Or it could be the Superfetch service, which (ironically) is trying to speed up your system by preloading frequently-used applications and documents into memory. It's the reason why a 4GB Vista system will show almost no memory free. It also "learns," which means that if you happened to launch a certain application at 10am every day for a week, apparently you can expect it to load that application at 10am from then on. Until I disabled this service, my machine would regularly thrash the disk so hard that the system would grind to a complete halt, forcing a cold reboot -- this, on a quad-core system.
And yet I wonder if devs of common browsers will ever introduce lower level primitives or ways to access to their Javascript runtime environments in the name of optimization and efficiency.
I've heard it said that the JavaScript code output by GWT often gives better performance than hand-coded JavaScript, because the GWT compiler is free to use every dirty syntactic trick in the book to wring the most performance out of the code. By comparison, hand-coded JavaScript has to be read and maintained by humans. Almost everyone sacrifices a little bit of performance for the sake of being able to maintain the code. But since you don't ever maintain the JavaScript part of the GWT application -- you write in Java, maintain the Java code, and treat the JavaScript pretty much as bytecode -- there's no need to worry about whether the JavaScript is written in the "cleanest" way possible. It's OK for GWT to generate code that favors performance over any other criteria.
If anyone's to blame here, it's your "third party tool" vendor because they're locking you into a distribution that rapidly becoming unsupported by the rest of the world.
Wow, I'm sure glad that Linux users avoid all that "DLL Hell" I keep hearing about on Windows.
That's kind of a weird perspective, to begin with. OK, economic disparity in the world is bad, mmmkay... but wouldn't it be kinda pointless to download a browser if you didn't have the Internet connection to, um, download anythi -- er, ah, my head asplode.
I think the point here is that, sure, open source is helping with the world's problems, but it's not solving anything on its own. No reason to act all mumbly and ashamed about it. The coders are doing their part. The real problems in Africa have a whole lot less to do with closed-source software than with corrupt African governments -- as has long been the case.
Now that that loophole has been closed we've probably seen the last of Boll in anything other than very small films.
A quick look at Mr. Boll's IMDB entry would have told you that's not the case. He has no less than seven movies currently under production or post-production. Some of them are based on video games; others are not. He's even producing at least one movie -- the Alone in the Dark sequel -- for someone else to direct. Obviously, Mr. Boll's method remains profitable for his investors.
And maybe I don't understand how multicast really works... but it seems to me that multicast made a lot of sense as a solution back when everybody was used to watching the same show at the same time every week and then waiting for the reruns to see it again. These days everyone is getting more and more used to watching their shows anytime they feel like it, and On Demand is one of the top selling points of a lot of digital cable packages. It doesn't seem like multicast is going to be much help if you're committed to letting each individual viewer start and stop the show at the precise second they choose.
It took a few moments to sink in. "In the San Francisco area"... with guns mounted on trucks? Why, unless people are using one of those really broad definitions of San Francisco, that could be nowhere else but... yup. Upon checking the address on Google Maps, it turns out to be none other than San Ramon, California -- about 15 minutes from where I grew up.
I know what you guys are thinking. "A bunch of uptight yuppies from San Francisco got in their cars and drove out to the wild wilderness and got a taste of the real world..." Yeah, right -- if by that you mean "took a pleasant drive out among the trees along the curves of Crow Canyon Road," just off the 580 Freeway kinda wilderness. Maybe they took the long way back and stopped off at Stoneridge Mall on their way home.
News flash for ya, folks. The exact location where these folks went is out a long, undeveloped road, sure. But San Ramon is a suburb, people. Yeah, if you're out there you'll find that 80 percent of the people are white. But that's not "white trash missin teeth an' drinkin moonshine" white, that's "53 percent of the people in this town are college educated and 17 percent have graduate degrees" white. It's "48 percent of the families in this town have median incomes higher than $100,000" white. Look it up.
Clearly, these "geohashers" must be even bigger peckerwoods than the people I grew up with (in neighboring Castro Valley) if that environment makes them uncomfortable. If white guys with guns mounted to pickup trucks makes them uncomfortable, I hope they had a speedy return to wherever they came from, completely bypassing Oakland, California, whose demographics are markedly different. And whatever they do, they should not wait for the bus on the streetcorner out in front of my local bar. It's gotten pretty hairy over there a couple times over the last few years.
