Seems to me this could be easily done if your DVR box can be assigned an IP
All but the earliest unhacked TiVos can be. In all others, you're given the standard IP configuration questions (IP address, DNS, Netmask, default route) when you configure your USB-Ethernet/802.11 interface. Or you can just use DHCP, of course.
Well, it looks like I'm not totally out of luck then - according to the Final Fantasy Anthology link that you provided, Final Fantasy VI is a reworking of Final Fantasy III! Is that right?
That very well might be good enough for me. Thanks!
OK, how can I play the whole series on hardware that is currently in production?
This covers I & II, and 7 onwards are on the PS/PS2. How about 3-6? I see that Amazon once had 3 & 4 as downloadable.exe files, but they are now "out of stock."
I understand that different "episodes" in the series are not necessarily connected, but I'm still somewhat compulsive about playing games "in order."
Unfortunately, Firefox is unacceptable (to me) on the Mac because it doesn't conform to the rest of the Mac OS X interface. I love the idea of cross-platform development, but not when it sacrifices strict conformance to UI guidelines for each platform.
Unfortunately, more often than not these days journalists instead collect press releases and reword them, occasionally making telephone calls to flesh them out or to get "the other point of view."
Actual comprehensive investigative journalism is rare enough these days that it's no surprise that people confuse journalism and blogging.
Blogging is useful for eyewitness accounts, but journalism requires some editorial input to help make clear the distinctions between witnessed events, speculated events, and rumoured events.
OSX got window focus absolutely right. I took a class of Final Cut Pro a few weeks ago, and even though I was juggling an Instant Messenging client and a web browser, typically calling a function in one app and jumping to another before tasks were completed, I never had a window unexpectedly bully its way to the front.
Unfortunately, I have not been so lucky on Mac OS X. There are a few apps that consistently either change modes out from under the user (like iTunes when a device is acknowledged) or Safari, which moves focus to a loading web page when it finishes loading.
This is by far my #1 peeve, and I really wish it would stop. Even Apple's apps do it - how can we convincingly yell at other apps like MPlayer (which is truly evil, grabbing focus even when it's invoked in a batch file) for the same transgression?
I handed over CEOship of my startup to a sales guy in 1998, and Red Hat bought the company in 2000. So I definitely understand your position.
Your best bet is to connect with local business development groups (in Pittsburgh, it was the Pittsburgh Technology Council) and groups like SCORE. Look particularly at networking opportunities like lunches, and be up front about what you're looking for and cautious about committing to any one person. You'll eventually meet people who will be pretty good fits. You'll want to find not an MBA, but somebody with substantial experience who might or might not have an MBA but whose skills are strong exactly where yours are weak. Also, do not discount the candidate's networking skills - a CEO who is in tight with local VCs can make lots of business opportunities appear even if you don't want VC. But don't neglect to check references, they'll tell you a lot about what you can expect in the future.
I could go on about the cultural conflicts with your new CEO that you'll encounter once you've started down that road, but those could fill a book or three and might get me sued.
The only way to fail the mission was to let time run out,
Not so. There are some missions that you can fail by preventing the bad guys from destroying something glowing. It's not a large number of missions, but they're there.
How does it compare with something like iChat's audio (not to mention video) support, or other free voip applications?
Assuming you have broadband already, of course.
I consider it just about any computer/computer information transfer that allows near-real time reading/posting/replying (as Usenet certainly did)
But that's the thing... message propagation on USENET often took hours-to-days between remote sites, even in the late 80s. Even in 1990, there were NASA sites on the Internet (Arpanet) that did not have a USENET feed!
It really isn't correct to say that the Internet "was called USENET" at any point. They're totally different beasts.
And by the way, USENET wasn't created until 1979 - you couldn't have been using it anywhere near 1970.
Ehn. I'm pretty sure you know this (or at least I would hope that you would), but Internet means TCP/IP, and developed parallel to USENET. USENET was content (specifically newsgroups, and a specific set of newsgroups after the great renaming), while the Internet is the transmission method.
USENET was NOT the Internet. USENET newsgroups were propogated over uucp, DECNet, BITNet, and so on... it was actually fairly late in the game that the majority of the propogation happened over TCP/IP instead of uucp.
In principle this isn't that new, it's an expansion upon an existing program.
For example, if you check the north Florida (Jacksonville sectional) aviation chart there's an obstacle along the west coast of the state, a border observation balloon at the "bend" between the peninsula of Florida and the pan handle. It has been used for years to monitor the Florida coast against smuggling from the Gulf of Mexico.
What looks different about this program is that the "balloons" will move at a very high altitude. It's unclear to me why stationary stations aren't sufficient for border monitoring, unless you want to monitor activity by all sorts of people in the interior of the country.
