Apple usually shows their MacWorld keynotes, and sometimes other events, via QuickTime Streaming Server from their own website. Check Apple's Quicktime Site for updates, I would think. That or hotnews.
The fact, however, remains that there are almost no third-party candidates running for the majority of offices on the ballot. Last mid-term, for example, my ballot listed 55 individual offices, and of those 6 had three or more candidates listed. Of the remaining 49, 5 had one candidate who was neither a republican or a democrat, and an additional 10 had only one candidate; none of these were from any alternate party. So, non-democrat, non-republican choices were listed on 11 of 55 offices. That's 20%. The vast majority of these offices either offered no choice, or a "choice" between the two major parties. That is not "meaningful choice."
CmdrTaco's hit at the end is spot-on: the problem with apathetic voters isn't the difficulty or ease of getting to polling places, but the utter lack of choice in elections. As has been said, many times, many ways, each officeholding choice is a selection between (almost always) two people who are either virtually identical in position, with only very minor distinguishing features, or two people who are, at the best, dishonest opportunists who siezed a chance to run for office because it's better than having a real job.
Much more fundamental things have to change before we relieve voter apathy.
Except that the solution you propose is a several-thousand dollar solution, which actually doesn't do what is required.
CVS is for version tracking of files. Public Folders on the Exchange server will not work for this. Source Safe would, but now you're talking even more money. And, to my knowledge, Source Safe doesn't integrate with Exchange at all.
Let's try this using a solution that is 1) free of lock-in to closed, proprietary code (since the author is pretty clearly asking for a solution that he or she can modifiy to fit their specific needs), 2) actually solves all of the posted problems, and 3) cost-free. Your "solution" isn't any of those things.
And, actually, the choice of software platforms is always relevant, since it is eminently possible to do all of the things listed on several platforms. Because of that, there is no reason to pay through the nose for software that you can't make changes to, can't inspect, and can't keep unless you rent it ad infinitum.
Which, of course, bears out the point: stupid Americans assume that 5.000 means five with zero tenths, zero hundredths, and zero thousandths, without taking even a millisecond to do any reflecting on the fact that the gathering is in Norway.
I repeat: If you are stupid, and cannot recognize that the way the United States does business is neither the only nor even the best way, then don't post, period. You are annoying and getting in the way of human progress.
Quixotic, yes. I, at least, knew that many European nations use , for decimal separators and . for triad separators. A fortiori, then, I am neither a hypocrite, nor ignorant.
I agree. At least then we wouldn't be fucking swamped with asinine comments like "5.000 people he he he stupid five people of course there are no tenths of people he he he you said 'tenths' he he he."
WILL THE STUPID PEOPLE PLEASE STOP POSTING? YOU ARE FUCKING ANNOYING TO THOSE OF US WHO ARE NOT STUPID.
heh... no, an electron has mass. Photons have no mass. Nor do Photon torpedoes. They do all their damage by making the enemy assume they've been impatcted (bright lights and all that), and computer systems just assume they've been hit and fail. It's funny to watch the expressions on the faces of the remaining Klingons after they've been "hit" with a Photon torpedo, then just as they're about to get all pissed off, you hit them with an electron torpedo. Then the fun really starts!
... not months. It was originally scheduled for the next-to-last week in May, and now it's scheduled for the next-to-last week in June. That's not a couple of months, thats a month.
[...] because it's more likely to be installed on random machines that you log into (into which you log?)
"into which you login" would be best, I think:)
I've been a *BSD & Linux user for many a year now, and I was first introduced to tcsh. The Sun OS 5.4 machine that I first logged into had csh, IIRC, and after a while of back & forth between Sun OS 5.4 and BSDI on the school machines, I settled on using tcsh. I find bash to be annoying from time to time, but like many others here I don't do shell scripting. I always use Perl. It just seems to be a cleaner solution. Maybe I'm weird.
Maybe I'm confused or wrong (I didn't do real well in math, but I did get an A in logic class), but if you have two datapoints on the end of a line, and you create new datapoints between them, aren't you interpolating, not extrapolating?
Re:Family Tree Tech support: Wood for the fire....
on
Family Tech Support
·
· Score: 1
Because you *can't* just tell them to go pound sand, or just tell them that they are stupid....
Who says you can't?
My family at least realizes that they have limits, so they usually don't end up doing monumentally stupid things. Once in a while, though, they do. After I 'splain it to them in short words, they usually, spontaneously, remark "oh, well, shoot. That was pretty stupid, huh?"
