We walk into a grocery store and usually buy stuff instead of stuffing it in our pockets and running. We know it's wrong to leave without paying.
Why do votes need uber security check technology? Whatever happened to scrutiny by peers?
IMO, paper ballots are best because it is just tougher to destroy them. But, we should get receipts showing how we voted for our own records.
But, trying to turn the entire election process into zero possibility of error or fraud undermines the election itself and goes against the ideals of our society. People in general are honest - and those that aren't get caught eventually by honest people.
Suggesting that 'one person' should not be able to hold an entire precincts' votes just doesn't make much sense. People are often responsible for others. I suppose twenty people should all carry a piece of the nuclear football too..
First of all, you replied back to my original conservative post calling for reason with an emotional response calling for reasons.
Second, you told me no one posts reasons to vote for Bush; only to vote against Kerry. Well, then YOU give me a reason to vote for Kerry. Give me lots of them.
My reasons for voting Bush:
1) I like the tax cuts. We're a free country meaning the rich are free to be rich without guilt, the poor are free to become rich, and the middle class are better off in the US than in most countries.
2) Bush believes in a free-market economy. He believes in healthcare that hasn't been socialized. He won't make efforts to socialize healthcare.
3) The economy is doing well. The recent downturn at the end of the Clinton era followed by 9/11 did not hurt us very much under Bush. Outsourcing happens. But, it forces Americans to become smarter and more competitive.
4) Bush supports vouchers. Ya, I'm an evil person that went to a private school. At my private school, the teachers got paid half as much as the local public school and our school spent less than half as much money per student. Guess what? Our average test scores were higher. Public schools will get better if faced with a little 'competition' and private schools will do better with a little more income. Most private schools are dirt poor.
5) Bush wants to privatize Social Security. He seems to realize that the government wastes money left and right. And, the government doesn't have the right to waste our money. Bush treats the average American like he or she is smart enough to plan for retirement.
6) Bush doesn't want to put the US under the jurisdiction of the UN or have the US join the World Court. Our Constitution is fundamentally against doing anything to decrease the sovereignty of the US, and so is Bush. Also, when the UN is ineffective, Bush has the guts to act alone. Perhaps Iraq won't have the best outcome in the long run, but Bush did exactly what he said he would do. The UN did not follow through with their threats to Saddam.
7) Despite world opinion, the media, and the constant barrage from the liberal left, the US citizens are NOT morons. Bush is NOT a moron. We don't expect the government to stifle a free-market economy and guarantee jobs. That is for communism. In the US, anyone that's willing to work can get a job. We have lower unemployment than almost all countries trying to point out the problems in ours.
8) Bush is honest. He doesn't change his mind with the wind. When he says he will do something, he does it. He admits his faults and laughs about them. He does his best to fix them and he surrounds himself with very smart advisors that help him. He stands by his decisions that he bases on conviction.
9) Bush believes in smaller government and more control to local governments. For me, that is Constitutional, and the US Constitution is always right.
10) Bush is optimistic about the future of the US. He will do his best to keep the US powerful - both in economics and military.
There are some of my reasons. I do have more. However, I will wait for your reasons to vote for Kerry that don't merely attack Bush.
This is another example of my original argument. It really has nothing to do with what I was saying. Instead, you call my candidate, who served in the national guard, a deserter.
You use Vietnam to say Kerry takes stands on the issues when I was arguing about the issues NOW, not then. Kerry does not tell us his plans in any detailed sense. His plans are vague enough to look exactly like the Bush plan already in place. But, Kerry cannot tell us whether or not Saddam would still be in power if he was in charge. So again, I say Kerry does not look like he can make a decision by taking a stand on the issues.
"We also all know that Dick Cheney makes money because of the war through Halliburton. Isn't it clear that this war doesn't exist to "spread democracy" or "chase terrorists", but to give money to friends of the republican party?"
Okay, Dick Cheney makes money from this. Now, if I somehow connect the dots between Dick Cheney's profit, the war in Iraq, and Bush being President and ignore information from the US, Russia's, Israel's intelligence agencies, UN demands, Saddam's previous actions - I'm supposed to have irrefutable evidence that the war in Iraq was just over Cheney making money.
