development of differnet kinds of Coke (Diet, Cherry, Vanilla, etc.) has probably blunted this usage in the recent past as it now becomes necessary to specify not only what kind of "coke" one wants (i.e. Dr. Pepper) but what kind of "Coke" (i.e. Caffeine Free, Diet).
But who knows? I only noticed it when in college someone called a Coke a "pop" and I almost fell out of my chair. Communists must drink "pop".:)
Sorry to use "partisan" in the neo-conservative manner, but Slashdot routinely invites me into the unspoken debate whether RMS is the "arbitor elegante" of the entire ideology, or just the Derek Smart of (to displease everyone) "Alternative Software".
Please, Slashdot, explain to me how publishing these persistant articles re:
"RMS is a weird monster driven by a cult of personality that exists in his own mind"
aren't editorial choices. Either say that RMS is a freak, or don't, this weird "I know she's my ex-girlfriend but I might need to screw her someday" attitude is -so- 1997.
-dameron
Who at BusinessWeek has SCO stock?
on
SCO DOS'ed
·
· Score: 1
Otherwise why does this little thing even rank a mention?
This the the equivalent of Jesus bitch smacking all the disciples 'cause Peter was a little to loud in his preaching. Hopefully one day Apple will realize fanatics who leak information about their products should be encouraged. After all, any press is good press, especially if you have a demonstrably inferior product.
He's following long established military strategies designed to keep an enemy army from using captured resources.
These acts aren't war crimes, and if an invasion force were marching up the Mississippi river valley you can bet your ass that the retreating U.S. military would be blowing up fuel reserves instead of letting them fall under enemy control.
MythTv at www.mythtv.org does everything you require, and it's open source to boot. It has a very nice semi-transparent program guide that automatically downloads schedule information for your cable/sat system into a mysql database and lets you record shows, pause live tv, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's just the kind of subtle manipulation this administration has perfected. They probably realized that if they pulled all kinds of documents from the web site that it'd appear as if they were limiting access to the public record.
It's all still there for all to see, but it's not as easy to find. So they can say "We're not hiding anything." while they actually hide it.
Things that become inconvenient or embarrassing after the fact are hard to hide. At the time this quote by Dick seemed reasonable: link
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Now maybe less so. Also, re: the Uranium production in Africa, Fleisher sounds like a complete fool.
This is the first example of the Bush administration confronting the forged Iraq/African Uranium document. This is from March, 14th 2002.
On March 17th 2002 Bush gives Hussein 48 hours to leave Iraq and on the 19th he launched "Operation Iraqi Freedom".
So for at least a week -before- the shooting started the Bush administration had reporters at press conferences asking questions about the forged uranium documents. The mainstream press didn't pick up on this story until July.
Link
Q Ari, the President said in his State of the Union address, the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. And since then, the IAEA said that those were forged documents --
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm sorry, whose statement was that?
Q The President, in his State of the Union address. Since then, the IAEA has said those were forged documents. Was the administration aware of any doubts about these documents, the authenticity of the documents, from any government agency or department before it was submitted to the IAEA?
MR. FLEISCHER: These are matters that are always reviewed with an eye toward the various information that comes in and is analyzed by a variety of different people. The President's concerns about Iraq stem from multiple places, involving multiple threats that Iraq can possess, and these are matters that remain discussed.
Fleischer stalls for time by pretending that he didn't understand the source of the quote (as if "President" and "State of the Union" in the first sentence were unclear), then comes up with a moronic bit of doublespeak. No wonder he quit. Read his last sentence in that press conference aloud. That's sentence is the official line one week before the war. Lots of confidence there.
If the whitehouse can make it a little more difficult for reporters or their opponents to dig up embarrassing quotes or timelines you can bet your last dollar they will. -dameron
Ouch!
And that's for their workstation configuration...
$179 for the x86 version.
-dameron
There is no contradiction here. The ACLU does not care what organization it represents.
BTW, the ACLU helped make sure that anti-abortion protesters were able to march in Clinton's inaugural parade.
