Sadly, "Pure Cap" is *not* pure capsaicin, and that stuff on the bottle is just marketing. The Scoville rating for Pure Cap is about 500,000 to 600,000 Scovilles, while straight capsaicin runs at 16,000,000 Scovilles.
Go, read the ingredients for "Pure Cap" and note that it's mostly vegetable oil.
I've had hotter than Pure Cap. You have to work up to it to be able to handle it, but it's very doable.
Because, out of everything, the only thing has ever held Opera back is the lack of extensions. Yep. Definitely. Nothing about having a weird interface, or having preferences in unusual locations. Just the lack of extensions.
Wait, what? I actually don't pirate software. I don't download what I don't have permission (from the rights holder) to download. And yet, from that, you're saying it's okay to violate my rights. You're saying that it's okay to violate the rights of one party on the grounds that a second party's rights are being violated by a third party, based on your assumption that the first party and the third party are pretty much one and the same.
Wow, and I thought I was an asshole. Thanks for making me realize how wrong I was.
the need to cut off the internet makes perfect sense IN THE RIGHT CONTEXT. which is what the law will be tailored to. but if you take the idea of shutting down the internet, and put it in the context of your deepest fear: say, censorship based on political ideology, of course the idea is frightening. AS IF THIS CONTEXT MAKES ANY SENSE. there is no slippery slope, folks, unless you remove from the law and its invocation the existence of thinking human beings. all jokes about big government to the contrary, that's absurd
One thing I have found time and time again: It is very easy to determine whether or not a law will be abused. Simply look at the people who are worried about what will happen, ask what they're worried about, and then listen to the responses from the proponents. When the responses include such phrases as "this will not happen" "it's impossible" "that's absurd" and the like, the law will be abused in exactly the way being described.
To see too many examples from my own lifetime, you only need to look at copyright law. Laws can now be copyrighted by the writers, and legal battles waged so that the laws can be even be posted online so that everybody can see the laws they are subjected to (see: building codes for various areas around the country, such as Oregon). People working legally within their own country can be held prisoner should they visit another country (see Dmitry Slyarov). People in other countries being investigated in their own country for violating a law that only exists in the US (see DVD Jon).
I have seen any number of people worried about the laws our government enacts, and the way in which it enforces those laws. I have seen them say "Wait! Bad idea! Abuse runs rampant with this!", and be told "Don't worry. Won't happen. You're being overly paranoid." Every time that has been the response, I have later seen that law get abused in just that way. And here you are, telling me (and others) not to worry, we're being paranoid, it won't happen. You'll pardon me if, based on past observation, I am somewhat skeptical of your claim.
If you want to calm us down, and keep us from worrying, it's actually quite easy: Get limits put in the bill. For instance, this would help: "If the President uses the power granted by this law, then a vote of confidence is to be held in both houses of Congress within 48 hours. If the vote of confidence does not pass with at least a 2/3 majority of all members of the houses (not just those who attend), the President is immediately removed from office, with his successor, the Vice President, to take his place. In addition, the order to shut down the Internet will be rescinded immediately on completion of the vote." Put that in, and I'll be okay with this bill passing. The people in charge will be unwilling to use this power except under conditions that would actually require its use. Your response goes from "That's absurd" to "Thanks to this provision, we can ensure that it will only be used when absolutely necessary." Anything less than that sort of response, and I'm nervous.
Quite frankly, you should be nervous too. If you're not, you haven't paid enough attention to how power gets abused.
Ya know, I really don't reply much, but the whole "anti-american" thing has gone too far when the damned summary includes something that tells anybody that knows anything about currency that this is not US thing. Here, allow me to quote it:
they fined the student £300
You might be especially interested in the currency indicator. That "£" symbol is used to denote the UK currency unit called the "pound". Over in the actual article (I know, nobody ever reads it, but I still did), they say this:
Rich Martell, 21, a final-year computer sciences student at University College London, has taken the site down under pressure from university authorities, who were concerned that it was distracting students from their studies.
So, at least in this case, no, it is not an "american thing". It is, most definitely, a "London thing". As London is considerably closer to Europe (and, being part of the UK, is considered to be part of Europe) than any part of the USA, I would have to venture that your assertion
Here in europe, the university has nothing to do with their students privat projects.
is now verified to be false. In fact, it might be so far false that this could be considered to be a "European thing", though I'm not sure I'd take it that far myself.