Let's just look at this from a broader perspective. You are essentially stating the George W Bush went to war in Iraq because Dick Cheney will profit from it. In other words, the President of the United States started a war in which people were killed so that the vice president would make money. I don't know how one can think that an American should not take offense to that. If Americans truly believed Bush went to war so Cheney could make money, then Kerry would be our new President.
If I said the only reason France didn't want to go to war with Iraq was because they were profiting illegally through the 'Oil For Food' conspiracy, it would also be a hasty generalization. And, it would be (or should be) offensive to anyone that believes in their leaders in France.
Either way, you still haven't convinced me to vote for Kerry and you, like most liberals, managed to say something offensive.
I truly intend to be completely reasonable (though, that is humanly impossible) when I talk about politics. I always try to keep an open mind. But from where I stand, Bush was the only logical option for the next leader of the United States.
"I'm glad I'm not american. Here in Canada, most of us can clearly see the sillyness of this all."
Once again, you self-proclaimed intellectual, please convince me, obviously of lesser intellect, to see it your way. I will even attempt to ignore the offensive statements you provide and just go with the facts.
The reasons the Democratic party lost can easily be seen in your arrogance - arrogance that reflects the whole Democrat presidential campaign. You talked to your granny and all of a sudden you gained a lot of insight. Now, since you talked to your granny, you can generalize the entire population of Bush voters. Since you talked to your roomates, you think you can call the lot of us racist bigots.
And somehow, what you said is supposed to be insightful. You hastily generalize, an error in reasoning, and you, like many Democrats, somehow expect the lot of us to repect your findings. Go re-examine the basis of the Democrat campaign. There are a lot of Democrats that voted for Bush - but somehow Bush only one by the 'righteous racist bigot Christians scared of change'.
Look at your candidate. He couldn't take a stand on anything. He was for and against the war on Iraq. He couldn't say whether or not Saddam would still be in charge of Iraq. He couldn't tell us any parts of his plan except vague hopeless general statements that resembled the hopes Bush had already stated, yet he said they were different. He was a new person every week - a hunter in Ohio in front of the fellow hunters, a snowboarder for the young crowd, a windsurfer, a religious Catholic, and even a dancing member of a black church. Go ahead and call the lot of us stupid again. Call us stupid for seeing that Kerry was nothing but man full of hot air and empty promises.
At least with Bush, if you love him or hate him, you know you love him or hate him. With Kerry, you just cannot tell.
A good Democrat candidate should have beaten Bush. Kerry was NOT a good candidate. Next time, be a good Democrat and convince me to vote for your candidate without offending the hell out of me - a nonreligious, non-racist, non-bigot Bush voter.
It's still fucking legal if you run XP without activating it, you goddamn moron. Just because you don't comply 100% with Microsoft's EULA doesn't mean you're a criminal. Just because MS says something is illegal does NOT make it illegal. There's copyright and then there's crime.
Nobody should have to ask permission to use software once they've already bought it. You're just one of the poor few too ignorant and naive enough to believe Microsoft, in it's ever-increasing legalized monopolistic behavior, will gravitate towards reason.
A free-market economy cannot influence Microsoft any longer since there is no longer a free market. So, the only thing left is active disobedience. By submitting to MS's phone activation scheme, you're just showing MS that there's willing drones ready to do anything required to run their software.
Non-morons know that asking permission to use something you already bought it unreasonable, so I am justified by calling you a moron. Not only do you submit to their requirements, but you actively defend them.
For example, it will allow students and professors on different campuses to meet -- virtually -- and discuss -- lively -- while being in ancient sites of Greece or Italy.
No, this will be used so that horny people can play 'student and professor' virtually.. I mean, I read this and thought, "Wow, now I can do Paris Hilton without getting a disease."
In other words, the main purpose of this is porn. Shuddup.. PORN.
I use a 12amp Milawakee Sawzall to carve my pumpkins.. And then, in Halloween fashion, I go cut everyone up that's in my zone of extension cord. It usually makes for a scary night!
Every part of the US government seems to have a decent amount of checks and balances except for our horrible law enforcement officers. It would be nice if video cameras were a lot smaller and higher quality (and on all of our cell phones with hours and hours of storage and battery life) so we could catch them in the act.
