To be completely honest I feel that if John were alive today he'd be a conservative. Don't ever underestimate how much the Beatles hated taxes.
The conservatives thirty years ago were just as anti-tax as today conservatives (see Reagan). Why do you think that would have made Lennon a conservative today if it didn't work when he was alive?
Also McCartney is still alive and he is no conservative.
That's absolutely right. I know purists like to criticize those who don't vote for their first choice, but the problem is with our voting system not our voters. We need a voting system that lets voters vote for who they really want, our current system is not it.
So you want to get the attention of the party which MAY have some virtue left by supporting the party with NO virtue? That's the party people don't get. Vote third party at least, helping the Republicans can do no good.
Re:Dealing with the same issue myself...
on
What NAS To Buy?
·
· Score: 1
I've been looking at the Synology DS207 as well. The only thing the 207+ buys you is better performance, all the other features are available in both. To me the extra price isn't worth it. Either way, they both look like great units.
If you change SSH to always send a full packets worth of data it will be unusable or ridiculously inefficient. I don't want "ls" to be padded with a meg of useless data.
Breaking up P2P packets is more plausible, but it would seriously degrade the performance.
Putting ctrl in the caps lock place seems so obviously right once you do it, I can't believe more keyboard makers don't do it. The only problem is now when I use someone elses computer I always have to deal with a few minutes of random uppercase letters everywhere i type.
Oh sure, it drives us crazy. The telco's did just win the previous/. poll for most irritating industry by a substantial 11%. Nothing we can do about it though if we want a cell phone.
300 megs is more than enough for just about every "normal" smartphone user. But not enough to throw in VoIP, radio-streaming on the road, or mobile pr0n.
No they aren't. The lines in an ordinary doodle are a fixed width and so they would be plainly different as you zoom in or out.
I don't remember all the details since it was at least 5 years ago, but the guys entire paper was based on the fact that software could accurately distinguish between original Pollack's and imitation splatter paintings done by himself and other artists based on fractal patterns that were characteristic only of Pollack's works.
Yeah, I remember reading a long time ago that mathematicians found fractal characteristics in the works of Pollock. Apparently this characteristic of his art is not so easy to replicate.
Your point is pointless. Many people appreciate the value of having an original piece of artwork. You're not one of them. What else is there to discuss?
That's not entirely true since the Biblical account of creation describes the origin of the species, not just the origin of life.
Some Christian scientists could certainly believe that the book of Genesis is a parable and God created the first life and evolution took over from there, but that form of creationism is not the one that gets all the attention.
It's an axiom it doesn't need to be proven. Some people choose not to believe it and they follow religions. So which way is better? Let's see.
On the one hand we have a science which has produced a large core of universally accepted knowledge. This core has resulted in the production of all of our modern technology resulting in longer lived, healthier people who are able to travel the world and communicate instantly.
On the other hand we have religion which consisting of thousands of separate branches with no universally accepted ideas and many flat out contradictory ideas. This has resulted in many bloody wars throughout history and pretty much nothing else of any objective.
Gee, who can say which works better? I guess we'll call it a toss-up.
By choosing to allow a "disabled" embryo to develop we are choosing not to allow another embryo to develop which would be just happy to have a chance to contribute to society as you are.
In other words, it's a bit silly to consider the rights or wishes of people who are not or would not have been born. I can say I'm glad I was born, but had I not been born I'd be in no position to care.
Keep in mind here we are talking about in vitro fertilization. In that process it is typical to create several fertilized eggs and implant one. The reset are disposed of. That being the case, why does it matter if genetic tests are used to determine which fertilized egg should be implanted? I don't see any moral dilemma here.
As an aside it is so absolutely ridiculous to give everything with human DNA the same rights as a full human that it isn't even worth discussing. If you can't see the folly of giving a lost tooth the same rights as a child you are beyond reason.
Slashdot Mirror
How would living miles away from the things you need and then complaining about the cost of having to drive around everywhere be the "right" way?
Obviously he's using absolute magnitudes.
Does CowboyNeal herd spherical cows?
How does someone who is not running and would never get elected qualify as our best hope as President?
To be completely honest I feel that if John were alive today he'd be a conservative. Don't ever underestimate how much the Beatles hated taxes.