Sorry, yes, O'Reilly's Safari provides download tokens, allowing you to download a chapter out of a book. That chapter is made available to you as a PDF. So no, no issues with the iLiad, or any computer (they work just fine on Linux, Windows, and Mac).
As to which one I got? 2nd Edition. More memory, more battery, than normal one. And wireless (while not very useful *yet*), too, which the Book edition doesn't have.
Will you settle for me having used a Palm Pilot Professional, Handspring Visor, Handspring Visor Deluxe, PalmOne Tungsteon T5, and a PalmOne Treo 650? I've read ebooks on all of them. They were all painful to use because it's so difficult to fit a full page on the screen. Hell, it's difficult to fit a full paragraph on the screen of some of them.
The iLiad, though, allows me to easily display a full page of text. It's easy on the eyes. I don't have to reformat whatever I get to fit the display. And I can take notes directly on the file. So much improved it's ridiculous.
I have (and use) the Treo 650 for what it's good far. I will continue to use the iLiad for what *it's* good for.
Yes, it is. It's also got a screen the size of most other ebook readers. Think about that: The screen is about as big across as the entire Kindle. Believe me, you need to see it. After that, the price seems a lot more justified.
Check out the iLiad. I've been using it for the past month and a half now, and wouldn't dream of using something else. Oh, and I can use my download tokens from Safari to get the books, and put the PDFs onto the iLiad. Very very nice device and combination.
I will also say this: none of the books I've read have been paid for and the prices charged for electronic distribution are obscene. Electronic distribution removes most of the costs associated with publication and you're still going to charge me the full price of the hardcover? Fuck you.
You wanna know really bad? Find "Web Component Development with Zope 3". Good book. About $60 new. Now find the PDF for it. Springer (the publisher) has a partner company which will sell it you. But only one chapter at a time. At $25/chapter. For 24 chapters. $600 for the PDFs that make up the book. For some odd reason, I didn't buy the PDF version.
IANAL. I just know the difference between copyrights, trademarks, patents, industrial design, and trade secrets.
But, apparently, not the difference between the EU and the US. The US does not have any concept of moral rights over a work, while at least one member state of the EU does (though I think it might be all of them).
Fascinating. The ER docs I have spoken to, as well as the RNs I have spoken to, and the reading I have done on the subject, have all confirmed what I have related. I have no explanation for why the ones you spoke with claimed me to be wrong.
Basically, a major organ transplant (such as heart or liver) goes through 5 stages (6 if you count the selection of the donor):
1. Something happens to the donor which results in them being chosen as an organ donor candidate. Ideally, the person who is to be the donor will be relatively young (less than 35 or so), in great health, who has a piano fall on their head, hard enough to basically destroy all higher brain function, but not hard enough to destroy autonomic brain function. In other words, their mind is gone, but their body could survive indefinitely on life support. For example, before all the hoopla, Terry Schiavo would have been a strong candidate for organ transplantation. 2. The organ is removed from the donor. 3. The organ is transported to the recipient. 4. The organ is placed into the recipient. 5. The recipient goes on immunosuppressants for life.
The body is kept warm prior to the removal. This keeps as much oxygen as possible flowing to the body parts. To use a swimming analogy, the organ is getting ready to hold its breath.
Once the organ is removed, it is no longer receiving oxygen. It is now "holding its breath". Some organs can do so for a very long time. Others can only do so for a very short time. Now, go read up on drowning. If you're going to find yourself drowning, and do not wish to die, try to do it in the coldest water possible. You have a chance of being revived, without brain damage, even an hour later. Yes, documented cases do exist of this. See http://www.hhp.ufl.edu/faculty/pbird/keepingfit/ARTICLE/drowningsurvival.HTM for some examples.
Transporting an organ on ice does the same thing. It slows the organ's metabolism down to improve survivability while out of the body.
Right until that moment of removal, though, you want the donor body doing as much as possible to keep that organ alive. You want it warm and fresh, fully oxygenated. Macabre, yes, but very true.
Yes, yes I am serious. The body still has a beating heart. Blood still flows through veins and arteries. These are requirements for optimal organ harvesting. If the heart is no longer beating, then the organ has already suffered oxygen deprivation. Furthermore, it has likely suffered other forms of trauma which are leading to an even earlier death.