I live in a college city that has about five times (it seems) the normal amount of officers. There's too many police here so they get bored and find things to do.
I've seen police pick fights with drunk college students and the results are never pretty. Often times, the students are groaning but complying while the police are tapping people with batons, shoving them, yelling at them, and patting down anyone at random.
I've said this before on Slashdot, but I once had a buddy get arrested for resisting arrest - without any other charges. He merely resisted arrest even though he wasn't arrested for anything. Cops were breaking up a party and he was leaving and he said that they have no right to be there... and one cop grabbed him, threw him down hitting his chin and elbow on the pavement, and arrested him for resisting arrest.. The charges were eventually dropped but his chin has a scar now.
I was thrown up against a car once and patted down for 'an officer's safety' after I asked for his badge number multiple times when he refused to give it to me. He stopped us for going 45mph in a 45mph zone, though he said we were going 62mph but he didn't have it on radar.
The proliferation of these small cameras everywhere, though hurting privacy, will definitely help in combating crappy cops. I would have loved to have a camera at the last party I was at that got broken up.. I doubt forced entry is an acceptable method of breaking up a party.
Having a Replay TV for a few years, using a proxy filter to filter ads, and disabling Shockwave except when needed, I hardly see advertisements.. Yet, I still don't have a problem spending my money!! Yup, I still have things I would like to buy that I can't even afford yet. It's crazy, but even without seeing those all-important ads, I still seem to know about new products!
In video games, I wouldn't mind seeing a 30-second advertisement say.. in between maps.. if the advertisement made me laugh. If the ads have any sort of entertainment value, then people don't hate them as much. Sometimes video games just seem too serious and I think a funny advertisement every once in a while could lighten the mood and make us realize that the other team isn't necessarily enemies - just fellow gamers.
Plus, ads work negatively if they piss off the viewer. Anything that wastes my time pisses me off. But, if I laugh, then I don't feel I've wasted that time. There could be a big market for creating something for groups of people on teamspeak/ventrillo to laugh and talk about..
Something tells me that these ads are all gonna be boring, can't close, gotta watch, piss-me-off-type ads..
My grandma died after complications from a broken hip ~ 3 years hospital stay, infections, never fully recovered..
My grandpa, a few years later, died from complications from a broken hip (slipped on the snow).
I really don't think a Segway is the best answer for old people or even fat people for that matter. Ya, it's a cute little machine that looks like fun - but it takes a certain amount of balance to use and from the way people stand, it's about as forgiving as a bicycle when you fall off of it or the batteries get low.
Every time I see the Segway in use on campus, it makes me glad I'm one of the people that still thinks walking isn't half bad.
ALT-F4 is nice when you can easily keep the windows you want closed in focus. But, with Microsoft's infinite trust towards developers, they allow websites to change the order of focus. So, sometimes ALT-F4 a few times will close one popup and then start closing the desired web pages even though there are popups in between.
And, in order to keep the windows you want to close in focus, you end up having to click on them. BLEH.
Of course you can find a way around all this bullshit that programs like to do to us.. But, my point in my original post is that we should not have to do that. We should not have to go out of our ways to keep programs from taking over our computers.
If I download a program called Weatherbug because it tells me that it will give me quick access to the weather, and then I find out that there were also many other stipulations in the 'user agreement' that 1% of people read, it's spyware.
IMO, Realplayer is spyware, AOL Instant Messenger is spyware. There oughta be a crackdown on dishonest software. When Realplayer starts with all the subscription defaults as deactivated, except for the ones conveniently out of view, SPYWARE. When AOL Instant Messenger wants to put wild tangent bullshit on my computer when AIM used to be for IM'ing people, SPYWARE. Sorry, but it's dishonest programming and doesn't give people enough options for how to disable it or even realize that it's there. Weatherbug does not have anything other than small text about its spyware.
Also, Microsoft is at fault. It's usually just one-click 'yes or no' that decides whether or not the average user has infinite spam, goes to coolwebsearch.com at default, and loses a reliable internet connection... 'Install on Demand' should be disabled by default. I once had spyware installed.. turns out I clicked 'yes' one time when I was just quickly closing popup windows.