It's worth noting that not all of them have all of the adjustments. If you look on Craiglist and the like, a lot of versions seem to have some of the adjustments removed, presumably to lower the price of the chair. I expect a lot of people got hold of these chairs from office sales, where companies bought them in bulk.
For the record, my Aeron can be raised or lowered, has a lock that controls whether you can tilt it back and forth or not, has a dial that lets you control the tension of the tilt, and has a separate lock that tilts the chair forward a bit (maybe useful for the restless leg syndrome someone else mentioned). I've seen many versions that lack some or all of these.
Some models may also lack all the arm adjustments that the full version can do -- I'm not sure about that, because I always take the arms off my office chairs. (If I leave them on, I inevitably start leaning on them when I become fatigued, and that absolutely trashes my arms after just a few weeks.)
Mine also came with a lumbar cushion that slides up and down. That's actually my least favorite part of the chair -- the sliding means that it will never stay put once you find the place you think it should be. Herman-Miller actually sells a new lumbar support as a separate purchase, now (about $100, last I checked) that seems designed to stay in place. Does anyone have one of these and can speak to how well it works?
Finally, some people don't seem to be aware that Aeron chairs come in three different sizes. The most common is the "B" size, but if you are a very small person you might want the "A" size. I -- a tall, skinny dude -- was told by the salesperson that I'd definitely want the "C" size because of my height, but having bought the chair I suspect I actually prefer the "B." Still, if you were a rather wide person I'm sure the "C" size would be much more comfortable.
Bottom line: There is some variation in Aeron chairs, so if you're looking to buy one, make sure you're getting what you pay for, especially if you're buying it used.
And one more thing: All that said, I still keep a boring old gray office chair that I bought from Office Despot because it's firm and comfortable. Maybe hubby actually likes that chair he's been sitting in? I don't actually buy that the Aeron is the be-all, end-all of sitting equipment just because it costs $600. Remember, there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all "ergonomic chair." The key is being able to adjust it to a position that suits you.
No, that's not the same thing. Trickle-down theory largely relates to tax policy. It's about putting more money into the pockets of businesses and the wealthy as a means of spurring overall economic growth (whether you personally believe in that or not).
In contrast, Brin has just done the opposite. He's volunteered to take $5 million out of his own pocket and give it to someone else. That's not trickle-down economics, that's plain ol' ordinary economics.
BTW, even if you don't believe that spending $5 million affects the overall economy in any meaningful way, surely some portion of that money will be spent not on Brin's own personal voyage but to further the cause of commercial space travel. If you're trying to grow a business, you don't take the profits and run; you re-invest them. In this case, it seems likely that Brin's money will be invested in ways that benefit future space exploration in some tangible way, even if we don't hear about it in the news.
I could give a shit either way. Do you know how many people you could HELP with $5 million, like real bonified food on the table for dinner kind of help?
It's not like the money just vanishes into thin air, you know. Sergei gives it to someone else, who ends up giving it to someone else, who gives it to someone else, who gives it to someone else... and so the economy rolls on. You could argue that spending the money does a lot more good for society than just leaving it in the bank.
BTW, why are you sitting there reading Slashdot when you could be volunteering at your local homeless shelter?
Well, maybe. If you want to be cynical, you can chalk it up to the fact that the Catholic Church has historically been a highly authoritarian organization -- so even if God does have a plan for you, by definition you're not smart enough to figure out what it is. Even if you think you've figured it out, you haven't.
But then, you're straying into cloudy philosophical areas with this kind of talk. Do you believe in a deterministic universe? You don't need the concept of a God to believe in a Master Plan. If everything that happens can be explained by natural laws, then it should be possible for the universe's most powerful computer to calculate all the causes and effects at the particle level and predict the future. It could also count backwards into the past until it reaches the Big Bang -- rebuilding the whole of history, as if from parity files. And if the whole of the past and the future has been fixed since the moment of the Big Bang, then everything has a destiny; you might as well say that "God has a plan," even if there isn't a God.
Whoah.
But I'm just speaking to my own understanding of the Catholic Church here; I'm probably not even a good spokesman for their beliefs, let alone those of anyone whose tenets I haven't even looked into. If you can't see the distinction between one form of belief and another, then you'd probably have a hard time choosing between one faith and another. Surely, however, you can see that incredibly long-standing conflicts have been sparked by distinctions that seem similarly trivial (to you) but are by no means trivial to adherents.