Do you hear people talking about that?
-dameron
I saw a documentary once where women rated the "date-ability" of men they observed through a one way mirror. All the men were judged to be above average in appearance based on headshots alone.
When viewed in context a taller than average men outranked the smaller men with remarkable consistency. One, identified as having an extensive criminal record, always outscored shorter men. To get the women to accept the shortest (around 5'3") bachelor as "date-able" the researchers had to say he was a doctor who loved to travel on his private jet all over the world and was independently wealthy.
The question isn't whether or taller people are better workers who earn more money through merit, rather it's whether we're still tied to longstanding biological instinct when evaluating people, even in an business context.
-dameron
This should read:
'I don't want to be the guy that fucks up this whole DMCA thing,' SunnComm's CEO Peter Jacobs said."
Actually, we need this kind of idiotic ligitation so the problems with the DMCA can become obvious to everyone, and so the courts can act to strike down this piece of shit legislation.
-dameron
Man wins.
The man who makes the tool that beats the guy without the tool wins.
Guy with gun beats guy with sword, guy with sword beats man with fist. Man with fist beats armless dude.
Simple enough for you?
This isn't a question of man vs. machine. This is man vs. man.
The "machines" are created by man as a collection of chess knowledge and principle. Essentially they're chess by committee, a very fast, giant, and efficient committee, but a committee nonetheless. Flaws in their understanding of the game will be reflected, and the imperfect compromises intrinsic to such aggregate systems will manifest themselves. (see: every funny Dilbert)
BTW, the dude actually playing vs. the software engineers and hardware developers ('cause that's who he's really playing against, they, and the chess "experts" who help them) might have a recital to attend, simultaneously he might have an itch, a touch of alcoholic dementia, gas, a football match, shingles, or a really profound comment that should appear here...
Likely not.
Show me a computer with shingles and a penchant for "Old Hickory" and I might accept this whole man vs. machine business...
'til then,
-dameron
Take a passport, leave your DL at home 'cause you're not driving anyway.
If they give you guff and say that they don't accept passports as ID tell them to screw themselves and that you'll find a place that does.
For gawd sakes, Hezbollah accepts passports as proof of identity...
-dameron
>Scientists - 1,000,001 ..... Crackpots - 0
Because as soon as a "Crackpot" proves his case he magically becomes a "Scientist". Unfortunately this scoring method can never really accurately reflect the contribution "Crackpots" have made to "Science".
Onced the sun and stars revolved around the earth, we'd discovered all the large apes in the world, giant squid were legends, the Tazmanian Tiger was extinct, people who report out of body experiences were kooks, people who felt strange in "haunted" places were suggestable and superstitious, and mood and temperment couldn't possibly impact health...
Yesterdays kooks get appropriated by science so the score is always perfect.
Try this: get a scientific "debunking" manual from twenty, thirty, and fourth years ago and read them. Make a note of what percentage of "impossible" and "fantastic" things actually turn out to be true and "scientific" and how long it takes for this to happen.
-dameron
I recall often hearing the term in the mid eighties in our local university's computer lab. People who would spool their print jobs over and over again because they hadn't printed yet were said to be "Spamming the que". Also, overloading a buffer, particulary when repeating commands over and over because your terminal hadn't gotten any feedback, and watching as the past dozen or so commands input registerd all at once was called "spam in the buffer".
I thought it was pointing to what spam might do to your bodily processes like arteries and bowels, block things up 'til they start causing problems.
In that case I think Spam is a good metaphor.
-dameron
http://www.c64.com/detail.php?gameid=100207
5 1
Wizard, by S.A. Moore and Steven Luedders, and release (eventually) by EA in the mid 1980's is one of the best climbing games ever. It runs like a dream on my 300Mhz Axim with Pocket 64 from clickgamer.com. It's 171K in D64 format and the developers would probably -LOVE- getting a single dollar from this "property". In general C64 games run very well on modern mobile devices and fit the screen dimensions nicely too.