I don't remember the lengths of time that individual organs are usable after harvesting. I think, for example, that kidneys are usable up to 24 hours later, while a heart is usable up to 4 hours later (maybe 6, maybe 8, I'm not sure).
Modern medical science gets around this by declaring somebody to be clinically dead. Different countries use different definitions, but that's what they do: This person will not recover. They are dead, their body just doesn't know it yet. We need to harvest these organs *now* before the body realizes it's supposed to be dead, and the organs are useless.
Make no mistake: The body is alive. Changing definitions of clinical death are seeing people recover from injuries that 10 years ago would have them declared clinically dead, and their organs harvested.
If you doubt that, look up severe trauma recoveries. You're going to see stories that are going to amaze you.
If you doubt what I've said about organ harvesting, find a person in the medical industry you actually know personally. Speak to them about it. It's better if they work for a hospital. They'll tell you that every word of this is true. Don't speak to a PR person. They will pooh-pooh this idea, downplay the notion, etc. Speak to people who deal with this personally.
I have, and I am frightened by the fact that they did not contradict even one word of what I said. Not one.
Except for one *very* important point: At the time of organ harvesting, these people are *not* dead. Their bodies are very much alive. And those same bodies show very much the same reactions to the pain of organ harvesting as any other living person.
Add in the whole issue I mentioned above about how to deal with treatments in case of severe injury, and I have a very strong case for not wanting to be an organ donor.
It's not as clear cut as that. You see, in the case of severe trauma, there are two basic treatment paths to take: Keep the body warm, or keep the body cold. The colder the body is, the better the chance the victim comes out alive and intact. So, the body should always be kept cold, right?
Well, if the victim dies anyway, then it's time to harvest. Oh, but the body being kept cold has put the organs closer to death. This reduces the amount of time they can be out of the body before they become useless to a new body.
So, we need to keep the body warm. But if we do that, then the victim has a much greater chance of suffering severe, disabling injuries out of the accident. Which means it's more likely he dies.
Think about it. Would you prefer to live, or to die? Oh, and let's not get started on the medical personnel who have a very important job: If there is any chance the person could be an organ donor, pressure the (still in shock) family to allow organ donation.
As for me, I choose to live. I do not wish to be an organ donor, and have said so to my family.
Actually, this little tidbit comes from snake handlers at a local snake and animal farm: There is only one accurate means to tell if a snake is poisonous or not before it bites, and that's the shape of the pupils of the eyes. If they are shaped like a cat's, it is a poisonous snake. Otherwise not.
Every other mnemonic will eventually fail you.
Of course, if you're able to distinguish the shape of the pupils, you're too close for it to matter anyway:)
The problem was that DOS programs were 16-bit real mode programs. This means that they used 16-bit pointers to refer to memory locations. This is what limits a DOS program to 1 megabyte of memory, not any deficiency in MS-DOS (which it had many of, admittedly). The segmented perversion of 8086 made things even worse by making memory divided into 64kB chunks rather than contiguous.
Wow, and here I thought that using nothing but 16 bit pointers would limit you to 64K of RAM, as 16 bit pointers would allow direct access to 65536 bytes of RAM (2^16=65536). Thanks for clearing that up. I'll go back and fix up some of my code now, so that I can reference that extra 384K that I didn't know was accessible.
Or would it be safer to say that 20 bit pointers and memory banking is what got you capable of using a full meg of memory?
People who have nothing to hide, once again, co-operate with the police.
Holy crap. I had no idea the President read this board.
So, let's continue with your logic, shall we? Let's install a speed monitor in your car. You don't speed, so have nothing to hide, right? Let's install cameras in every room in your home, especially if you're in a state that prohibits certain sexual acts. You don't do anything wrong, so have nothing to hide, right? Hey, many states are passing legislation regarding what you are allowed to do while driving. This necessitates cameras in the car to monitor you. You don't break those laws, and have nothing to hide, right?
Only a criminal would have an issue with any of that. Only criminals have anything to hide from the proper authorities. Everybody else will just cooperate, and let them do their job, so they can catch all the bad guys.
Or, maybe, just maybe, people shouldn't have to spend their time helping the police do their job? Nah, couldn't be it. They've got to be criminals.
Checkpoint is stable, secure and has an excellent track record.