The difference, as I understand it, is theological, having to do with variations in belief between Christian sects. IANAC, but my understanding is that Catholics regard the idea of "a personal God" as a heresy. God, in Catholic doctrine, does not intervene in day to day events -- to claim that he does violates the doctrine of Free Will, and it also seems to imply that God might favor one person over another (when we are all in fact sinners). If you slip off the sidewalk and bruise your bottom, a Catholic wouldn't say "God willed that." You just slipped. Likewise, if you became a powerful government leader, that wasn't "God's will" -- to assume that God wanted you, personally, to rise to power would be vanity; you are still a sinner and are not absolved of the other responsibilities of Catholic worship (such as confession) just because you are publicly successful.
Some other versions of the Christian faith might interpret the same events differently, however.
This difference has implications for scientific understanding, more specifically. The Catholic Church doesn't encourage its adherents to turn to prayer to cure diseases, for example. If scientists say that diseases are caused not by evil curses but by bacteria, then that's the truth. If a Catholic can look at the bacteria under a microscope, then what would be the point of denying that they exist? Now, if you believed that God controlled every single thing, then you might ask, "Why doesn't God smite down these awful bacteria? Why does God allow people to be sick?" Well, He doesn't. He allows bacteria to be alive; that much is His will. Is there a reason? Surely. Is it for you to understand that reason? Not necessarily. Why was your child singled out to be sick? He wasn't; God is a loving God. Can't I ask Him to make the disease go away? You may ask. Will it go away? It may. How will I know if He has favored me? Take some antibiotics and find out.
P.S. It seems to me that those Catholics who are inclined to believe in the influence of supernatural forces on their lives are encouraged to attribute their good fortune not to God himself, but to the intervention of saints. But again, IANAC.
Java is definetelly one of main factors for its slowness. There isn't a single Java GUI program that doesn't suck majorly when it comes to speed and responsiveness.
To reiterate what the GP said, OpenOffice.org is not a Java GUI program. What Java components it might [optionally] use have nothing to do with screen rendering.
Of course, the downside of my point is that OpenOffice.org manages to be sluggish on its own, with or without Java.
The perfect counter to it is "so why would you tolerate someone spying on you if you have done nothing wrong?"
And wouldn't the perfect counter to that be, "Because I have nothing to hide?"
You're a little thin-skinned if you interpret "I have nothing to hide" as a personal attack. It seems to me that "I have nothing to hide" is just another way of saying "I'm not that worried about it."
Let's face it, if you picked up a phone in 1972, called your cousin, and told him you were planning to rob a bank, they might have caught you. The chances were actually quite good if they had reason to suspect you were likely to do that kind of thing.
So what's changed today? Data retention? They've already demonstrated that all those CCTV cameras in Britain do next to nothing to prevent crime, or to solve crimes after the fact. If the government kept a record of every single phone call ever made, would it have any greater impact?
Yes, yes, I know... data mining and all that. Someday they may be able to sift through every word you speak and pinpoint every time you commit a thoughtcrime. But, unfortunately, you just start to sound a little nutty when you talk like that. Most people are going to want a slightly stronger case to be made before they pay attention.
Having a large share of the browser market doesn't necessarily mean you control it -- not when the majority of Web companies are unwilling to give up the other segment of their potential audience. If you'd said that Microsoft controls the intranet, I could maybe believe that... but between PDF and Flash, you could argue that Adobe controls more of the Web than Microsoft does.
1. Where are the VBA editor and the form controls? (by default, not after you've found the "show developer ribbon" in the "popular" (??) options section.)
Well... you can get there by doing View->Macros, and from there you can choose either Edit or Create. But now that you mention it, thank you for pointing out the "Show Developer Ribbon" option; I had no idea that it was even there.
P.S. FWIW I think Office 2007 is the best version they've ever done, even (finally) surpassing the Mac versions.
The exits are north and south, pick one. But no! Believe it or not, there's a whole, wide world out there, even beyond Tennessee and Florida. Really, you should try Georgia or Mississippi sometime -- who knows, you might like them.