They ought to impose the same kinds of restrictions that credit card companies have. When I get a CC add, I can instantly sort through all the bullshit. When Capital One sends me their junk mail, I can open it up and instantly see that $79 a year credit card membership fee is a ripoff. In software, you have to read through a longwinded user agreement - often only available after the software is already downloaded and installed.
The average user is stupid. But, it's not always only stupid users that are being deceived. The software itself lies about its purpose.
I would mod parent up, but I don't currently have mod points. However, it is the same suggestion I would suggest.
For a family with a near-blind kid, a $1000-2000 projector should be in the budget. (Cheaper than most medical procedures.) It might allow the poor kid to even do other things like explore the Internet. Some projectors are extremely bright and have a very high contrast ratio - very useful for trying to make things easier to see.
Didn't Tesla predict infinite bandwidth in the wireless spectrum by combining frequencies in certain combinations?..
Re:As an American I can say...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 0
That's just about one of the least educated comments I have ever read on the Internet. The American worker, on average, works longer hours than any other country - including Japan. Also, our culture has fewer holidays and days off than any other culture. Our economy produces more money per work-hour than any other.
As an American I can say that your comment is un-American and completely wrong.
I used to download all sorts of songs off mp3.com for free. Ya, they were only 128kbps non-vbr, but that was better than the crappy Xing encoding that was all over Napster at the time. The only thing bad about mp3.com is that I had to sort through all the shit. Finding a good song was like finding your wife's diamond ring that the dog ate.. There were a lot of good songs, though.
Now, we have the same thing and it's only $9.99 as opposed to free. Wonderful. Is it just me or does it seem like the Internet is trying to charge us for things we used to get for free? Once people are used to getting things for free (as in songs), it's very hard to get them to pay unless a new feature is added that outweighs the opportunity cost.
People need to realize that the next big music business model is small music. Bands will have to post their songs and fans will decide if they're worth paying for. The big music will be left to selling concert tickets and controlling the radio that no one will listen to.
We are a capitalist system and antiquated business is supposed to get phased out or adapt. Clearly, big music is not adapting. This smaller label might be able to sell songs cheaper for a bit, but it will be a select audience and will never explode.
I welcome the demise of big music. Music is art which is optional. Art is for the masses. They can't force me to buy their art even if they force a tune to get stuck in my head. Perhaps I'm just completely cynical, but I just can't see this smaller label having any chance of succeeding in the long run since it is still based on the current 'failing' (failed, imo) business model, only cheaper.
Aside from the few times Intel released a great overclocker, I have never seen a lower-priced Intel processor beat a higher-priced AMD processor in any significant set of benchmarks..
AMD4tw!
Yet, benchmarks, until recently, always seemed to compare same clock speeds/ratings despite Intel's offerings always costing more. It's nice they're starting to be more fair to AMD.
So, by going from original analog to analog recording to digital CD to lossless mp3 to digital sound card that produces analog out to analog tube amp, the quality of sound increases? Hrm.. maybe I don't need to re-code all those 32kbps mp3s after all.
It seems to me that in the digital bandwagon, many companies ignore the potential utility in analog. A lot of our technology is mere digital representations of an analog data.
I know I really miss the analog dials for quickly finding radio stations. With analog, it was just spin the dial quick to get to your station fast; with digital, click and hold, click and hold some more, tap, tap, tap. Though, I do tend to like digital tuning, analog tuning sometimes allows you to get that pesky hard-to-tune station where digital tuning would just skip it.
Also, I have heard that analog amplifiers have better sound quality than digital. They should, if you just look at the basic properties of sound. Maybe if companies spent some new research money on making a better analog amplifier, analog would turn out to be better overall.
My buddy and I build a HT subwoofer on our own and it turned out pretty amazing. It was very powerful and very tight. We paid about $200 for the materials and it turned out about as good as a $1000 subwoofer.
There are lots of ways to build speakers, but they are more complicated because the sound quality depends a lot about the box that they're in. Perhaps this magazine can have a few DIY templates for speakers boxes, crossover wiring, and things like that.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope the spammers don't all sue me for sending out millions of emails that say all spammers are evil and that spam should be ignored!
We walk into a grocery store and usually buy stuff instead of stuffing it in our pockets and running. We know it's wrong to leave without paying.