We have problems with the Checkpoint/Nokia combo as well. I'll admit it: It's at least partially because my training with the system has amounted to "I wonder what this button does?". However, it is mostly stable, mostly functional. But, when there is a problem, I get to make the call I dread the most: I call Checkpoint customer support.
Why do I dread this call? I have zero options. I'll get a call back. If I've got a severity 1 issue (my company is down, unable to access the internet, web site sales are shut down because of it, I need help fixing this now!), the best I can hope for is to get a call back within the hour. I've opened up lesser issues, and not even gotten a call back. Found the answer within a day of searching the net, and appended a note to my ticket that I appreciated their lack of response, but that the issue was now fixed, so they could close it. And the whole reply to that was a "heartfelt" apology.
The software may well be great. The devices may well be solid. But the customer support? I've gotten more (and more useful!) answers from Microsoft's web site than I have from the Checkpoint people. Based on that alone, I would never recommend buying their software.
Note: I have no problem with paying for software. I have no problem with paying for support. I have no problem with using software that is unsupported in any official manner (much FOSS stuff, for instance). I do have a problem with paying for software, then paying for support, and not being able to get it when I have to have it.
the vast majority of people who I argue with over the subject start from the premise, "It says in Genesis..."
I think I'm going to start my own replies to this sort of argument with this reply: Is this from the same Bible which is missing a whole book? Not just a testament, like Luke, but a whole book. After all, unless you're a Roman Catholic, you very likely do not have a bible which has the Apocrypha in it. And if your Bible is missing that entire book, how can you be sure of what is actually said in so much as a single chapter and verse?
Not that I expect to ever win such an argument, but it makes for some fun when they look at you as if you've just grown an extra head, and then realize you're being serious.
I love ubuntu. easy install, recognizes all hardwrae, even my wifi.
I was mightily impressed by Ubuntu as well. I'd been running a progressively more and more unstable Debian MythTV server, and finally decided to give Ubuntu a try. Long story short: As soon as I get the time over a weekend, Ubuntu is going away.
Short story long: Debian had become unstable over the years on this machine, due to new alpha and pre-alpha drivers being installed, crashing bad reboots due to the crashing, etc. Especially when I had to hit reset, the file corruption that was occurring was destroying the machine. So, last month, I installed Ubuntu. Remember the crashing I mentioned? It would happen every 3 or 4 days. With Ubuntu? At *least* once/night, and usually more often than that. Maddening doesn't begin to do it justice.
Looks like it's down to a video driver issue, though. If I drop my video driver all the way back to vesa (which looks worse than absolute crap on this setup, let me tell you!), the machine has finally become stable. In other words, it's been up for almost 4 days running now. I'm happy to get 4 days out of it. That is pathetic. Ubuntu is going away, and I'm switching back to Debian, where I expect I will have my stability completely returned by a nice, clean install.
Slashdot Mirror
Seems to me that you've thrown your own gauntlet. Make it happen.
Sadly, "Pure Cap" is *not* pure capsaicin, and that stuff on the bottle is just marketing. The Scoville rating for Pure Cap is about 500,000 to 600,000 Scovilles, while straight capsaicin runs at 16,000,000 Scovilles.
Go, read the ingredients for "Pure Cap" and note that it's mostly vegetable oil.
I've had hotter than Pure Cap. You have to work up to it to be able to handle it, but it's very doable.
Because, out of everything, the only thing has ever held Opera back is the lack of extensions. Yep. Definitely. Nothing about having a weird interface, or having preferences in unusual locations. Just the lack of extensions.
Sure.
Wait, what? I actually don't pirate software. I don't download what I don't have permission (from the rights holder) to download. And yet, from that, you're saying it's okay to violate my rights. You're saying that it's okay to violate the rights of one party on the grounds that a second party's rights are being violated by a third party, based on your assumption that the first party and the third party are pretty much one and the same.
Wow, and I thought I was an asshole. Thanks for making me realize how wrong I was.
One thing I have found time and time again: It is very easy to determine whether or not a law will be abused. Simply look at the people who are worried about what will happen, ask what they're worried about, and then listen to the responses from the proponents. When the responses include such phrases as "this will not happen" "it's impossible" "that's absurd" and the like, the law will be abused in exactly the way being described.