It does give them another excuse for UFO debunking though.
in the last election the Libertarian candidate got jack shit for votes. I think the Libertarians have already proven themselves to be unelectable.
Uh, yeah. Using that logic, no other party other than the Democrats and the Republicans could ever be considered (and going back in history, the Republican party would never have succeeded when they were the "3rd party").
Hell, you could even use your feeble-minded "reasoning" against the Democrats in 1992: since Michael Dukakis only got 111 out of 538 electoral votes in 1988, Bill Clinton was obviously unelectable in 1992!
"Qualified candidates" should really be translated as something like "any candidates who have a chance in hell of getting more than a handful of votes."
And who decides which candidates have such a chance? The government? Surely even the most simple fool can see why that's an obvious conflict of interest. Or any organization that claims to be independent but is actually run by a balance of only the two dominant parties? No, no conflict of interest there. Or perhaps you think that early polls
Locking the country in to the two parties forces our political debate down to the level of the perpetual false dichotomy - we're forced to choose between the special interests funding the Republicans and the special interests funding the Democrats. Even when "third-party" candidates aren't electable, they can profoundly influence the debate in very important ways.
When water is the best choice, we shouldn't be forced to choose between Coke and Pepsi.
For a long time, Ross Perot actually had a shot at being electable, and it wouldn't have happened without his using his money to break through the duopoly of the major parties. He wouldn't have made a good president, I think, but people had a right to see what he stood for and in the end, having his voice in the debate was extremely good for the country. He brought a political focus to the budget deficit and the national debt that we hadn't had in a generation.
There is a process for deciding who actually has the chance in hell of getting more votes. It's called an election. Before the election, the government must enforce objective standards even-handedly to all candidates.
I think it's perfectly consistent for the Libertarian Party to use one part of the state (the Courts) to stop another part of the state (the legislative, funding the university and therefore the debate) from behaving in an abhorrent manner, engaging in election fraud. Here's why:
Let's be very clear: the state should not be excluding legally qualified candidates from any context featuring candidates just because they are not part of the dominant party. That is election fraud, and is exactly what single-party states do. That's how Saddam Hussein got 99% of the Iraqi vote.
Libertarians roughly believe that Government force should only be employed to protect the citizenry from force and fraud. The orthodoxies vary upon what should be considered force or fraud, but that's the core thought.
The suit is being file to prevent government force (ie, money collected under threat of force) to fund election fraud. That's perfectly consistent.
And that's all beside the delicious maneuver of using the political system's hypocrisies against itself.
And don't forget the comic book based on the MMORPG based on comic books...
City of Heroes
It's too bad that it isn't very good. What works in the game, hunting mobs of bad guys for fairly simplistic plots, doesn't work very well in a comic book.
There should be a law making all records public after a certain period of time
I think we need more than that. I think we need a federal version of many states' Open Government laws - see Florida's Government-In-The-Sunshine, for example, which is in the Florida Constitution.
The government should have a priority of making most of its operations transparent.
Slashdot Mirror
That very well might be good enough for me. Thanks!
OK, how can I play the whole series on hardware that is currently in production?
.exe files, but they are now "out of stock."
This covers I & II, and 7 onwards are on the PS/PS2. How about 3-6? I see that Amazon once had 3 & 4 as downloadable
I understand that different "episodes" in the series are not necessarily connected, but I'm still somewhat compulsive about playing games "in order."
Agreed.
Unfortunately, Firefox is unacceptable (to me) on the Mac because it doesn't conform to the rest of the Mac OS X interface. I love the idea of cross-platform development, but not when it sacrifices strict conformance to UI guidelines for each platform.
Actual comprehensive investigative journalism is rare enough these days that it's no surprise that people confuse journalism and blogging.
Blogging is useful for eyewitness accounts, but journalism requires some editorial input to help make clear the distinctions between witnessed events, speculated events, and rumoured events.
This is by far my #1 peeve, and I really wish it would stop. Even Apple's apps do it - how can we convincingly yell at other apps like MPlayer (which is truly evil, grabbing focus even when it's invoked in a batch file) for the same transgression?
About 17% of mine comes from nuclear power produced at the the Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant in Florida.
I handed over CEOship of my startup to a sales guy in 1998, and Red Hat bought the company in 2000. So I definitely understand your position.
Your best bet is to connect with local business development groups (in Pittsburgh, it was the Pittsburgh Technology Council) and groups like SCORE. Look particularly at networking opportunities like lunches, and be up front about what you're looking for and cautious about committing to any one person. You'll eventually meet people who will be pretty good fits. You'll want to find not an MBA, but somebody with substantial experience who might or might not have an MBA but whose skills are strong exactly where yours are weak. Also, do not discount the candidate's networking skills - a CEO who is in tight with local VCs can make lots of business opportunities appear even if you don't want VC. But don't neglect to check references, they'll tell you a lot about what you can expect in the future.