Why do votes need uber security check technology? Whatever happened to scrutiny by peers?
IMO, paper ballots are best because it is just tougher to destroy them. But, we should get receipts showing how we voted for our own records.
But, trying to turn the entire election process into zero possibility of error or fraud undermines the election itself and goes against the ideals of our society. People in general are honest - and those that aren't get caught eventually by honest people.
Suggesting that 'one person' should not be able to hold an entire precincts' votes just doesn't make much sense. People are often responsible for others. I suppose twenty people should all carry a piece of the nuclear football too..
At the risk of losing karma, I will reply again..
First of all, you replied back to my original conservative post calling for reason with an emotional response calling for reasons.
Second, you told me no one posts reasons to vote for Bush; only to vote against Kerry. Well, then YOU give me a reason to vote for Kerry. Give me lots of them.
My reasons for voting Bush:
1) I like the tax cuts. We're a free country meaning the rich are free to be rich without guilt, the poor are free to become rich, and the middle class are better off in the US than in most countries.
2) Bush believes in a free-market economy. He believes in healthcare that hasn't been socialized. He won't make efforts to socialize healthcare.
3) The economy is doing well. The recent downturn at the end of the Clinton era followed by 9/11 did not hurt us very much under Bush. Outsourcing happens. But, it forces Americans to become smarter and more competitive.
4) Bush supports vouchers. Ya, I'm an evil person that went to a private school. At my private school, the teachers got paid half as much as the local public school and our school spent less than half as much money per student. Guess what? Our average test scores were higher. Public schools will get better if faced with a little 'competition' and private schools will do better with a little more income. Most private schools are dirt poor.
5) Bush wants to privatize Social Security. He seems to realize that the government wastes money left and right. And, the government doesn't have the right to waste our money. Bush treats the average American like he or she is smart enough to plan for retirement.
6) Bush doesn't want to put the US under the jurisdiction of the UN or have the US join the World Court. Our Constitution is fundamentally against doing anything to decrease the sovereignty of the US, and so is Bush. Also, when the UN is ineffective, Bush has the guts to act alone. Perhaps Iraq won't have the best outcome in the long run, but Bush did exactly what he said he would do. The UN did not follow through with their threats to Saddam.
7) Despite world opinion, the media, and the constant barrage from the liberal left, the US citizens are NOT morons. Bush is NOT a moron. We don't expect the government to stifle a free-market economy and guarantee jobs. That is for communism. In the US, anyone that's willing to work can get a job. We have lower unemployment than almost all countries trying to point out the problems in ours.
8) Bush is honest. He doesn't change his mind with the wind. When he says he will do something, he does it. He admits his faults and laughs about them. He does his best to fix them and he surrounds himself with very smart advisors that help him. He stands by his decisions that he bases on conviction.
9) Bush believes in smaller government and more control to local governments. For me, that is Constitutional, and the US Constitution is always right.
10) Bush is optimistic about the future of the US. He will do his best to keep the US powerful - both in economics and military.
There are some of my reasons. I do have more. However, I will wait for your reasons to vote for Kerry that don't merely attack Bush.
This is another example of my original argument. It really has nothing to do with what I was saying. Instead, you call my candidate, who served in the national guard, a deserter.
You use Vietnam to say Kerry takes stands on the issues when I was arguing about the issues NOW, not then. Kerry does not tell us his plans in any detailed sense. His plans are vague enough to look exactly like the Bush plan already in place. But, Kerry cannot tell us whether or not Saddam would still be in power if he was in charge. So again, I say Kerry does not look like he can make a decision by taking a stand on the issues.
"We also all know that Dick Cheney makes money because of the war through Halliburton. Isn't it clear that this war doesn't exist to "spread democracy" or "chase terrorists", but to give money to friends of the republican party?"
Okay, Dick Cheney makes money from this. Now, if I somehow connect the dots between Dick Cheney's profit, the war in Iraq, and Bush being President and ignore information from the US, Russia's, Israel's intelligence agencies, UN demands, Saddam's previous actions - I'm supposed to have irrefutable evidence that the war in Iraq was just over Cheney making money.
