U.S. immigration officials refused Tuesday to allow Robert Fisk, longtime Middle East correspondent for the London newspaper, The Independent, to board a plane from Toronto to Denver. Fisk was on his way to Santa Fe for a sold-out appearance in the Lannan Foundation 's readings-and-conversations series Wednesday night. According to Christie Mazuera Davis, a Lannan program officer, Fisk was told that his papers were not in order.
Have you considered the possibility that his papers may not have been in order?
A 64kbps WMA file might possibly sound as good as a poorly encoded 96kbps MP3, in some cases. In no way is it anywhere close to a lame-encoded 128kbps VBR MP3. If you have listening tests to back up your statement, please post them.
The point of "decoding and reencoding... can only lower quality" was that when you buy a song from iTMS, it has artifacts from being compressed with 128kbps AAC. If you burn that to a CD and rerip to MP3, AAC, or any other lossy format, you're adding a new set of compression artifacts to the already lossy file. So there's no (legal) way to convert songs from the iTMS into non-DRMed formats without losing quality.
It can say something that's already in the summary or the article; or that has been recently posted elsewhere (i.e., if someone came up with a joke about Apple and started posting it in every Apple-related story, it'd be fair to mark it redundant). In this case, however, the mods are most likely smoking crack.
1 mile in 20 minutes is 3 mph. I can walk faster than that, and keep it up for much longer than a mile (on flat ground), and I don't consider myself fit.
Because 360 is divisible by a lot of numbers, making it easier to work with than say, 359. It's really pretty arbitrary, which is why mathematicians use radians for most serious purposes.
You, sir, are ignorant. Being about to choose a CMYK color in the color picker means nothing; the GIMP converts those values into the RGB colorspace when you use them in an image. Look in the menus: Image > Mode. You will see RGB, Grayscale, and Indexed. CMYK is not an option.
No one said the GIMP doesn't have layers; the grandparent said that it doesn't have layer effects, which is most certainly true.
Statistics are BS. Apache 2 has been around longer and is open-source, so you'd expect more security flaws to be reported than with a newer, closed product like IIS. I have no idea whether IIS or Apache is more secure, but you're not going to find out by looking at numbers of security advisories.
The conversation was "odd he mentioned that Firefox should retain the last URL when opening a new window"...the question of should a new tab copy the former window is different.
The discussion was about windows because that's all that IE can do. The only time I ever open a new *window* in Firefox is when I want to browse a totally different set of pages then I already have open (say, I've got a bunch of reference sites open in one window and I get the urge to read Fark and open lots of links in tabs; then I open a new window for Fark). I think that fits with typical usage patterns; people open related pages (say a/. discussion and any replies to it) in tabs in the same window.
I use a PC that was cheapish 4 years ago and notice little lag.
There's enough lag right now on my current PC (dual Athlon 2200+, 1GB RAM, Windows Server 2k3) that I can hit ctrl-N in IE followed by alt-D (to focus the URL box), start typing, and then have focus taken away from the box when the page finishes loading. So it's not instant, and the way it behaves makes it a horrible pain to deal with.
Don't assume that just because something isn't in your usual usage pattern, it doesn't make any sense. Cloning the current window lets me have a "safe backup" of my current browsing state (one that might be annoying to recreate) and then "play" in the new window...for instance, if I was browsing Slashdot, started a reply, but then wanted to check out the conversation to cut and paste something, or do a quick ctrl-F, I can just hit ctrl-N, and then "back" in the new window (thanks to IE's niceness of duping browser history to) and be right back to my previous browse position, without having to renavigate through slashdot.
That example doesn't make much sense to me. Why not just go back in your current window? Firefox will remember the text you already typed. To get back to your reply page, just find it under the Back menu.
Or do what I do and middle-click the "Reply to This" link to open it in a new tab. That way you still have the original discussion open without having to do any back-button/window-cloning gymnastics.
I realize that you have certain usage patterns based on IE's way of doing things, and they're not wrong if they work for you. My point is that window cloning is a huge annoyance to a lot of people, and anything that it achieves can be done better using other browser features.
That "perfect" workaround is useless if you use tabs, which most people do.
I don't know exactly how IE clones windows, but on slower systems or systems with little memory, there can be a huge lag between asking IE to open a new window and the point at which it has opened the window and loaded the page (or at least paused long enough to let you click "stop"). Besides, it doesn't make any sense to copy the current window; the page you're already looking is the one page you're definitely not going to want in the new window.
If everything that could be a configuration option actually became one, the preferences window would be so huge and cluttered as to be impossible to use. As it is, there are several extensions that provide this functionality.
Yes, the size of the pixels bothers me. The day I'm not able to tell the difference between a monitor and the pages of a book (ignoring the issue of the monitor emitting light) is the day that resolutions have gotton high enough.
In the US, NPR stations are mostly FM and provide news, talk, weather, and other assorted stuff (like Prairie Home Companion) that an iPod doesn't. To me, that alone is reason to have an FM radio. Then again, I don't need one built into my iPod; I already have one in my car and one at home.
Slashdot Mirror
Now there's an oxymoron. Perhaps you meant "non-reproductive sex"?
