That's about 50x more effort then checking the book out from the library and photocopying it, or downloading the text form your favorite p2p network (most popular novels are available).
Re:Still can't open message in a new window
on
Gmail Adds Features
·
· Score: 1
You can use the Firefox Single Window extension to catch new window calls and convert them into new tabs.
Re:Does it work properly/completely with Opera yet
on
Gmail Adds Features
·
· Score: 1
Because it's still a better browser than IE, which also crashes.
The purpose of voting is to select the best candidate for the job. If someone doesn't have enough of an opinion to vote for themselves, then their vote only adds noise to the system. I'd rather not have an extra 50 million voters if they all voted for whoever's yard sign they last saw.
"Best" is subjective, but if you mean "fastest 3D performance at a consumer price", you want the Radeon 9000. Any Radeon or GeForce will work superbly in 2D with open-source drivers, but only Radeons 9000 and below are 3D-accelerated.
This link was purposely not left clickable, because the 'nyud.net' at the end, would cause Slashdot to add the [nyud.net] to the link text, which would stop people from clicking on it.
Lemme get this straight. In order to get the most people possible to click your link, you made it non-clickable?
There isn't one. If you're happy with what you've got, don't switch. But I wouldn't recommend Gentoo to someone looking to try out Linux; I'd recommend Ubuntu. It's easier to install and gives you a clean, functional desktop without three days of installing, compiling, and manual configuration.
In any case, the Nader electors, seeing that there was no way Nader could win, could have switched their votes to Gore. If seven of them did so, Gore would win.
They're using the Crystal iconset, presumably because they have more important things to do right now than build their own. The rest of the interface doesn't look all that much like KDE, any more than GNOME, Windows, or OSX do.
The res and mapsize are technical issues. The gameplay itself consists of the races, units, balance, combat, that sort of thing. IMHO (and the opinion of many others, apparently), Starcraft trounces TA and every other RTS (including Warcraft III) in those areas.
Starcraft didn't squash TA because it was better marketed (well, it did, but that's not the main reason). Starcraft squashed TA because it was a better game, in spite of not being as technically advanced.
You're confusing Linux and open-source. FreeCraft is the only one of the games you mention that's open-source; the other two have commercial license agreements. And FreeCraft may be a decent game, but it doesn't hold a candle to Starcraft.
You've evidently never heard of EphPod, GtkPod, or any of the countless other iPod interface programs. Apple's perfectly fine with non-iTunes programs, they just don't support them.
Hussein was a known problem, we'd tangled with him before.
And what happened then? We decided not to take him out, because our president at the time had at least a shred of intelligence and could forsee the consequences:
"Trying to eliminate Saddam.. would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq...there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."
Well, the true conservative bloggers would be attacking Bush for running up huge deficits, expanding the government, and curtailing civil liberties. So Bush might want to rebut them too.
A good portable CD player can run 30 hours on 2 AAs. The color screen and the proc may suck power, but I don't think the optical drive will be as much of an issue as some people think.
Al Gore didn't want any of the votes of Nader supporters.
I don't know what you're smoking. Al Gore, like all politicians, wanted all the votes he could get.
If Gore had wanted Nader supporters to vote for him, he would have debated Nader and attempted to win over his supporters.
That would be pointless, because Nader voters generally are quite sure that they favor Nader on the issues. The question for them was not "do I prefer Gore to Nader?", because they've already decided "no". The question was "will my beliefs be better served by a Nader or Gore vote?".
Similarly, I'm sure Kerry would love all the Nader/Green/Libertarian/etc. votes he can get. But debating those candidates would gain him few of their supporters, and would alienate quite a few more of his centrist supporters.
Third-party candidates cost Bush votes, yes, but Nader polled the highest by far of all third-party candidates, and I think it's fair to say that the majority (not all, but many) of Naders voters would have voted Gore.
NOBODY was disenfranchised!
And you know this how? It's fairly well-documented that thousands of voters (mostly black) were erroneously purged from the rolls and turned away at the polls.
The plurality/electoral college system is undemocratic. If 35% of poeple want Gore, 25% want a more liberal candidate, and 40% want Bush, then Bush wins even though the will of the people is clearly against him. When states divide their electors to reflect the actual vote, and/or when we switch to approval or instant runoff voting, then people will be able to effectively vote for the person they actually want to be president. As it is, such a move would make perfect sense on Nader's part.
The candidates aren't even allowed to talk to one another or ask questions, and there's almost no time for rebuttal or follow-up. What remains is two interleaved speeches, not a debate.
So Nader should have jettisoned his campaign to save Gore?
He should have asked his voters in swing states to vote for Gore, and Gore voters in non-swing states to vote for him.
So we could have an inept Gore Administration in the place of an equally inept Bush Administration?
We'll never know what Gore's administration would have been like. I'm fairly sure, though, that Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq, which would leave the world a much safer place at the moment.
Gore lost Florida because of Gore.