Let's just look at this from a broader perspective. You are essentially stating the George W Bush went to war in Iraq because Dick Cheney will profit from it. In other words, the President of the United States started a war in which people were killed so that the vice president would make money. I don't know how one can think that an American should not take offense to that. If Americans truly believed Bush went to war so Cheney could make money, then Kerry would be our new President.
If I said the only reason France didn't want to go to war with Iraq was because they were profiting illegally through the 'Oil For Food' conspiracy, it would also be a hasty generalization. And, it would be (or should be) offensive to anyone that believes in their leaders in France.
Either way, you still haven't convinced me to vote for Kerry and you, like most liberals, managed to say something offensive.
I truly intend to be completely reasonable (though, that is humanly impossible) when I talk about politics. I always try to keep an open mind. But from where I stand, Bush was the only logical option for the next leader of the United States.
"I'm glad I'm not american. Here in Canada, most of us can clearly see the sillyness of this all."
Once again, you self-proclaimed intellectual, please convince me, obviously of lesser intellect, to see it your way. I will even attempt to ignore the offensive statements you provide and just go with the facts.
The reasons the Democratic party lost can easily be seen in your arrogance - arrogance that reflects the whole Democrat presidential campaign. You talked to your granny and all of a sudden you gained a lot of insight. Now, since you talked to your granny, you can generalize the entire population of Bush voters. Since you talked to your roomates, you think you can call the lot of us racist bigots.
And somehow, what you said is supposed to be insightful. You hastily generalize, an error in reasoning, and you, like many Democrats, somehow expect the lot of us to repect your findings. Go re-examine the basis of the Democrat campaign. There are a lot of Democrats that voted for Bush - but somehow Bush only one by the 'righteous racist bigot Christians scared of change'.
Look at your candidate. He couldn't take a stand on anything. He was for and against the war on Iraq. He couldn't say whether or not Saddam would still be in charge of Iraq. He couldn't tell us any parts of his plan except vague hopeless general statements that resembled the hopes Bush had already stated, yet he said they were different. He was a new person every week - a hunter in Ohio in front of the fellow hunters, a snowboarder for the young crowd, a windsurfer, a religious Catholic, and even a dancing member of a black church. Go ahead and call the lot of us stupid again. Call us stupid for seeing that Kerry was nothing but man full of hot air and empty promises.
At least with Bush, if you love him or hate him, you know you love him or hate him. With Kerry, you just cannot tell.
A good Democrat candidate should have beaten Bush. Kerry was NOT a good candidate. Next time, be a good Democrat and convince me to vote for your candidate without offending the hell out of me - a nonreligious, non-racist, non-bigot Bush voter.
It's still fucking legal if you run XP without activating it, you goddamn moron. Just because you don't comply 100% with Microsoft's EULA doesn't mean you're a criminal. Just because MS says something is illegal does NOT make it illegal. There's copyright and then there's crime.
Nobody should have to ask permission to use software once they've already bought it. You're just one of the poor few too ignorant and naive enough to believe Microsoft, in it's ever-increasing legalized monopolistic behavior, will gravitate towards reason.
A free-market economy cannot influence Microsoft any longer since there is no longer a free market. So, the only thing left is active disobedience. By submitting to MS's phone activation scheme, you're just showing MS that there's willing drones ready to do anything required to run their software.
Non-morons know that asking permission to use something you already bought it unreasonable, so I am justified by calling you a moron. Not only do you submit to their requirements, but you actively defend them.
For example, it will allow students and professors on different campuses to meet -- virtually -- and discuss -- lively -- while being in ancient sites of Greece or Italy.
No, this will be used so that horny people can play 'student and professor' virtually.. I mean, I read this and thought, "Wow, now I can do Paris Hilton without getting a disease."
In other words, the main purpose of this is porn. Shuddup.. PORN.
I use a 12amp Milawakee Sawzall to carve my pumpkins.. And then, in Halloween fashion, I go cut everyone up that's in my zone of extension cord. It usually makes for a scary night!
Every part of the US government seems to have a decent amount of checks and balances except for our horrible law enforcement officers. It would be nice if video cameras were a lot smaller and higher quality (and on all of our cell phones with hours and hours of storage and battery life) so we could catch them in the act.
I live in a college city that has about five times (it seems) the normal amount of officers. There's too many police here so they get bored and find things to do.