To be honest, I'd rather play a well crafted C64 game (like Wizard's Crown or the abovementioned Wizard, or any text adventure) on my Axim than even think about a modern game that'd use a great deal more memory and resources to battle nicely rendered gorillas...
It's just amazing, really, how much the C64 programmers got out of the hardware, and how effectively the emulator folk have translated that to the mobile market.
Druid:
http://www.c64.com/detail.php?gameid=10
Is a fantastic game.
Trust me, if you can find a C64 emulator for your platform then by all means explore some of the forgotten gems of the past.
-dameron
Is that the same Tom Hanks that dumped that delicious Nicole Kidman? If so, screw him, he needs nother eye transplant or his money back! She's a fox. Oh well, what can you do, he's been a jerk ever since Welcome Back Kotter got canned.
And don't get me started on Battlefield Earth. He wouldn't be squat without Tarantino pulling his career back from the pits of disco hell.
Tom Hanks, what a lamer.
-dameron
Great post. Well thought out.
Too bad the Republicans reading it never got past:
"Like oil......."
They seem to get stuck on that word for some reason...
-dameron
Back in the day music was cheap. Recording companies had few bankable artists and wanted to get these artists as much exposure as possible. This paradigm existed pretty much unchanged from the time of sheet music to the invention of the cd.
Ah, the cd!
The magical bandit that changed music forever. With the introduction of the cd, music distributers realized that people who already own a certain song (i.e. purchased the album or the single) would eventually pay to own that song again, in a slightly better format. I can't tell you how many people I know used to be music collectors. Owning every song ever released by a particular artist, every kind of album cover, misprint album cover, or censored record was a goal. And yet, when these albums, sometimes dozens of them, were re-released on CD, they purchased them all again...
RIAA: OMFG!!!! GOLDMINE!!!
While mp3/ogg/bla aren't as pristine and, in the mind of the audiophile, "better" versions of the same song, people want them because of their convenience and portability. They're the "CD format change" of the 90's to date.
What should concern the "end user" is that what the RIAA really wants to control is music's distribution format. They really want portable, digital (i.e. almost free to distribute) songs available. Their format. Their distribution method. Their profits all over again, every generation, same song, with endless copyright. A license to print money effectively.
You wanna buy the latest and greatest pop song, ok, it's -ALWAYS- gonna be $15 'cause some sappy sod in a business suit decided in 1987 that he just fucking -HAD- to repopulate his Gordon Lightfoot collection with those new fangled "CD"s. People have "proven" that's the going rate for music, and you can bet your ass the RIAA is computing all their "damages" based on the last "transistional" cycle, the "CD revolution".
That's why this is important and why music's expensive. Popular music used to cost $1 or $2/song, back when singles ruled the day. But noooo. Some dumbass had to pony up the big bucks to "upgrade" his collection....
-dameron
I'm sick of hearing about the "War on" this or the "War on" that. As a civilization we're well past this cheap and easy metaphor. Why "war on" anything? How well have our past "Wars" gone:
- LBJ's war on poverty
- Nixon's war on cancer
- Reagan's war on drugs
- W's war on terrorism
To paraphrase the best source for "War" info: remember when we had that war on drugs and now there aren't drugs anymore?Seems having a "War on" something makes it omnipresent and ustoppable.
-dameron
>If faced with creeping tyranny, wouldn't you want to be armed, just in case?
To paraphrase a jurist I heard on the radio recently, the 2nd Amendment isn't our great bulwark against tyrany, the 1st Amendment is.
The upcoming stealth FCC media consolidation deregulation poses a far, far greater threat to democracy than the most rabid gun control advocate.
-dameron
Shamelessly snaked from a book review at:
...The author states, "a safe assumption is that this notion was proclaimed and promoted, in the main, by men. From this anatomic designation comes the term hysteria."
http://www.bestbookdeal.com/book/0943126568
"Hysterectomy, literally "cutting the uterus," leads to a discussion of Plato's belief that the uterus was an animal roaming freely within the female body and causing moodiness...
>>
That's 19th century "science" for you. A moody (i.e. trapped in the 19th century) woman is "hysterical", best remedy: remove her uterus.