And what is that reason? Seriously, have you ever had to carry a Green Card? Because I have. For years I was told that anytime I left the country I could be denied entry for just about any reason, owing to the fact that I was really only allowed to stay here at the pleasure of Uncle Sam. Then I had to spend thousands of dollars and be fingerprinted, photographed, investigated, and grilled by examiners before I could become a U.S. citizen. What did you ever have to do to earn the right to come and go as you please, or to vote? What makes you better than me?
The whole business is nonsense. And when you hear firsthand stories of people whose families were broken up by ridiculous immigration policies enforced by xenophobic zealots in the name of "patriotism," or "protecting our jobs," or "failure to learn our language," or whatever the excuse is this week, the situation starts to look considerably less cut-and-dried than you make it out to be.
True, there are "perfectly legal" ways to get into a country, just like there are "perfectly legal" was to buy a Ferrari, or run for President. That doesn't mean those options are open to everybody. Plus, the mere fact that this guy is pursuing an advanced degree at university should be proof enough that the "stealing our jobs" excuse doesn't apply in this case. Your kneejerk obeisance to immigration policy on the mere basis that "it's policy, ergo we follow it" is just another way of distracting attention from your own need to protect your position of privilege.
The fact remains that illegal immigrants should be deported.
Oh, that's a fact, is it? So you happened to be born on a particular patch of soil and have never had a run-in with oppressive government -- luck of the draw, right? Your great-great grandfathers had the honor and the foresight to carve up the entire globe into completely arbitrary empires, and now you're happy to sit there in your Aeron chair with your computers and your big-screen TVs and your Internets and pat yourself on the back about it? "Sorry about where you were born, olde chappe, but you'd best to hie back there forthwith, wot!" Never mind the fact that the direct fallout of colonialism can be seen in the oppressive governments and violent chaos now evident in much of the developing world -- as long as they don't try to climb over "our" fence, you're OK with it, I guess?
In Seven Samurai, none of the Samurai die by the sword -- all are shot.
Not "all." In Seven Samurai, the samurai win. The bandits are defeated. The story that unfolds in that movie is that the supposedly defenseless villagers are cravenly manipulating the samurai, but the samurai continue the fight even after they figure that out, and they win, though they suffer incredible losses. The lesson isn't the same at all (if there even is a lesson to be found in Eps I-III).
Your mistake is looking at it as a trilogy. The first one cannot be touched, glasses-color be damned. It was a perfect, self-contained gem that required no sequels at all. Empire had great gee-whiz appeal for kids, and you can't discount the AT-ATs, but really it was bolted onto the original.
Slashdot Mirror
Or it could be the Superfetch service, which (ironically) is trying to speed up your system by preloading frequently-used applications and documents into memory. It's the reason why a 4GB Vista system will show almost no memory free. It also "learns," which means that if you happened to launch a certain application at 10am every day for a week, apparently you can expect it to load that application at 10am from then on. Until I disabled this service, my machine would regularly thrash the disk so hard that the system would grind to a complete halt, forcing a cold reboot -- this, on a quad-core system.
I've heard it said that the JavaScript code output by GWT often gives better performance than hand-coded JavaScript, because the GWT compiler is free to use every dirty syntactic trick in the book to wring the most performance out of the code. By comparison, hand-coded JavaScript has to be read and maintained by humans. Almost everyone sacrifices a little bit of performance for the sake of being able to maintain the code. But since you don't ever maintain the JavaScript part of the GWT application -- you write in Java, maintain the Java code, and treat the JavaScript pretty much as bytecode -- there's no need to worry about whether the JavaScript is written in the "cleanest" way possible. It's OK for GWT to generate code that favors performance over any other criteria.
Wow, I'm sure glad that Linux users avoid all that "DLL Hell" I keep hearing about on Windows.
Yeah, yeah, mod me down...
That's kind of a weird perspective, to begin with. OK, economic disparity in the world is bad, mmmkay ... but wouldn't it be kinda pointless to download a browser if you didn't have the Internet connection to, um, download anythi -- er, ah, my head asplode.
I think the point here is that, sure, open source is helping with the world's problems, but it's not solving anything on its own. No reason to act all mumbly and ashamed about it. The coders are doing their part. The real problems in Africa have a whole lot less to do with closed-source software than with corrupt African governments -- as has long been the case.