I've seen police pick fights with drunk college students and the results are never pretty. Often times, the students are groaning but complying while the police are tapping people with batons, shoving them, yelling at them, and patting down anyone at random.
I've said this before on Slashdot, but I once had a buddy get arrested for resisting arrest - without any other charges. He merely resisted arrest even though he wasn't arrested for anything. Cops were breaking up a party and he was leaving and he said that they have no right to be there... and one cop grabbed him, threw him down hitting his chin and elbow on the pavement, and arrested him for resisting arrest.. The charges were eventually dropped but his chin has a scar now.
I was thrown up against a car once and patted down for 'an officer's safety' after I asked for his badge number multiple times when he refused to give it to me. He stopped us for going 45mph in a 45mph zone, though he said we were going 62mph but he didn't have it on radar.
The proliferation of these small cameras everywhere, though hurting privacy, will definitely help in combating crappy cops. I would have loved to have a camera at the last party I was at that got broken up.. I doubt forced entry is an acceptable method of breaking up a party.
You forgot to use flux.. That's why you're bitter.
Having a Replay TV for a few years, using a proxy filter to filter ads, and disabling Shockwave except when needed, I hardly see advertisements.. Yet, I still don't have a problem spending my money!! Yup, I still have things I would like to buy that I can't even afford yet. It's crazy, but even without seeing those all-important ads, I still seem to know about new products!
In video games, I wouldn't mind seeing a 30-second advertisement say.. in between maps.. if the advertisement made me laugh. If the ads have any sort of entertainment value, then people don't hate them as much. Sometimes video games just seem too serious and I think a funny advertisement every once in a while could lighten the mood and make us realize that the other team isn't necessarily enemies - just fellow gamers.
Plus, ads work negatively if they piss off the viewer. Anything that wastes my time pisses me off. But, if I laugh, then I don't feel I've wasted that time. There could be a big market for creating something for groups of people on teamspeak/ventrillo to laugh and talk about..
Something tells me that these ads are all gonna be boring, can't close, gotta watch, piss-me-off-type ads..
My grandma died after complications from a broken hip ~ 3 years hospital stay, infections, never fully recovered..
My grandpa, a few years later, died from complications from a broken hip (slipped on the snow).
I really don't think a Segway is the best answer for old people or even fat people for that matter. Ya, it's a cute little machine that looks like fun - but it takes a certain amount of balance to use and from the way people stand, it's about as forgiving as a bicycle when you fall off of it or the batteries get low.
Every time I see the Segway in use on campus, it makes me glad I'm one of the people that still thinks walking isn't half bad.
a Republican ROBOT?!
talk about disenfranchised.. Robots can't vote.
You forgot the +5 Funny comment about how the link was slashdotted because the server was running on Windows.
ALT-F4 is nice when you can easily keep the windows you want closed in focus. But, with Microsoft's infinite trust towards developers, they allow websites to change the order of focus. So, sometimes ALT-F4 a few times will close one popup and then start closing the desired web pages even though there are popups in between.
And, in order to keep the windows you want to close in focus, you end up having to click on them. BLEH.
Of course you can find a way around all this bullshit that programs like to do to us.. But, my point in my original post is that we should not have to do that. We should not have to go out of our ways to keep programs from taking over our computers.
If I download a program called Weatherbug because it tells me that it will give me quick access to the weather, and then I find out that there were also many other stipulations in the 'user agreement' that 1% of people read, it's spyware.
IMO, Realplayer is spyware, AOL Instant Messenger is spyware. There oughta be a crackdown on dishonest software. When Realplayer starts with all the subscription defaults as deactivated, except for the ones conveniently out of view, SPYWARE. When AOL Instant Messenger wants to put wild tangent bullshit on my computer when AIM used to be for IM'ing people, SPYWARE. Sorry, but it's dishonest programming and doesn't give people enough options for how to disable it or even realize that it's there. Weatherbug does not have anything other than small text about its spyware.
Also, Microsoft is at fault. It's usually just one-click 'yes or no' that decides whether or not the average user has infinite spam, goes to coolwebsearch.com at default, and loses a reliable internet connection... 'Install on Demand' should be disabled by default. I once had spyware installed.. turns out I clicked 'yes' one time when I was just quickly closing popup windows.