To see too many examples from my own lifetime, you only need to look at copyright law. Laws can now be copyrighted by the writers, and legal battles waged so that the laws can be even be posted online so that everybody can see the laws they are subjected to (see: building codes for various areas around the country, such as Oregon). People working legally within their own country can be held prisoner should they visit another country (see Dmitry Slyarov). People in other countries being investigated in their own country for violating a law that only exists in the US (see DVD Jon).
I have seen any number of people worried about the laws our government enacts, and the way in which it enforces those laws. I have seen them say "Wait! Bad idea! Abuse runs rampant with this!", and be told "Don't worry. Won't happen. You're being overly paranoid." Every time that has been the response, I have later seen that law get abused in just that way. And here you are, telling me (and others) not to worry, we're being paranoid, it won't happen. You'll pardon me if, based on past observation, I am somewhat skeptical of your claim.
If you want to calm us down, and keep us from worrying, it's actually quite easy: Get limits put in the bill. For instance, this would help: "If the President uses the power granted by this law, then a vote of confidence is to be held in both houses of Congress within 48 hours. If the vote of confidence does not pass with at least a 2/3 majority of all members of the houses (not just those who attend), the President is immediately removed from office, with his successor, the Vice President, to take his place. In addition, the order to shut down the Internet will be rescinded immediately on completion of the vote." Put that in, and I'll be okay with this bill passing. The people in charge will be unwilling to use this power except under conditions that would actually require its use. Your response goes from "That's absurd" to "Thanks to this provision, we can ensure that it will only be used when absolutely necessary." Anything less than that sort of response, and I'm nervous.
Quite frankly, you should be nervous too. If you're not, you haven't paid enough attention to how power gets abused.
Ya know, I really don't reply much, but the whole "anti-american" thing has gone too far when the damned summary includes something that tells anybody that knows anything about currency that this is not US thing. Here, allow me to quote it:
You might be especially interested in the currency indicator. That "£" symbol is used to denote the UK currency unit called the "pound". Over in the actual article (I know, nobody ever reads it, but I still did), they say this:
So, at least in this case, no, it is not an "american thing". It is, most definitely, a "London thing". As London is considerably closer to Europe (and, being part of the UK, is considered to be part of Europe) than any part of the USA, I would have to venture that your assertion
is now verified to be false. In fact, it might be so far false that this could be considered to be a "European thing", though I'm not sure I'd take it that far myself.
Sorry, yes, O'Reilly's Safari provides download tokens, allowing you to download a chapter out of a book. That chapter is made available to you as a PDF. So no, no issues with the iLiad, or any computer (they work just fine on Linux, Windows, and Mac).
As to which one I got? 2nd Edition. More memory, more battery, than normal one. And wireless (while not very useful *yet*), too, which the Book edition doesn't have.
Will you settle for me having used a Palm Pilot Professional, Handspring Visor, Handspring Visor Deluxe, PalmOne Tungsteon T5, and a PalmOne Treo 650? I've read ebooks on all of them. They were all painful to use because it's so difficult to fit a full page on the screen. Hell, it's difficult to fit a full paragraph on the screen of some of them.
The iLiad, though, allows me to easily display a full page of text. It's easy on the eyes. I don't have to reformat whatever I get to fit the display. And I can take notes directly on the file. So much improved it's ridiculous.
I have (and use) the Treo 650 for what it's good far. I will continue to use the iLiad for what *it's* good for.
Yes, it is. It's also got a screen the size of most other ebook readers. Think about that: The screen is about as big across as the entire Kindle. Believe me, you need to see it. After that, the price seems a lot more justified.
Check out the iLiad. I've been using it for the past month and a half now, and wouldn't dream of using something else. Oh, and I can use my download tokens from Safari to get the books, and put the PDFs onto the iLiad. Very very nice device and combination.
You wanna know really bad? Find "Web Component Development with Zope 3". Good book. About $60 new. Now find the PDF for it. Springer (the publisher) has a partner company which will sell it you. But only one chapter at a time. At $25/chapter. For 24 chapters. $600 for the PDFs that make up the book. For some odd reason, I didn't buy the PDF version.
But, apparently, not the difference between the EU and the US. The US does not have any concept of moral rights over a work, while at least one member state of the EU does (though I think it might be all of them).
Fascinating. The ER docs I have spoken to, as well as the RNs I have spoken to, and the reading I have done on the subject, have all confirmed what I have related. I have no explanation for why the ones you spoke with claimed me to be wrong.