"Indeed."
Yes. You can buy CodeWarrior, and the Win32 version (at least, all the ones I've bought!) have all the Mac SDKs you need, including PowerPlant. Obviously, you won't be able to debug from your windows machine (not directly, anyway!).
No. Every instance cited in the footnotes involved either a military member or a spy, which is a different animal completely.
As for the first two phrases, you are flat wrong on your interpretation. The facts which followed were sufficient only because of the earlier, undisputed facts, which include that petitioners were members of their countries military.
It is clear that you are incapable of reading simple, basic English. Further posts will be ignored.
You're missing the most important part of the holding:
It is enough that petitioners here,
upon the conceded facts, were plainly within those boundaries, and were held in good faith for trial by military commission, charged with being enemies who, with the purpose of destroying war materials and utilities, entered or after entry remained in our territory without uniform-an offense against the law of war. We hold only that those particular acts constitute an offense against the law of war which the Constitution authorizes to be tried by military commission.
The holding depends upon those facts. The holding depends upon the petitioners being members of the military. It is not sufficient to merely meet the conditions listed.
I disagree completely (as if you can't tell by now). In order to be subject to tribunal, they must be members of the military of an enemy country. That much was established in Quirin, and is part of the "conceded facts" referred to. It does not match exactly, and in fact does not match at all, the present case.
I did read it. The Court ruled that the conceded facts included that Quirin, Haupt, et al., were members of the Military, and that the Articles of war applied.
Citizenship in the United States of an enemy belligerent does not relieve him from the consequences of a belligerency which is unlawful because in violation of the law of war. Citizens
who associate themselves with the military arm of the enemy government, and with its aid, [317 U.S. 1, 38] guidance and direction enter this country bent on hostile acts are enemy belligerents within the meaning of the Hague Convention and the law of war. Cf. Gates v. Goodloe, 101 U.S. 612, 615 , 617 S., 618. It is as an enemy belligerent that petitioner Haupt is charged with entering the United States, and unlawful belligerency is the gravamen of the offense of which he is accused.
(bold/italic emphasis mine)
As the Court has pointed out in several places, Quirin, Haupt et al. were all members of military forces of nations at war with the United States. This causes two serious problems for DOD and DOJ, in the present case. First, there has been no Declaration of War, which would be required to prosecute under the Articles of War. Second, the defendent in the present case is a Citizen of the United States, and is not a member of any country's military. There is no justification for subjecting the defendant to a tribual.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple usually shows their MacWorld keynotes, and sometimes other events, via QuickTime Streaming Server from their own website. Check Apple's Quicktime Site for updates, I would think. That or hotnews.
The fact, however, remains that there are almost no third-party candidates running for the majority of offices on the ballot. Last mid-term, for example, my ballot listed 55 individual offices, and of those 6 had three or more candidates listed. Of the remaining 49, 5 had one candidate who was neither a republican or a democrat, and an additional 10 had only one candidate; none of these were from any alternate party. So, non-democrat, non-republican choices were listed on 11 of 55 offices. That's 20%. The vast majority of these offices either offered no choice, or a "choice" between the two major parties. That is not "meaningful choice."
CmdrTaco's hit at the end is spot-on: the problem with apathetic voters isn't the difficulty or ease of getting to polling places, but the utter lack of choice in elections. As has been said, many times, many ways, each officeholding choice is a selection between (almost always) two people who are either virtually identical in position, with only very minor distinguishing features, or two people who are, at the best, dishonest opportunists who siezed a chance to run for office because it's better than having a real job.
Much more fundamental things have to change before we relieve voter apathy.
Except that the solution you propose is a several-thousand dollar solution, which actually doesn't do what is required.
CVS is for version tracking of files. Public Folders on the Exchange server will not work for this. Source Safe would, but now you're talking even more money. And, to my knowledge, Source Safe doesn't integrate with Exchange at all.
Let's try this using a solution that is 1) free of lock-in to closed, proprietary code (since the author is pretty clearly asking for a solution that he or she can modifiy to fit their specific needs), 2) actually solves all of the posted problems, and 3) cost-free. Your "solution" isn't any of those things.
And, actually, the choice of software platforms is always relevant, since it is eminently possible to do all of the things listed on several platforms. Because of that, there is no reason to pay through the nose for software that you can't make changes to, can't inspect, and can't keep unless you rent it ad infinitum.
Yes, I know that. Did it ever occur to you that I did it on purpose? Specifically because it is "like" shouting?