The conservatives thirty years ago were just as anti-tax as today conservatives (see Reagan). Why do you think that would have made Lennon a conservative today if it didn't work when he was alive?
Also McCartney is still alive and he is no conservative.
That's absolutely right. I know purists like to criticize those who don't vote for their first choice, but the problem is with our voting system not our voters. We need a voting system that lets voters vote for who they really want, our current system is not it.
Cut them some slack, after eight years of Bush anyone who can string a sentence together on their own looks pretty damn impressive.
Maybe he was talking about Reid, those Mormons are so notoriously liberal.
So you want to get the attention of the party which MAY have some virtue left by supporting the party with NO virtue? That's the party people don't get. Vote third party at least, helping the Republicans can do no good.
I've been looking at the Synology DS207 as well. The only thing the 207+ buys you is better performance, all the other features are available in both. To me the extra price isn't worth it. Either way, they both look like great units.
If you change SSH to always send a full packets worth of data it will be unusable or ridiculously inefficient. I don't want "ls" to be padded with a meg of useless data.
Breaking up P2P packets is more plausible, but it would seriously degrade the performance.
And if you're telecommuting, your employer really should be paying for your connection anyway.
Why is that? It sounds nice but seems a little unrealistic. That's like saying if you're not telecommuting then your company should pay for your car.
Shouldn't ssh be doing this anyway considering that similar timing methods can be used to guess passwords?
Get thousands of people killed, who knows you might get elected president
More likely that should be re-elected. It's hard to get that many deaths under your belt before being President.
Putting ctrl in the caps lock place seems so obviously right once you do it, I can't believe more keyboard makers don't do it. The only problem is now when I use someone elses computer I always have to deal with a few minutes of random uppercase letters everywhere i type.
Oh sure, it drives us crazy. The telco's did just win the previous /. poll for most irritating industry by a substantial 11%. Nothing we can do about it though if we want a cell phone.
300 megs is more than enough for just about every "normal" smartphone user. But not enough to throw in VoIP, radio-streaming on the road, or mobile pr0n.
That's what they think. Ascii pr0n FTW!
No they aren't. The lines in an ordinary doodle are a fixed width and so they would be plainly different as you zoom in or out.
I don't remember all the details since it was at least 5 years ago, but the guys entire paper was based on the fact that software could accurately distinguish between original Pollack's and imitation splatter paintings done by himself and other artists based on fractal patterns that were characteristic only of Pollack's works.
Yeah, I remember reading a long time ago that mathematicians found fractal characteristics in the works of Pollock. Apparently this characteristic of his art is not so easy to replicate.
Your point is pointless. Many people appreciate the value of having an original piece of artwork. You're not one of them. What else is there to discuss?
They both probably are about equally low in worth.
That's not entirely true since the Biblical account of creation describes the origin of the species, not just the origin of life.
Some Christian scientists could certainly believe that the book of Genesis is a parable and God created the first life and evolution took over from there, but that form of creationism is not the one that gets all the attention.
It's an axiom it doesn't need to be proven. Some people choose not to believe it and they follow religions. So which way is better? Let's see.
On the one hand we have a science which has produced a large core of universally accepted knowledge. This core has resulted in the production of all of our modern technology resulting in longer lived, healthier people who are able to travel the world and communicate instantly.
On the other hand we have religion which consisting of thousands of separate branches with no universally accepted ideas and many flat out contradictory ideas. This has resulted in many bloody wars throughout history and pretty much nothing else of any objective.
Gee, who can say which works better? I guess we'll call it a toss-up.
By choosing to allow a "disabled" embryo to develop we are choosing not to allow another embryo to develop which would be just happy to have a chance to contribute to society as you are.
In other words, it's a bit silly to consider the rights or wishes of people who are not or would not have been born. I can say I'm glad I was born, but had I not been born I'd be in no position to care.
Keep in mind here we are talking about in vitro fertilization. In that process it is typical to create several fertilized eggs and implant one. The reset are disposed of. That being the case, why does it matter if genetic tests are used to determine which fertilized egg should be implanted? I don't see any moral dilemma here.
As an aside it is so absolutely ridiculous to give everything with human DNA the same rights as a full human that it isn't even worth discussing. If you can't see the folly of giving a lost tooth the same rights as a child you are beyond reason.