A quick look at Mr. Boll's IMDB entry would have told you that's not the case. He has no less than seven movies currently under production or post-production. Some of them are based on video games; others are not. He's even producing at least one movie -- the Alone in the Dark sequel -- for someone else to direct. Obviously, Mr. Boll's method remains profitable for his investors.
And maybe I don't understand how multicast really works ... but it seems to me that multicast made a lot of sense as a solution back when everybody was used to watching the same show at the same time every week and then waiting for the reruns to see it again. These days everyone is getting more and more used to watching their shows anytime they feel like it, and On Demand is one of the top selling points of a lot of digital cable packages. It doesn't seem like multicast is going to be much help if you're committed to letting each individual viewer start and stop the show at the precise second they choose.
It took a few moments to sink in. "In the San Francisco area" ... with guns mounted on trucks? Why, unless people are using one of those really broad definitions of San Francisco, that could be nowhere else but ... yup. Upon checking the address on Google Maps, it turns out to be none other than San Ramon, California -- about 15 minutes from where I grew up.
I know what you guys are thinking. "A bunch of uptight yuppies from San Francisco got in their cars and drove out to the wild wilderness and got a taste of the real world..." Yeah, right -- if by that you mean "took a pleasant drive out among the trees along the curves of Crow Canyon Road," just off the 580 Freeway kinda wilderness. Maybe they took the long way back and stopped off at Stoneridge Mall on their way home.
News flash for ya, folks. The exact location where these folks went is out a long, undeveloped road, sure. But San Ramon is a suburb, people. Yeah, if you're out there you'll find that 80 percent of the people are white. But that's not "white trash missin teeth an' drinkin moonshine" white, that's "53 percent of the people in this town are college educated and 17 percent have graduate degrees" white. It's "48 percent of the families in this town have median incomes higher than $100,000" white. Look it up.
Clearly, these "geohashers" must be even bigger peckerwoods than the people I grew up with (in neighboring Castro Valley) if that environment makes them uncomfortable. If white guys with guns mounted to pickup trucks makes them uncomfortable, I hope they had a speedy return to wherever they came from, completely bypassing Oakland, California, whose demographics are markedly different. And whatever they do, they should not wait for the bus on the streetcorner out in front of my local bar. It's gotten pretty hairy over there a couple times over the last few years.
It's worth noting that not all of them have all of the adjustments. If you look on Craiglist and the like, a lot of versions seem to have some of the adjustments removed, presumably to lower the price of the chair. I expect a lot of people got hold of these chairs from office sales, where companies bought them in bulk.
For the record, my Aeron can be raised or lowered, has a lock that controls whether you can tilt it back and forth or not, has a dial that lets you control the tension of the tilt, and has a separate lock that tilts the chair forward a bit (maybe useful for the restless leg syndrome someone else mentioned). I've seen many versions that lack some or all of these.
Some models may also lack all the arm adjustments that the full version can do -- I'm not sure about that, because I always take the arms off my office chairs. (If I leave them on, I inevitably start leaning on them when I become fatigued, and that absolutely trashes my arms after just a few weeks.)
Mine also came with a lumbar cushion that slides up and down. That's actually my least favorite part of the chair -- the sliding means that it will never stay put once you find the place you think it should be. Herman-Miller actually sells a new lumbar support as a separate purchase, now (about $100, last I checked) that seems designed to stay in place. Does anyone have one of these and can speak to how well it works?
Finally, some people don't seem to be aware that Aeron chairs come in three different sizes. The most common is the "B" size, but if you are a very small person you might want the "A" size. I -- a tall, skinny dude -- was told by the salesperson that I'd definitely want the "C" size because of my height, but having bought the chair I suspect I actually prefer the "B." Still, if you were a rather wide person I'm sure the "C" size would be much more comfortable.
Bottom line: There is some variation in Aeron chairs, so if you're looking to buy one, make sure you're getting what you pay for, especially if you're buying it used.
And one more thing: All that said, I still keep a boring old gray office chair that I bought from Office Despot because it's firm and comfortable. Maybe hubby actually likes that chair he's been sitting in? I don't actually buy that the Aeron is the be-all, end-all of sitting equipment just because it costs $600. Remember, there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all "ergonomic chair." The key is being able to adjust it to a position that suits you.
And remember: RSIs are the real deal.
Better that than a Web server.
