What's so difficult about it? You get a bunch of people together after the polling station closes down, burn the old ballots and make up new ones.
I mean, obviously that can be accomplished quicker via electronic means.
But the point remains, it's not the machine itself that is responsible for the fraud per se, it's the people who have access to the machines after the polling stations close. Paper ballots have the exact same problem.
Why does everyone think paper ballots are foolproof? Remember, the election results are determined by the people counting the ballots, not the ballot technology itself.
So basically you're saying that the Democrat party's best chance to win the election is to hope that Republican voters don't bother voting? Maybe they should focus on giving Democrat voters compelling reasons to vote in record numbers.
That's a deliberate attempt to time the news with the election, right?
Well, since you're so sure that this was a well-timed coincidence, would you care to explain, rationally, how this will have any outcome on the election? The Republicans were always going to vote Republican and the Democrats were always going to vote Democrat. So I guess that just leaves the undecided voters, right? And are we to think that, upon hearing that Saddam has been sentenced to death, they are going to vote Republican solely because, uh, Saddam was sentenced to death?
Yep, that must be it. They were sitting on the fence and anxiously awaiting the Saddam trial verdict before deciding whether to vote Republican or Democrat on Tuesday.
Because all the Republicans who are running had an active part in making sure Saddam was sentenced to death, right?
Well, the "run" part isn't necessarily literal. They got the money, that's what matters. If they'd waited it out, more and more problems like these would've come to light and the value of YouTube would've dwindled accordingly.
The guys who sold YouTube were smart. Take the money and run, because when your business model revolves around flagrantly breaking copyright, it's not gonna last.
I suppose Google is smart enough to figure a way around it, but if not, no one's going to bother with it.
Re:Not even capable of what the original XBOX can
on
Wii Confirmed at 480p
·
· Score: 1
You've neglected the horizontal resolution aspect. 1080i is 1920x1080 (interlaced), whereas 720p is 1280x720 (progressive). Do the math. Even 1920*540 > 1280*720. But you're also forgetting that 1080i contains two 1920x540 fields for every 1920x1080 frame. So remember to double the amount of data generated by the last calculation.
Well, ask yourself this: do you think 640x480 is still an acceptable PC gaming resolution or do you see benefit in higher resolutions?
Another thing you should consider is that the Wii is going to stick around for what, five years or so? The 480p graphics will look absolutely primitive by then (I would argue they do right now), and the fact is that HDTV adoption is on the rise, and more and more households will have them in five year's time. Nintendo should've at least allowed the possibility of 720p/1080i output in order to "future-proof" the console.
Bottom line: there's no reason yet to get excited about the iTunes-cracking technology (and, indeed, no reason to buy an iPod), when you can already convert songs this way.
I wonder if the people who trot out the "analog loophole" argument are aware that the resulting quality sucks (D/A then A/D conversion) and you can only "convert" at 1x speed. In my mind, it's not really an acceptable method of stripping off DRM -- just a last resort for the desperate.
For major procedures, by law no hospital can turn away someone due to lack of funds. Hospitals also write off a significant number of procedures performed on those with no or limited ability to pay every year.
And what specifically has happened during Bush's term that has hurt freedom of press? It's one thing to claim that the media/press has been put in a stranglehold by Bush, it's quite another to prove it. Who's been thrown in jail for criticizing Bush? And please don't cite "bloggers" who scrawl "Kill Bush" on their Myspace page and complain about "freedom of speech" when the Secret Service comes calling.
Freedom of speech, just because saying 'Fush Buck' should not be cause enough to be sent to prison.
Who was arrested for this? They really need to back up their claims that reporters are getting thrown in jail left and right for criticizing this administration. A day doesn't go by that Bush et al aren't criticized by someone in the media, so by their logic there won't be reporters left by the end of his term.
Instead, I think their ranking system works like this:
How many years would I have to work to pay for my $100,000 medical procedure with the tax savings from living in the USA?
If you had a job that paid $100K a year in the US, it is highly doubtful that whatever company you're working for wouldn't provide you with excellent healthcare. Point being, you wouldn't have paid anywhere near $100K for your procedure.
But "free healthcare" advocates tend to forget that Americans with real jobs already get "free healthcare" -- they just have to pay co-pays which total to as much (or less than) what Canadians, etc. pay in additional taxes. And if they have minimal or no major medical issues in a given year, they pocket all the extra savings!
But I guess since you aren't directly cutting a check, that makes you think it's all "free".
11. Americans abroad are patronising and arrogant in other countries, and look down on local customs and mores as being inferior, quaint, and/or silly - and make this opinion obvious and loudly
Funny how this argument comes from Europeans, Canadians, etc. that spend all their time telling Americans that their culture is crap, their entertainment is crap, they're fat, they're stupid, they're too religious, they have too many guns, they're too prudish when it comes to sex and too liberal when it comes to violence, we need to provide universal health care, etc. In other words, we need to be more like European countries, because they have everything figured out and do everything the right way.