Oh, yeah, that's right. This is slashdot after all. The odds of any particular person doing it intentionally are slim to none.
Which, of course, bears out the point: stupid Americans assume that 5.000 means five with zero tenths, zero hundredths, and zero thousandths, without taking even a millisecond to do any reflecting on the fact that the gathering is in Norway.
I repeat: If you are stupid, and cannot recognize that the way the United States does business is neither the only nor even the best way, then don't post, period. You are annoying and getting in the way of human progress.
Quixotic, yes. I, at least, knew that many European nations use , for decimal separators and . for triad separators. A fortiori, then, I am neither a hypocrite, nor ignorant.
It's funny you should mention that, because half the message is in sentence capitalization.
Yes, that's exactly how it is displayed.
We need to get one of these going in the US. :-)
I agree. At least then we wouldn't be fucking swamped with asinine comments like "5.000 people he he he stupid five people of course there are no tenths of people he he he you said 'tenths' he he he."
WILL THE STUPID PEOPLE PLEASE STOP POSTING? YOU ARE FUCKING ANNOYING TO THOSE OF US WHO ARE NOT STUPID.
How does SCO, and its cohorts, account for the lying and factual misrepresentation that exists in the initial filing?
heh ... no, an electron has mass. Photons have no mass. Nor do Photon torpedoes. They do all their damage by making the enemy assume they've been impatcted (bright lights and all that), and computer systems just assume they've been hit and fail. It's funny to watch the expressions on the faces of the remaining Klingons after they've been "hit" with a Photon torpedo, then just as they're about to get all pissed off, you hit them with an electron torpedo. Then the fun really starts!
Of course, that was before I read additional information. Geez, quixy, read all the press releases first, will ya?
According to what I can tell, Mac Hack is after WWDC, not before. Panther hacks will still be available.
... not months. It was originally scheduled for the next-to-last week in May, and now it's scheduled for the next-to-last week in June. That's not a couple of months, thats a month.
[...] because it's more likely to be installed on random machines that you log into (into which you log?)
:)
"into which you login" would be best, I think
I've been a *BSD & Linux user for many a year now, and I was first introduced to tcsh. The Sun OS 5.4 machine that I first logged into had csh, IIRC, and after a while of back & forth between Sun OS 5.4 and BSDI on the school machines, I settled on using tcsh. I find bash to be annoying from time to time, but like many others here I don't do shell scripting. I always use Perl. It just seems to be a cleaner solution. Maybe I'm weird.
Maybe I'm confused or wrong (I didn't do real well in math, but I did get an A in logic class), but if you have two datapoints on the end of a line, and you create new datapoints between them, aren't you interpolating, not extrapolating?
Because you *can't* just tell them to go pound sand, or just tell them that they are stupid....
Who says you can't?
My family at least realizes that they have limits, so they usually don't end up doing monumentally stupid things. Once in a while, though, they do. After I 'splain it to them in short words, they usually, spontaneously, remark "oh, well, shoot. That was pretty stupid, huh?"
"Indeed."
Let the judges be the judge! Seriously, if you think it's eligible, submit it. Make them reject it :) They may even tell you why!
Yes. You can buy CodeWarrior, and the Win32 version (at least, all the ones I've bought!) have all the Mac SDKs you need, including PowerPlant. Obviously, you won't be able to debug from your windows machine (not directly, anyway!).
oops. Make that the oldest footprints ... my mistake! They were 3.5M yo., but of a pre-human species.
The article points out that footprints in the 3.5 million years old range have been found, these are just the oldest footprints of Stone Age humans.
Grr.
No. Every instance cited in the footnotes involved either a military member or a spy, which is a different animal completely.
As for the first two phrases, you are flat wrong on your interpretation. The facts which followed were sufficient only because of the earlier, undisputed facts, which include that petitioners were members of their countries military.
It is clear that you are incapable of reading simple, basic English. Further posts will be ignored.
I disagree completely (as if you can't tell by now). In order to be subject to tribunal, they must be members of the military of an enemy country. That much was established in Quirin, and is part of the "conceded facts" referred to. It does not match exactly, and in fact does not match at all, the present case.
(bold/italic emphasis mine)
As the Court has pointed out in several places, Quirin, Haupt et al. were all members of military forces of nations at war with the United States. This causes two serious problems for DOD and DOJ, in the present case. First, there has been no Declaration of War, which would be required to prosecute under the Articles of War. Second, the defendent in the present case is a Citizen of the United States, and is not a member of any country's military. There is no justification for subjecting the defendant to a tribual.