Basically, a major organ transplant (such as heart or liver) goes through 5 stages (6 if you count the selection of the donor):
1. Something happens to the donor which results in them being chosen as an organ donor candidate. Ideally, the person who is to be the donor will be relatively young (less than 35 or so), in great health, who has a piano fall on their head, hard enough to basically destroy all higher brain function, but not hard enough to destroy autonomic brain function. In other words, their mind is gone, but their body could survive indefinitely on life support. For example, before all the hoopla, Terry Schiavo would have been a strong candidate for organ transplantation.
2. The organ is removed from the donor.
3. The organ is transported to the recipient.
4. The organ is placed into the recipient.
5. The recipient goes on immunosuppressants for life.
The body is kept warm prior to the removal. This keeps as much oxygen as possible flowing to the body parts. To use a swimming analogy, the organ is getting ready to hold its breath.
Once the organ is removed, it is no longer receiving oxygen. It is now "holding its breath". Some organs can do so for a very long time. Others can only do so for a very short time. Now, go read up on drowning. If you're going to find yourself drowning, and do not wish to die, try to do it in the coldest water possible. You have a chance of being revived, without brain damage, even an hour later. Yes, documented cases do exist of this. See http://www.hhp.ufl.edu/faculty/pbird/keepingfit/ARTICLE/drowningsurvival.HTM for some examples.
Transporting an organ on ice does the same thing. It slows the organ's metabolism down to improve survivability while out of the body.
Right until that moment of removal, though, you want the donor body doing as much as possible to keep that organ alive. You want it warm and fresh, fully oxygenated. Macabre, yes, but very true.
Yes, yes I am serious. The body still has a beating heart. Blood still flows through veins and arteries. These are requirements for optimal organ harvesting. If the heart is no longer beating, then the organ has already suffered oxygen deprivation. Furthermore, it has likely suffered other forms of trauma which are leading to an even earlier death.
I don't remember the lengths of time that individual organs are usable after harvesting. I think, for example, that kidneys are usable up to 24 hours later, while a heart is usable up to 4 hours later (maybe 6, maybe 8, I'm not sure).
Modern medical science gets around this by declaring somebody to be clinically dead. Different countries use different definitions, but that's what they do: This person will not recover. They are dead, their body just doesn't know it yet. We need to harvest these organs *now* before the body realizes it's supposed to be dead, and the organs are useless.
Make no mistake: The body is alive. Changing definitions of clinical death are seeing people recover from injuries that 10 years ago would have them declared clinically dead, and their organs harvested.
If you doubt that, look up severe trauma recoveries. You're going to see stories that are going to amaze you.
If you doubt what I've said about organ harvesting, find a person in the medical industry you actually know personally. Speak to them about it. It's better if they work for a hospital. They'll tell you that every word of this is true. Don't speak to a PR person. They will pooh-pooh this idea, downplay the notion, etc. Speak to people who deal with this personally.
I have, and I am frightened by the fact that they did not contradict even one word of what I said. Not one.
Except for one *very* important point: At the time of organ harvesting, these people are *not* dead. Their bodies are very much alive. And those same bodies show very much the same reactions to the pain of organ harvesting as any other living person.
Add in the whole issue I mentioned above about how to deal with treatments in case of severe injury, and I have a very strong case for not wanting to be an organ donor.
It's not as clear cut as that. You see, in the case of severe trauma, there are two basic treatment paths to take: Keep the body warm, or keep the body cold. The colder the body is, the better the chance the victim comes out alive and intact. So, the body should always be kept cold, right?
Well, if the victim dies anyway, then it's time to harvest. Oh, but the body being kept cold has put the organs closer to death. This reduces the amount of time they can be out of the body before they become useless to a new body.
So, we need to keep the body warm. But if we do that, then the victim has a much greater chance of suffering severe, disabling injuries out of the accident. Which means it's more likely he dies.
Think about it. Would you prefer to live, or to die? Oh, and let's not get started on the medical personnel who have a very important job: If there is any chance the person could be an organ donor, pressure the (still in shock) family to allow organ donation.
As for me, I choose to live. I do not wish to be an organ donor, and have said so to my family.
Actually, this little tidbit comes from snake handlers at a local snake and animal farm: There is only one accurate means to tell if a snake is poisonous or not before it bites, and that's the shape of the pupils of the eyes. If they are shaped like a cat's, it is a poisonous snake. Otherwise not.
