I use "ID3-TagIT 3" and going from directories/filename to ID3 is very easy. I have perfectly catalogued about 130GB of music with it over the last year, sorted by folder/filename and ID3 info. I use ID3v2 only.
He meant you are missing carriage returns. That's why the period in his sentence is on the next line. What you are missing is in between the word "are" and the period. Doh!
This claim seems to make sense, but think of all the products that compete with free alternatives. How do these non free products get exchanged for money? Well, they are better (in some way, to some people) than their free variant.
Think bottled water vs. tap water, callgirl vs. girlfriend, a round of golf vs. a walk in the park, etc. Can you think of more examples?
As speed decreases to zero, the capacity of any lane (how many cars on any stretch of a lane) increases to the max (less than infinity), with cars stacked one after the other with no space between them. Of course, they are not going anywhere. The flow of cars with a 2 second distance between them depends on the speed because cars are larger than points.
More importantly, as highway speed decreases towards ~35mph , people react by stepping on the brake which interferes with the flow of traffic that would otherwise occur with the 2 second rule.
At least in financial lingo, Deficit is a flow, Debt is a stock. Therefore, deficit increases debt. Debt can be paid back. Deficit can be reduced. Typically governements do neither willingly.
True, government commercials suck and are ineffective on average. That's because government doesn't have to increase its profits, but it likes to increase its costs. So the incentives to choose effective advertising campains is low - and thus we get stupid ads and ineffective policies.
I'd like to clarify the "cellphone increase efficiency" claim made earlier by a poster.
Cellphones decrease the amount of time needed to communicate something or organize a joint action, like being in the same place at the same time.
This is important for day laborers as those who need their services will expend less effort in communicating their need to the day laborer. How do you tell a day laborer that you'll need him right now, tonite, or early tomorrow morning? They are unlikely to be at home, don't have a landline phone, and come and go at irregular hours. When you can find a day laborer more easily, you are likely to require his services more often, for jobs which may have been too much trouble to organize before.
Another example: Often people call each other several times in order to meet in a cafe in the city (I'm running late, let's go to this cafe instead, can't find you, where's that street again), and then wonder how they managed to meet before cellphones. Well, they didn't meet, or they waited. Waiting was particularly common, I think, but cellphones have made this activity more efficient as well.
In this weeks issue of the Economist, there's an article about the departure of some heads of NASA: The search for intelligent life at NASA.
The story is basically that NASA, or the world, doesn't need the ISS, and that the money spent on keeping it there should be used on unmanned missions to various places. Economist goes as far to claim that there is no reason for men to be in space, and that all can be done by machines at a fraction of the cost and with more reliability.
Slashdot Mirror
I use "ID3-TagIT 3" and going from directories/filename to ID3 is very easy. I have perfectly catalogued about 130GB of music with it over the last year, sorted by folder/filename and ID3 info. I use ID3v2 only.
http://www.id3-tagit.de/
He meant you are missing carriage returns. That's why the period in his sentence is on the next line. What you are missing is in between the word "are" and the period. Doh!
This claim seems to make sense, but think of all the products that compete with free alternatives. How do these non free products get exchanged for money? Well, they are better (in some way, to some people) than their free variant.
Think bottled water vs. tap water, callgirl vs. girlfriend, a round of golf vs. a walk in the park, etc. Can you think of more examples?
More importantly, as highway speed decreases towards ~35mph , people react by stepping on the brake which interferes with the flow of traffic that would otherwise occur with the 2 second rule.
rd
At least in financial lingo, Deficit is a flow, Debt is a stock. Therefore, deficit increases debt. Debt can be paid back. Deficit can be reduced. Typically governements do neither willingly.
True, government commercials suck and are ineffective on average. That's because government doesn't have to increase its profits, but it likes to increase its costs. So the incentives to choose effective advertising campains is low - and thus we get stupid ads and ineffective policies.
I'd like to clarify the "cellphone increase efficiency" claim made earlier by a poster.
Cellphones decrease the amount of time needed to communicate something or organize a joint action, like being in the same place at the same time.
This is important for day laborers as those who need their services will expend less effort in communicating their need to the day laborer. How do you tell a day laborer that you'll need him right now, tonite, or early tomorrow morning? They are unlikely to be at home, don't have a landline phone, and come and go at irregular hours. When you can find a day laborer more easily, you are likely to require his services more often, for jobs which may have been too much trouble to organize before.
Another example: Often people call each other several times in order to meet in a cafe in the city (I'm running late, let's go to this cafe instead, can't find you, where's that street again), and then wonder how they managed to meet before cellphones. Well, they didn't meet, or they waited. Waiting was particularly common, I think, but cellphones have made this activity more efficient as well.
In this weeks issue of the Economist, there's an article about the departure of some heads of NASA: The search for intelligent life at NASA.
The story is basically that NASA, or the world, doesn't need the ISS, and that the money spent on keeping it there should be used on unmanned missions to various places. Economist goes as far to claim that there is no reason for men to be in space, and that all can be done by machines at a fraction of the cost and with more reliability.
Bye