But we're the ones who aren't accepting of other people's culture and way of life...
The winners, who will have emerged from an initial pool of more than 2,700 entrants, will see their app idea realized as a Mac shareware application and earn royalties on sales.
Which is to say, they'll get royalties on one copy sold, and several million pirated.
I don't know about using a $25 PC to do development work, but you're mostly right.
I mean, it sounds to me like this guy has to deal with Windows for at least eight hours of his day if that's what he uses to do development work. So why not get a development PC and use Remote Desktop (yes, a client exists for Mac)? The GUI is actually very responsive, and seeing as how he's complaining about Parallels refreshing the entire desktop every time a character is typed, I think using a PC via Remote Desktop will win performance-wise quite easily. And the upside is, he still gets to use his beloved Mac desktop.
Look, I understand the desire to use one's OS of choice. But if you're forced to use another OS for work, why not bite the bullet and build another PC to handle the task adequately instead of gritting your teeth and pretending to find the performance of emulation/virtualization to be acceptable? It's going to lose out to a second machine hosting the OS every time.
I wasted over $3k in expenses out of pocket to interview with them.
Wow! For a company that provides "free everything" to their employees, they sure are cheapskates when it comes to interviewing potential employees. I've had far less prosperous companies pay my for my airfare, lodging, and food when visiting for an interview.
I'm willing to bet that they're "ignoring" USENET because it's not as well-known as Bittorrent and nowhere near as user-friendly.
Has anyone here actually tried to download anything of significant size from USENET? It's a baffling and frustrating experience. If your news server happens to carry all 30,000 messages related to whatever movie it is you're downloading, then you've got to make sure your newsreader supports whatever obscure 7-bit encoding format the poster used. In all likelihood, you'll never get that far because it's highly doubtful that your news server carries all the messages you want. For something small, say 20 or 30 parts, I'd say you have a 1 in 10 chance that your news server even carries all the messages. You could always pay a monthly fee for a much better news server, but the average person wouldn't want to bother with that.
I don't even see why anyone bothers getting binaries off USENET, honestly.
Slashdot Mirror
What's so difficult about it? You get a bunch of people together after the polling station closes down, burn the old ballots and make up new ones.
I mean, obviously that can be accomplished quicker via electronic means.
But the point remains, it's not the machine itself that is responsible for the fraud per se, it's the people who have access to the machines after the polling stations close. Paper ballots have the exact same problem.
You sound awfully sure that your paper ballot can't be tampered with in any way whatsoever.
Why does everyone think paper ballots are foolproof? Remember, the election results are determined by the people counting the ballots, not the ballot technology itself.
So basically you're saying that the Democrat party's best chance to win the election is to hope that Republican voters don't bother voting? Maybe they should focus on giving Democrat voters compelling reasons to vote in record numbers.
Well, since you're so sure that this was a well-timed coincidence, would you care to explain, rationally, how this will have any outcome on the election? The Republicans were always going to vote Republican and the Democrats were always going to vote Democrat. So I guess that just leaves the undecided voters, right? And are we to think that, upon hearing that Saddam has been sentenced to death, they are going to vote Republican solely because, uh, Saddam was sentenced to death?
Yep, that must be it. They were sitting on the fence and anxiously awaiting the Saddam trial verdict before deciding whether to vote Republican or Democrat on Tuesday.
Because all the Republicans who are running had an active part in making sure Saddam was sentenced to death, right?
Well, the "run" part isn't necessarily literal. They got the money, that's what matters. If they'd waited it out, more and more problems like these would've come to light and the value of YouTube would've dwindled accordingly.
The guys who sold YouTube were smart. Take the money and run, because when your business model revolves around flagrantly breaking copyright, it's not gonna last.
I suppose Google is smart enough to figure a way around it, but if not, no one's going to bother with it.
You've neglected the horizontal resolution aspect. 1080i is 1920x1080 (interlaced), whereas 720p is 1280x720 (progressive). Do the math. Even 1920*540 > 1280*720. But you're also forgetting that 1080i contains two 1920x540 fields for every 1920x1080 frame. So remember to double the amount of data generated by the last calculation.
1080i is more taxing than 720p.
Well, ask yourself this: do you think 640x480 is still an acceptable PC gaming resolution or do you see benefit in higher resolutions?
Another thing you should consider is that the Wii is going to stick around for what, five years or so? The 480p graphics will look absolutely primitive by then (I would argue they do right now), and the fact is that HDTV adoption is on the rise, and more and more households will have them in five year's time. Nintendo should've at least allowed the possibility of 720p/1080i output in order to "future-proof" the console.