No, that's not the same thing. Trickle-down theory largely relates to tax policy. It's about putting more money into the pockets of businesses and the wealthy as a means of spurring overall economic growth (whether you personally believe in that or not).
In contrast, Brin has just done the opposite. He's volunteered to take $5 million out of his own pocket and give it to someone else. That's not trickle-down economics, that's plain ol' ordinary economics.
BTW, even if you don't believe that spending $5 million affects the overall economy in any meaningful way, surely some portion of that money will be spent not on Brin's own personal voyage but to further the cause of commercial space travel. If you're trying to grow a business, you don't take the profits and run; you re-invest them. In this case, it seems likely that Brin's money will be invested in ways that benefit future space exploration in some tangible way, even if we don't hear about it in the news.
It's not like the money just vanishes into thin air, you know. Sergei gives it to someone else, who ends up giving it to someone else, who gives it to someone else, who gives it to someone else... and so the economy rolls on. You could argue that spending the money does a lot more good for society than just leaving it in the bank.
BTW, why are you sitting there reading Slashdot when you could be volunteering at your local homeless shelter?
Well, maybe. If you want to be cynical, you can chalk it up to the fact that the Catholic Church has historically been a highly authoritarian organization -- so even if God does have a plan for you, by definition you're not smart enough to figure out what it is. Even if you think you've figured it out, you haven't.
But then, you're straying into cloudy philosophical areas with this kind of talk. Do you believe in a deterministic universe? You don't need the concept of a God to believe in a Master Plan. If everything that happens can be explained by natural laws, then it should be possible for the universe's most powerful computer to calculate all the causes and effects at the particle level and predict the future. It could also count backwards into the past until it reaches the Big Bang -- rebuilding the whole of history, as if from parity files. And if the whole of the past and the future has been fixed since the moment of the Big Bang, then everything has a destiny; you might as well say that "God has a plan," even if there isn't a God.
Whoah.
But I'm just speaking to my own understanding of the Catholic Church here; I'm probably not even a good spokesman for their beliefs, let alone those of anyone whose tenets I haven't even looked into. If you can't see the distinction between one form of belief and another, then you'd probably have a hard time choosing between one faith and another. Surely, however, you can see that incredibly long-standing conflicts have been sparked by distinctions that seem similarly trivial (to you) but are by no means trivial to adherents.
The difference, as I understand it, is theological, having to do with variations in belief between Christian sects. IANAC, but my understanding is that Catholics regard the idea of "a personal God" as a heresy. God, in Catholic doctrine, does not intervene in day to day events -- to claim that he does violates the doctrine of Free Will, and it also seems to imply that God might favor one person over another (when we are all in fact sinners). If you slip off the sidewalk and bruise your bottom, a Catholic wouldn't say "God willed that." You just slipped. Likewise, if you became a powerful government leader, that wasn't "God's will" -- to assume that God wanted you, personally, to rise to power would be vanity; you are still a sinner and are not absolved of the other responsibilities of Catholic worship (such as confession) just because you are publicly successful.
Some other versions of the Christian faith might interpret the same events differently, however.
This difference has implications for scientific understanding, more specifically. The Catholic Church doesn't encourage its adherents to turn to prayer to cure diseases, for example. If scientists say that diseases are caused not by evil curses but by bacteria, then that's the truth. If a Catholic can look at the bacteria under a microscope, then what would be the point of denying that they exist? Now, if you believed that God controlled every single thing, then you might ask, "Why doesn't God smite down these awful bacteria? Why does God allow people to be sick?" Well, He doesn't. He allows bacteria to be alive; that much is His will. Is there a reason? Surely. Is it for you to understand that reason? Not necessarily. Why was your child singled out to be sick? He wasn't; God is a loving God. Can't I ask Him to make the disease go away? You may ask. Will it go away? It may. How will I know if He has favored me? Take some antibiotics and find out.
P.S. It seems to me that those Catholics who are inclined to believe in the influence of supernatural forces on their lives are encouraged to attribute their good fortune not to God himself, but to the intervention of saints. But again, IANAC.
To reiterate what the GP said, OpenOffice.org is not a Java GUI program. What Java components it might [optionally] use have nothing to do with screen rendering.
Of course, the downside of my point is that OpenOffice.org manages to be sluggish on its own, with or without Java.
My understanding is that Office 2007 doesn't even install properly under WINE (which, IMHO, is the version you'd want).