I could go on about the cultural conflicts with your new CEO that you'll encounter once you've started down that road, but those could fill a book or three and might get me sued.
If you don't shuffle you should just join the tracks before you rip; the menu option is under "Advanced" and it makes them into a single track.
Not the best solution, but it might help you a little bit.
Now somebody needs to write something that automatically syncs the iPod with something like Autopr0n, and Apple'll sell a kazillion more.
How does it compare with something like iChat's audio (not to mention video) support, or other free voip applications? Assuming you have broadband already, of course.
It really isn't correct to say that the Internet "was called USENET" at any point. They're totally different beasts.
And by the way, USENET wasn't created until 1979 - you couldn't have been using it anywhere near 1970.
Ehn. I'm pretty sure you know this (or at least I would hope that you would), but Internet means TCP/IP, and developed parallel to USENET. USENET was content (specifically newsgroups, and a specific set of newsgroups after the great renaming), while the Internet is the transmission method.
USENET was NOT the Internet. USENET newsgroups were propogated over uucp, DECNet, BITNet, and so on... it was actually fairly late in the game that the majority of the propogation happened over TCP/IP instead of uucp.
Former member of the USENET Volunteer Votetakers,
will have to be modified to "the drummer drools oil on both sides of the drummer's mouth."
On the other hand, the joke: Will still be valid, but a bit less funny.
That's 1996. Maybe the *web* was young at that point, but a whole lot of us had been using the net for more than 10 years at that point.
Hell, even AOL had been plaguing the net for years at that point.
They'll be 10-15 miles up. That's not exactly easy to pick out of a very large sky.
In principle this isn't that new, it's an expansion upon an existing program.
For example, if you check the north Florida (Jacksonville sectional) aviation chart there's an obstacle along the west coast of the state, a border observation balloon at the "bend" between the peninsula of Florida and the pan handle. It has been used for years to monitor the Florida coast against smuggling from the Gulf of Mexico.
What looks different about this program is that the "balloons" will move at a very high altitude. It's unclear to me why stationary stations aren't sufficient for border monitoring, unless you want to monitor activity by all sorts of people in the interior of the country.
It does give them another excuse for UFO debunking though.
Hell, you could even use your feeble-minded "reasoning" against the Democrats in 1992: since Michael Dukakis only got 111 out of 538 electoral votes in 1988, Bill Clinton was obviously unelectable in 1992!
Locking the country in to the two parties forces our political debate down to the level of the perpetual false dichotomy - we're forced to choose between the special interests funding the Republicans and the special interests funding the Democrats. Even when "third-party" candidates aren't electable, they can profoundly influence the debate in very important ways.
When water is the best choice, we shouldn't be forced to choose between Coke and Pepsi.
For a long time, Ross Perot actually had a shot at being electable, and it wouldn't have happened without his using his money to break through the duopoly of the major parties. He wouldn't have made a good president, I think, but people had a right to see what he stood for and in the end, having his voice in the debate was extremely good for the country. He brought a political focus to the budget deficit and the national debt that we hadn't had in a generation.
There is a process for deciding who actually has the chance in hell of getting more votes. It's called an election. Before the election, the government must enforce objective standards even-handedly to all candidates.
I think it's perfectly consistent for the Libertarian Party to use one part of the state (the Courts) to stop another part of the state (the legislative, funding the university and therefore the debate) from behaving in an abhorrent manner, engaging in election fraud. Here's why:
Let's be very clear: the state should not be excluding legally qualified candidates from any context featuring candidates just because they are not part of the dominant party. That is election fraud, and is exactly what single-party states do. That's how Saddam Hussein got 99% of the Iraqi vote.
Libertarians roughly believe that Government force should only be employed to protect the citizenry from force and fraud. The orthodoxies vary upon what should be considered force or fraud, but that's the core thought.
The suit is being file to prevent government force (ie, money collected under threat of force) to fund election fraud. That's perfectly consistent.
And that's all beside the delicious maneuver of using the political system's hypocrisies against itself.
Let's get NASA out of the business of basic space access and back into the basic research without economic incentive that wouldn't be done otherwise.
Ferrying people and objects to space should be a commercial or military activity, instead of NASA trying to be all things to all people
And don't forget the comic book based on the MMORPG based on comic books...
City of Heroes
It's too bad that it isn't very good. What works in the game, hunting mobs of bad guys for fairly simplistic plots, doesn't work very well in a comic book.
The government should have a priority of making most of its operations transparent.