Instead of making it look "gorgeous", how about focusing on making Linux look "consistent"?
Windows and Mac OS sure didn't achieve their easily identifiable "looks" by promoting dozens of inconsistent GUI toolkits.
I wonder if the people who trot out the "analog loophole" argument are aware that the resulting quality sucks (D/A then A/D conversion) and you can only "convert" at 1x speed. In my mind, it's not really an acceptable method of stripping off DRM -- just a last resort for the desperate.
The retired have access to Medicare.
Other low-income earners have access to Medicaid.
For major procedures, by law no hospital can turn away someone due to lack of funds. Hospitals also write off a significant number of procedures performed on those with no or limited ability to pay every year.
And what specifically has happened during Bush's term that has hurt freedom of press? It's one thing to claim that the media/press has been put in a stranglehold by Bush, it's quite another to prove it. Who's been thrown in jail for criticizing Bush? And please don't cite "bloggers" who scrawl "Kill Bush" on their Myspace page and complain about "freedom of speech" when the Secret Service comes calling.
Oh well, guess I'd assumed it had been around longer. We'll see in 2009, won't we?
Who was arrested for this? They really need to back up their claims that reporters are getting thrown in jail left and right for criticizing this administration. A day doesn't go by that Bush et al aren't criticized by someone in the media, so by their logic there won't be reporters left by the end of his term.
Instead, I think their ranking system works like this:
If you had a job that paid $100K a year in the US, it is highly doubtful that whatever company you're working for wouldn't provide you with excellent healthcare. Point being, you wouldn't have paid anywhere near $100K for your procedure.
But "free healthcare" advocates tend to forget that Americans with real jobs already get "free healthcare" -- they just have to pay co-pays which total to as much (or less than) what Canadians, etc. pay in additional taxes. And if they have minimal or no major medical issues in a given year, they pocket all the extra savings!
But I guess since you aren't directly cutting a check, that makes you think it's all "free".
Funny how this argument comes from Europeans, Canadians, etc. that spend all their time telling Americans that their culture is crap, their entertainment is crap, they're fat, they're stupid, they're too religious, they have too many guns, they're too prudish when it comes to sex and too liberal when it comes to violence, we need to provide universal health care, etc. In other words, we need to be more like European countries, because they have everything figured out and do everything the right way.
But we're the ones who aren't accepting of other people's culture and way of life...
Which is to say, they'll get royalties on one copy sold, and several million pirated.
I don't know about using a $25 PC to do development work, but you're mostly right.
I mean, it sounds to me like this guy has to deal with Windows for at least eight hours of his day if that's what he uses to do development work. So why not get a development PC and use Remote Desktop (yes, a client exists for Mac)? The GUI is actually very responsive, and seeing as how he's complaining about Parallels refreshing the entire desktop every time a character is typed, I think using a PC via Remote Desktop will win performance-wise quite easily. And the upside is, he still gets to use his beloved Mac desktop.
Look, I understand the desire to use one's OS of choice. But if you're forced to use another OS for work, why not bite the bullet and build another PC to handle the task adequately instead of gritting your teeth and pretending to find the performance of emulation/virtualization to be acceptable? It's going to lose out to a second machine hosting the OS every time.
I wasted over $3k in expenses out of pocket to interview with them.
Wow! For a company that provides "free everything" to their employees, they sure are cheapskates when it comes to interviewing potential employees. I've had far less prosperous companies pay my for my airfare, lodging, and food when visiting for an interview.
Like I said, that requires paying money, something the people hitting up Bittorrent sites aren't all that willing to do.
I'm willing to bet that they're "ignoring" USENET because it's not as well-known as Bittorrent and nowhere near as user-friendly.
Has anyone here actually tried to download anything of significant size from USENET? It's a baffling and frustrating experience. If your news server happens to carry all 30,000 messages related to whatever movie it is you're downloading, then you've got to make sure your newsreader supports whatever obscure 7-bit encoding format the poster used. In all likelihood, you'll never get that far because it's highly doubtful that your news server carries all the messages you want. For something small, say 20 or 30 parts, I'd say you have a 1 in 10 chance that your news server even carries all the messages. You could always pay a monthly fee for a much better news server, but the average person wouldn't want to bother with that.
I don't even see why anyone bothers getting binaries off USENET, honestly.
Let me guess... bad knees, right? Brought on by too much weight being placed on them?
Thou the one good side effect of Byetta is missing, weight loss.
You can compensate for that by exercising and eating properly.
He's correct actually. "An" usage is based a vowel sound. The word it preceeds doesn't have to start with a vowel letter.