21st century science has an analog in chemical (or even physical) castration. If someone is mentally unstable enough to be a sexual predator then off go the man parts. It's not spot on the same kind of thing, because I don't think there's any institutional sexism woven into the chemical/physical castration debate.
For and against links for chemical castration:
http://www.csun.edu/~psy453/crimes_y.htm
http://www.csun.edu/~psy453/crimes_n.htm
Suppose the cops are evil and mutated?
Will Duke
1) call the ACLU and report an abuse of power, or
2) unload both barrels into their porcine bottoms?
I can see it now, in 3D Realms vs. the State of Washington, the argument over whether a half-man/half pig is nonetheless still a cop.
Meanwhile shooting a stripper with a shotgun will still result in an explosion of gore and money.
We need a little less pandering to law enforcement and a few more strippers.
-dameron
Here:
t ml
http://store.yahoo.com/extremepcgear/fd1128mb.h
128mb usb keychain drive: $32.99
-dameron
Two of the following are true:
1) Love slashdot.
2) Push nearly everyone I know in IT to read slashdot.
3) Slashdot is still important.
Unfortunately I'm struggling between #2 and #3.
This post is nothing more than an advert for a 128MB USB wrist watch that has been heavily advertised by www.thinkgeek.com. I've seen half a dozen popular web sites today that mention this watch and -every- one mentions thinkgeek yet somehow slashdot manages to find a "submission" that doesn't.
Odd. Yep. Unlikely. Yeppers.
Still, a neat piece of tech, not nearly worth $100. A 128mb keychain is like $30 and few will care if you're keychain is goofy. They're much more likely to notice the geek watch.
I mean, but your friends will dig it, and that's what matters...
-dameron
A conversation that has happened everywhere from New Mexico to Missouri to Alabama (at least):
:)
Person 1: "I'm gonna go to the store, you wanna coke?"
Person 2: "Yeah."
Person 1: "What kind."
Person 2: "Uh, Seven-Up."
Everywhere I've traveled/lived in the South (AL, LA, MS, TN, AR, TX) this usage as been the norm, and friends from places further afield have verified this usage in other southern and southwestern states.
The development of differnet kinds of Coke (Diet, Cherry, Vanilla, etc.) has probably blunted this usage in the recent past as it now becomes necessary to specify not only what kind of "coke" one wants (i.e. Dr. Pepper) but what kind of "Coke" (i.e. Caffeine Free, Diet).
But who knows? I only noticed it when in college someone called a Coke a "pop" and I almost fell out of my chair. Communists must drink "pop".
-dameron
are soon martyrs to their partisan causes.
Sorry to use "partisan" in the neo-conservative manner, but Slashdot routinely invites me into the unspoken debate whether RMS is the "arbitor elegante" of the entire ideology, or just the Derek Smart of (to displease everyone) "Alternative Software".
Please, Slashdot, explain to me how publishing these persistant articles re:
"RMS is a weird monster driven by a cult of personality that exists in his own mind"
aren't editorial choices. Either say that RMS is a freak, or don't, this weird "I know she's my ex-girlfriend but I might need to screw her someday" attitude is -so- 1997.
-dameron
Otherwise why does this little thing even rank a mention?
-dameron
This the the equivalent of Jesus bitch smacking all the disciples 'cause Peter was a little to loud in his preaching. Hopefully one day Apple will realize fanatics who leak information about their products should be encouraged. After all, any press is good press, especially if you have a demonstrably inferior product.
-dameron
He's following long established military strategies designed to keep an enemy army from using captured resources.
These acts aren't war crimes, and if an invasion force were marching up the Mississippi river valley you can bet your ass that the retreating U.S. military would be blowing up fuel reserves instead of letting them fall under enemy control.
-dameron
MythTv at www.mythtv.org does everything you require, and it's open source to boot. It has a very nice semi-transparent program guide that automatically downloads schedule information for your cable/sat system into a mysql database and lets you record shows, pause live tv, etc.
-dameron