They ought to impose the same kinds of restrictions that credit card companies have. When I get a CC add, I can instantly sort through all the bullshit. When Capital One sends me their junk mail, I can open it up and instantly see that $79 a year credit card membership fee is a ripoff. In software, you have to read through a longwinded user agreement - often only available after the software is already downloaded and installed.
The average user is stupid. But, it's not always only stupid users that are being deceived. The software itself lies about its purpose.
I would mod parent up, but I don't currently have mod points. However, it is the same suggestion I would suggest.
For a family with a near-blind kid, a $1000-2000 projector should be in the budget. (Cheaper than most medical procedures.) It might allow the poor kid to even do other things like explore the Internet. Some projectors are extremely bright and have a very high contrast ratio - very useful for trying to make things easier to see.
Didn't Tesla predict infinite bandwidth in the wireless spectrum by combining frequencies in certain combinations? ..
That's just about one of the least educated comments I have ever read on the Internet. The American worker, on average, works longer hours than any other country - including Japan. Also, our culture has fewer holidays and days off than any other culture. Our economy produces more money per work-hour than any other.
As an American I can say that your comment is un-American and completely wrong.
I encode all my CDs in 2822 kbps mp3s, thus exactly doubling the quality of the original CD.
I used to download all sorts of songs off mp3.com for free. Ya, they were only 128kbps non-vbr, but that was better than the crappy Xing encoding that was all over Napster at the time. The only thing bad about mp3.com is that I had to sort through all the shit. Finding a good song was like finding your wife's diamond ring that the dog ate.. There were a lot of good songs, though.
Now, we have the same thing and it's only $9.99 as opposed to free. Wonderful. Is it just me or does it seem like the Internet is trying to charge us for things we used to get for free? Once people are used to getting things for free (as in songs), it's very hard to get them to pay unless a new feature is added that outweighs the opportunity cost.
People need to realize that the next big music business model is small music. Bands will have to post their songs and fans will decide if they're worth paying for. The big music will be left to selling concert tickets and controlling the radio that no one will listen to.
We are a capitalist system and antiquated business is supposed to get phased out or adapt. Clearly, big music is not adapting. This smaller label might be able to sell songs cheaper for a bit, but it will be a select audience and will never explode.
I welcome the demise of big music. Music is art which is optional. Art is for the masses. They can't force me to buy their art even if they force a tune to get stuck in my head. Perhaps I'm just completely cynical, but I just can't see this smaller label having any chance of succeeding in the long run since it is still based on the current 'failing' (failed, imo) business model, only cheaper.
All I can say is 'good luck.'
Aside from the few times Intel released a great overclocker, I have never seen a lower-priced Intel processor beat a higher-priced AMD processor in any significant set of benchmarks..
AMD4tw!
Yet, benchmarks, until recently, always seemed to compare same clock speeds/ratings despite Intel's offerings always costing more. It's nice they're starting to be more fair to AMD.
So, by going from original analog to analog recording to digital CD to lossless mp3 to digital sound card that produces analog out to analog tube amp, the quality of sound increases? Hrm.. maybe I don't need to re-code all those 32kbps mp3s after all.
It seems to me that in the digital bandwagon, many companies ignore the potential utility in analog. A lot of our technology is mere digital representations of an analog data.
I know I really miss the analog dials for quickly finding radio stations. With analog, it was just spin the dial quick to get to your station fast; with digital, click and hold, click and hold some more, tap, tap, tap. Though, I do tend to like digital tuning, analog tuning sometimes allows you to get that pesky hard-to-tune station where digital tuning would just skip it.
Also, I have heard that analog amplifiers have better sound quality than digital. They should, if you just look at the basic properties of sound. Maybe if companies spent some new research money on making a better analog amplifier, analog would turn out to be better overall.
My buddy and I build a HT subwoofer on our own and it turned out pretty amazing. It was very powerful and very tight. We paid about $200 for the materials and it turned out about as good as a $1000 subwoofer.
There are lots of ways to build speakers, but they are more complicated because the sound quality depends a lot about the box that they're in. Perhaps this magazine can have a few DIY templates for speakers boxes, crossover wiring, and things like that.