True. Gore also lost Florida because of Nadar. Multiple factors can lead to a single event.
Slashdot Mirror
5 millihertz would be the emulated CPU, so there's no actual silicon. And that's a pretty good approximation of PearPC's speed. :-)
That's about 50x more effort then checking the book out from the library and photocopying it, or downloading the text form your favorite p2p network (most popular novels are available).
You can use the Firefox Single Window extension to catch new window calls and convert them into new tabs.
Because it's still a better browser than IE, which also crashes.
The purpose of voting is to select the best candidate for the job. If someone doesn't have enough of an opinion to vote for themselves, then their vote only adds noise to the system. I'd rather not have an extra 50 million voters if they all voted for whoever's yard sign they last saw.
"Best" is subjective, but if you mean "fastest 3D performance at a consumer price", you want the Radeon 9000. Any Radeon or GeForce will work superbly in 2D with open-source drivers, but only Radeons 9000 and below are 3D-accelerated.
Lemme get this straight. In order to get the most people possible to click your link, you made it non-clickable?
There isn't one. If you're happy with what you've got, don't switch. But I wouldn't recommend Gentoo to someone looking to try out Linux; I'd recommend Ubuntu. It's easier to install and gives you a clean, functional desktop without three days of installing, compiling, and manual configuration.
Well, not guarenteed. I think it's perfectly plausible that 15 or more Nader electors would switch faced with the impossibility of a win.
In any case, the Nader electors, seeing that there was no way Nader could win, could have switched their votes to Gore. If seven of them did so, Gore would win.
They're using the Crystal iconset, presumably because they have more important things to do right now than build their own. The rest of the interface doesn't look all that much like KDE, any more than GNOME, Windows, or OSX do.
The res and mapsize are technical issues. The gameplay itself consists of the races, units, balance, combat, that sort of thing. IMHO (and the opinion of many others, apparently), Starcraft trounces TA and every other RTS (including Warcraft III) in those areas.
Starcraft didn't squash TA because it was better marketed (well, it did, but that's not the main reason). Starcraft squashed TA because it was a better game, in spite of not being as technically advanced.
You're confusing Linux and open-source. FreeCraft is the only one of the games you mention that's open-source; the other two have commercial license agreements. And FreeCraft may be a decent game, but it doesn't hold a candle to Starcraft.
You've evidently never heard of EphPod, GtkPod, or any of the countless other iPod interface programs. Apple's perfectly fine with non-iTunes programs, they just don't support them.
And what happened then? We decided not to take him out, because our president at the time had at least a shred of intelligence and could forsee the consequences:
"you can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror" - GWB
Well, the true conservative bloggers would be attacking Bush for running up huge deficits, expanding the government, and curtailing civil liberties. So Bush might want to rebut them too.
A good portable CD player can run 30 hours on 2 AAs. The color screen and the proc may suck power, but I don't think the optical drive will be as much of an issue as some people think.
I don't know what you're smoking. Al Gore, like all politicians, wanted all the votes he could get.
If Gore had wanted Nader supporters to vote for him, he would have debated Nader and attempted to win over his supporters.
That would be pointless, because Nader voters generally are quite sure that they favor Nader on the issues. The question for them was not "do I prefer Gore to Nader?", because they've already decided "no". The question was "will my beliefs be better served by a Nader or Gore vote?".
Similarly, I'm sure Kerry would love all the Nader/Green/Libertarian/etc. votes he can get. But debating those candidates would gain him few of their supporters, and would alienate quite a few more of his centrist supporters.
Third-party candidates cost Bush votes, yes, but Nader polled the highest by far of all third-party candidates, and I think it's fair to say that the majority (not all, but many) of Naders voters would have voted Gore.
NOBODY was disenfranchised!
And you know this how? It's fairly well-documented that thousands of voters (mostly black) were erroneously purged from the rolls and turned away at the polls.
The plurality/electoral college system is undemocratic. If 35% of poeple want Gore, 25% want a more liberal candidate, and 40% want Bush, then Bush wins even though the will of the people is clearly against him. When states divide their electors to reflect the actual vote, and/or when we switch to approval or instant runoff voting, then people will be able to effectively vote for the person they actually want to be president. As it is, such a move would make perfect sense on Nader's part.
I'm sure Kerry could debate himself for 90 minutes. It's called thinking, and it's a useful skill I wish Bush would attempt to learn.
The candidates aren't even allowed to talk to one another or ask questions, and there's almost no time for rebuttal or follow-up. What remains is two interleaved speeches, not a debate.
He should have asked his voters in swing states to vote for Gore, and Gore voters in non-swing states to vote for him.
So we could have an inept Gore Administration in the place of an equally inept Bush Administration?
We'll never know what Gore's administration would have been like. I'm fairly sure, though, that Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq, which would leave the world a much safer place at the moment.
Gore lost Florida because of Gore.
True. Gore also lost Florida because of Nadar. Multiple factors can lead to a single event.