And wouldn't the perfect counter to that be, "Because I have nothing to hide?"
You're a little thin-skinned if you interpret "I have nothing to hide" as a personal attack. It seems to me that "I have nothing to hide" is just another way of saying "I'm not that worried about it."
Let's face it, if you picked up a phone in 1972, called your cousin, and told him you were planning to rob a bank, they might have caught you. The chances were actually quite good if they had reason to suspect you were likely to do that kind of thing.
So what's changed today? Data retention? They've already demonstrated that all those CCTV cameras in Britain do next to nothing to prevent crime, or to solve crimes after the fact. If the government kept a record of every single phone call ever made, would it have any greater impact?
Yes, yes, I know... data mining and all that. Someday they may be able to sift through every word you speak and pinpoint every time you commit a thoughtcrime. But, unfortunately, you just start to sound a little nutty when you talk like that. Most people are going to want a slightly stronger case to be made before they pay attention.
Having a large share of the browser market doesn't necessarily mean you control it -- not when the majority of Web companies are unwilling to give up the other segment of their potential audience. If you'd said that Microsoft controls the intranet, I could maybe believe that... but between PDF and Flash, you could argue that Adobe controls more of the Web than Microsoft does.
MMO == Marine Mammal Observation Clearly, Sci-Fi Channel has figured out a way to automatically tell when its shows have jumped the porpoise!
Well... you can get there by doing View->Macros, and from there you can choose either Edit or Create. But now that you mention it, thank you for pointing out the "Show Developer Ribbon" option; I had no idea that it was even there.
P.S. FWIW I think Office 2007 is the best version they've ever done, even (finally) surpassing the Mac versions.
MMO == Massively Multiplayer Online?
Is that how the kids talk these days? Kinda like "wanna cyber" -- "Hay d00dz, whats ur favorite online?"
And what is that reason? Seriously, have you ever had to carry a Green Card? Because I have. For years I was told that anytime I left the country I could be denied entry for just about any reason, owing to the fact that I was really only allowed to stay here at the pleasure of Uncle Sam. Then I had to spend thousands of dollars and be fingerprinted, photographed, investigated, and grilled by examiners before I could become a U.S. citizen. What did you ever have to do to earn the right to come and go as you please, or to vote? What makes you better than me?
The whole business is nonsense. And when you hear firsthand stories of people whose families were broken up by ridiculous immigration policies enforced by xenophobic zealots in the name of "patriotism," or "protecting our jobs," or "failure to learn our language," or whatever the excuse is this week, the situation starts to look considerably less cut-and-dried than you make it out to be.
True, there are "perfectly legal" ways to get into a country, just like there are "perfectly legal" was to buy a Ferrari, or run for President. That doesn't mean those options are open to everybody. Plus, the mere fact that this guy is pursuing an advanced degree at university should be proof enough that the "stealing our jobs" excuse doesn't apply in this case. Your kneejerk obeisance to immigration policy on the mere basis that "it's policy, ergo we follow it" is just another way of distracting attention from your own need to protect your position of privilege.
Oh, that's a fact, is it? So you happened to be born on a particular patch of soil and have never had a run-in with oppressive government -- luck of the draw, right? Your great-great grandfathers had the honor and the foresight to carve up the entire globe into completely arbitrary empires, and now you're happy to sit there in your Aeron chair with your computers and your big-screen TVs and your Internets and pat yourself on the back about it? "Sorry about where you were born, olde chappe, but you'd best to hie back there forthwith, wot!" Never mind the fact that the direct fallout of colonialism can be seen in the oppressive governments and violent chaos now evident in much of the developing world -- as long as they don't try to climb over "our" fence, you're OK with it, I guess?
Not "all." In Seven Samurai, the samurai win. The bandits are defeated. The story that unfolds in that movie is that the supposedly defenseless villagers are cravenly manipulating the samurai, but the samurai continue the fight even after they figure that out, and they win, though they suffer incredible losses. The lesson isn't the same at all (if there even is a lesson to be found in Eps I-III).
Your mistake is looking at it as a trilogy. The first one cannot be touched, glasses-color be damned. It was a perfect, self-contained gem that required no sequels at all. Empire had great gee-whiz appeal for kids, and you can't discount the AT-ATs, but really it was bolted onto the original.