Have you considered the possibility that his papers may not have been in order?
A 64kbps WMA file might possibly sound as good as a poorly encoded 96kbps MP3, in some cases. In no way is it anywhere close to a lame-encoded 128kbps VBR MP3. If you have listening tests to back up your statement, please post them.
The iPod Photo probably can't decode H.264, but it's certainly capable of playing video.
The point of "decoding and reencoding ... can only lower quality" was that when you buy a song from iTMS, it has artifacts from being compressed with 128kbps AAC. If you burn that to a CD and rerip to MP3, AAC, or any other lossy format, you're adding a new set of compression artifacts to the already lossy file. So there's no (legal) way to convert songs from the iTMS into non-DRMed formats without losing quality.
It's called metamoderating. Your metamod results affect how often you get mod points.
Since the DMCA passed, if you circumvent copy protection to do it.
It can say something that's already in the summary or the article; or that has been recently posted elsewhere (i.e., if someone came up with a joke about Apple and started posting it in every Apple-related story, it'd be fair to mark it redundant). In this case, however, the mods are most likely smoking crack.
1 mile in 20 minutes is 3 mph. I can walk faster than that, and keep it up for much longer than a mile (on flat ground), and I don't consider myself fit.
iTunes with a 20GB library loaded on my machine uses 20MB of RAM and 0-1% CPU. I don't think that's excessive.
Because 360 is divisible by a lot of numbers, making it easier to work with than say, 359. It's really pretty arbitrary, which is why mathematicians use radians for most serious purposes.
There's a lot more to trig than just S=O/H, C=A/H, and T=O/A.
No one said the GIMP doesn't have layers; the grandparent said that it doesn't have layer effects, which is most certainly true.
Yeah, and I've been unimpressed by PCs and Windows. If you don't run strictly PC apps they're slow as hell.
WTF is your point?
I agree with that.
Statistics are BS. Apache 2 has been around longer and is open-source, so you'd expect more security flaws to be reported than with a newer, closed product like IIS. I have no idea whether IIS or Apache is more secure, but you're not going to find out by looking at numbers of security advisories.
The discussion was about windows because that's all that IE can do. The only time I ever open a new *window* in Firefox is when I want to browse a totally different set of pages then I already have open (say, I've got a bunch of reference sites open in one window and I get the urge to read Fark and open lots of links in tabs; then I open a new window for Fark). I think that fits with typical usage patterns; people open related pages (say a /. discussion and any replies to it) in tabs in the same window.
I use a PC that was cheapish 4 years ago and notice little lag.
There's enough lag right now on my current PC (dual Athlon 2200+, 1GB RAM, Windows Server 2k3) that I can hit ctrl-N in IE followed by alt-D (to focus the URL box), start typing, and then have focus taken away from the box when the page finishes loading. So it's not instant, and the way it behaves makes it a horrible pain to deal with.
Don't assume that just because something isn't in your usual usage pattern, it doesn't make any sense. Cloning the current window lets me have a "safe backup" of my current browsing state (one that might be annoying to recreate) and then "play" in the new window...for instance, if I was browsing Slashdot, started a reply, but then wanted to check out the conversation to cut and paste something, or do a quick ctrl-F, I can just hit ctrl-N, and then "back" in the new window (thanks to IE's niceness of duping browser history to) and be right back to my previous browse position, without having to renavigate through slashdot.
That example doesn't make much sense to me. Why not just go back in your current window? Firefox will remember the text you already typed. To get back to your reply page, just find it under the Back menu.
Or do what I do and middle-click the "Reply to This" link to open it in a new tab. That way you still have the original discussion open without having to do any back-button/window-cloning gymnastics.
I realize that you have certain usage patterns based on IE's way of doing things, and they're not wrong if they work for you. My point is that window cloning is a huge annoyance to a lot of people, and anything that it achieves can be done better using other browser features.
I don't know exactly how IE clones windows, but on slower systems or systems with little memory, there can be a huge lag between asking IE to open a new window and the point at which it has opened the window and loaded the page (or at least paused long enough to let you click "stop"). Besides, it doesn't make any sense to copy the current window; the page you're already looking is the one page you're definitely not going to want in the new window.
If everything that could be a configuration option actually became one, the preferences window would be so huge and cluttered as to be impossible to use. As it is, there are several extensions that provide this functionality.
Yes, the size of the pixels bothers me. The day I'm not able to tell the difference between a monitor and the pages of a book (ignoring the issue of the monitor emitting light) is the day that resolutions have gotton high enough.
Yeah, that's what I meant. It's quite possible my French teacher was smoking crack, though.
I learned it as T-BANGS, with T standing for truth.
Not any more; GMail is public to anyone with a cell phone (or a friend with a cell phone).
I believe he was talking about the iPod, not Apple's laptops.
Just so you know, Bacon's Rebellion occured in colonial Virginia in 1676, 100 years before the Declaration of Independence.
In the US, NPR stations are mostly FM and provide news, talk, weather, and other assorted stuff (like Prairie Home Companion) that an iPod doesn't. To me, that alone is reason to have an FM radio. Then again, I don't need one built into my iPod; I already have one in my car and one at home.