:)
Every other mnemonic will eventually fail you.
Of course, if you're able to distinguish the shape of the pupils, you're too close for it to matter anyway
Wow, and here I thought that using nothing but 16 bit pointers would limit you to 64K of RAM, as 16 bit pointers would allow direct access to 65536 bytes of RAM (2^16=65536). Thanks for clearing that up. I'll go back and fix up some of my code now, so that I can reference that extra 384K that I didn't know was accessible.
Or would it be safer to say that 20 bit pointers and memory banking is what got you capable of using a full meg of memory?
Holy crap. I had no idea the President read this board.
So, let's continue with your logic, shall we? Let's install a speed monitor in your car. You don't speed, so have nothing to hide, right? Let's install cameras in every room in your home, especially if you're in a state that prohibits certain sexual acts. You don't do anything wrong, so have nothing to hide, right? Hey, many states are passing legislation regarding what you are allowed to do while driving. This necessitates cameras in the car to monitor you. You don't break those laws, and have nothing to hide, right?
Only a criminal would have an issue with any of that. Only criminals have anything to hide from the proper authorities. Everybody else will just cooperate, and let them do their job, so they can catch all the bad guys.
Or, maybe, just maybe, people shouldn't have to spend their time helping the police do their job? Nah, couldn't be it. They've got to be criminals.
"Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option." "Humously"?
Yes, Humously. As in "Posthumously". Jeez, I've seen that sig for a long time, and it took me all of 10 seconds to get it.
We have problems with the Checkpoint/Nokia combo as well. I'll admit it: It's at least partially because my training with the system has amounted to "I wonder what this button does?". However, it is mostly stable, mostly functional. But, when there is a problem, I get to make the call I dread the most: I call Checkpoint customer support.
Why do I dread this call? I have zero options. I'll get a call back. If I've got a severity 1 issue (my company is down, unable to access the internet, web site sales are shut down because of it, I need help fixing this now!), the best I can hope for is to get a call back within the hour. I've opened up lesser issues, and not even gotten a call back. Found the answer within a day of searching the net, and appended a note to my ticket that I appreciated their lack of response, but that the issue was now fixed, so they could close it. And the whole reply to that was a "heartfelt" apology.
The software may well be great. The devices may well be solid. But the customer support? I've gotten more (and more useful!) answers from Microsoft's web site than I have from the Checkpoint people. Based on that alone, I would never recommend buying their software.
Note: I have no problem with paying for software. I have no problem with paying for support. I have no problem with using software that is unsupported in any official manner (much FOSS stuff, for instance). I do have a problem with paying for software, then paying for support, and not being able to get it when I have to have it.
I'm not sure where this goes (monitor or device), but it fixes agp freezes on Linux 99% of the time when it comes to NVidia cards: Option "NvAgp" "0"
I think I'm going to start my own replies to this sort of argument with this reply: Is this from the same Bible which is missing a whole book? Not just a testament, like Luke, but a whole book. After all, unless you're a Roman Catholic, you very likely do not have a bible which has the Apocrypha in it. And if your Bible is missing that entire book, how can you be sure of what is actually said in so much as a single chapter and verse?
Not that I expect to ever win such an argument, but it makes for some fun when they look at you as if you've just grown an extra head, and then realize you're being serious.
I was mightily impressed by Ubuntu as well. I'd been running a progressively more and more unstable Debian MythTV server, and finally decided to give Ubuntu a try. Long story short: As soon as I get the time over a weekend, Ubuntu is going away.
Short story long: Debian had become unstable over the years on this machine, due to new alpha and pre-alpha drivers being installed, crashing bad reboots due to the crashing, etc. Especially when I had to hit reset, the file corruption that was occurring was destroying the machine. So, last month, I installed Ubuntu. Remember the crashing I mentioned? It would happen every 3 or 4 days. With Ubuntu? At *least* once/night, and usually more often than that. Maddening doesn't begin to do it justice.
Looks like it's down to a video driver issue, though. If I drop my video driver all the way back to vesa (which looks worse than absolute crap on this setup, let me tell you!), the machine has finally become stable. In other words, it's been up for almost 4 days running now. I'm happy to get 4 days out of it. That is pathetic. Ubuntu is going away, and I'm switching back to Debian, where I expect I will have my stability completely returned by a nice, clean install.