I own an iRex and this is very cool. Problem with the compactflash cards is that is significantly drains the battery. The SD slot does not take anything over 1 Gig. Hopefully this wil be corrected in a next version.
If you factor in the drop of the actual value of a dollar since 2000 it's not so impressive. Especially considering they have a few (2) insanely profitable products.
"Then again, maybe it is getting exactly the attention it deserves."
Except ms Edmonds is the most gagged person is US history and her story has been confirmed by several other (former) FBI agents and the FBI itself.
All she wanted was to testify in public before the 9/11 commission. This was denied and she was forbidden to speak to anyone about what she knew by the supreme court (some indication that it is interesting to say the least).
OOXML will not be an allowed document format according to the current policy. ODF is the mandatory standards. If and when OOXML is ISO approved the Dutch government *may* add this format. But there is very little reason to do so. No applications use OOXML (the version up for ISO-approval anyway) and all applications (even MS-Office) support ODF. So MS-office will be usable as a tool as long as ODF is used to store documents.
As one of the authors of the parliament motion that started this policy track back in 2002 and someone who had the oportunity to advise the minister personally I can categorically state that this is not the intention of the plan. It is also not the intention to ban any specific product or any vendor. If certain public institutions wish to use a proprietary word processor that is fine. They just have to store their documents in a neutral format so that others remain free to use the tools of their choosing. This is about the freedom to choose, both for government organizations and citizens who wish to access government documents.
If because of this someone can get a good deal on licenses than that's less cost for the taxpayer so that also a 'good thing'.
Yeah right. It's statements like these that make her story a lot less believable.
Considering the cost of building safe nuclear reactors, the cost of taking proper care of the waste and all the other things such as mining a shrinking reserve of usable fuel make nuclear only viable if propped up by massive government subsidies. Why not put those subsidies into wind and other altrnatives? The real solution here is using less energy. Something that for some reason is not mentioned as an option at all.
Most Dutch 'it-education' is really a course in Windows+MS-Office. 90% of teachers (from elementry to university level institutions) have never even heard of any alternatives or have any clue as to what an open standard is. Even a college-level CS education will most often does not include any teaching of the the basic concepts of open standards, free software or opensource development methodologies. We actually have academics praising Microsoft for innovation... in market approach and marketing. There are some activities in the Netherlands trying to change all this but is is slow going.
You used to be a pirate? How many ships did you plunder? Or perhaps you mean you infringed on someone's copyright and the actual plundering boats on the high sead was not involved? So let's call ik what is is. By downloading content or software I may or may not break the law, depending on the nature of the content and my location at that time (Sweden and the Netherlands have very different legal systems compared to the US). Completely seperate from this the lawbreaking may or may not be immoral. If you do not believe there may be a big difference between illegal and immoral you nee to study the history of civil disobiedience (or just watch Schindlers list or something).
It says so in their own kabinet memo of July 23, 2002 (!!!)
And that makes the attack on Iraq a war crime accoring to the rules laid down after WW-II
(see downingstreetmemo.com)
SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY
DAVID MANNING From: Matthew Rycroft Date: 23 July 2002 S 195/02
cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell
IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY
Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.
This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.
John Scarlett summarised the intelligence and latest JIC assessment. Saddam's regime was tough and based on extreme fear. The only way to overthrow it was likely to be by massive military action. Saddam was worried and expected an attack, probably by air and land, but he was not convinced that it would be immediate or overwhelming. His regime expected their neighbours to line up with the US. Saddam knew that regular army morale was poor. Real support for Saddam among the public was probably narrowly based.
C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
CDS said that military planners would brief CENTCOM on 1-2 August, Rumsfeld on 3 August and Bush on 4 August.
The two broad US options were:
(a) Generated Start. A slow build-up of 250,000 US troops, a short (72 hour) air campaign, then a move up to Baghdad from the south. Lead time of 90 days (30 days preparation plus 60 days deployment to Kuwait).
(b) Running Start. Use forces already in theatre (3 x 6,000), continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli. Total lead time of 60 days with the air campaign beginning even earlier. A hazardous option.
The US saw the UK (and Kuwait) as essential, with basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus critical for either option. Turkey and other Gulf states were also important, but less vital. The three main options for UK involvement were:
(i) Basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus, plus three SF squadrons.
(ii) As above, with maritime and air assets in addition.
(iii) As above, plus a land contribution of up to 40,000, perhaps with a discrete role in Northern Iraq entering from Turkey, tying down two Iraqi divisions.
The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.
The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.
The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be diff
In the Book 2001 the NSA (or whatever 3-letter agency) did not lie to HAL-9000. HAL was the only crew-member that was fully informed about the nature of the mission (studying the monolith in orbit around Jupiter). It was the instructions not to inform the human crewmembers that led to HAL's nervous breakdown and erratic behaviour.
Funny that this does not make it to the first page:-) MSN search results
27: Microsoft Linux - the premier linux distro Learn how you can use Microsoft Linux Technologies to expand your busness or your desktop.... Linux to have Start Button. Microsoft is working to incorporate the well known "Start" button from the Windows Platform... www.mslinux.org
Slashdot Mirror
Unobtainuim (it ook 12 years just to get one atom of the stuff)
This is the perfect scenario for a remake of 'The Blob'
I own an iRex and this is very cool. Problem with the compactflash cards is that is significantly drains the battery. The SD slot does not take anything over 1 Gig. Hopefully this wil be corrected in a next version.
If you factor in the drop of the actual value of a dollar since 2000 it's not so impressive. Especially considering they have a few (2) insanely profitable products.
"Then again, maybe it is getting exactly the attention it deserves."
Except ms Edmonds is the most gagged person is US history and her story has been confirmed by several other (former) FBI agents and the FBI itself.
All she wanted was to testify in public before the 9/11 commission. This was denied and she was forbidden to speak to anyone about what she knew by the supreme court (some indication that it is interesting to say the least).
More on her story.
OOXML will not be an allowed document format according to the current policy. ODF is the mandatory standards. If and when OOXML is ISO approved the Dutch government *may* add this format. But there is very little reason to do so. No applications use OOXML (the version up for ISO-approval anyway) and all applications (even MS-Office) support ODF. So MS-office will be usable as a tool as long as ODF is used to store documents.
Rgds,
Arjen
As one of the authors of the parliament motion that started this policy track back in 2002 and someone who had the oportunity to advise the minister personally I can categorically state that this is not the intention of the plan. It is also not the intention to ban any specific product or any vendor. If certain public institutions wish to use a proprietary word processor that is fine. They just have to store their documents in a neutral format so that others remain free to use the tools of their choosing. This is about the freedom to choose, both for government organizations and citizens who wish to access government documents.
If because of this someone can get a good deal on licenses than that's less cost for the taxpayer so that also a 'good thing'.
Arjen
Yeah right. It's statements like these that make her story a lot less believable.
Considering the cost of building safe nuclear reactors, the cost of taking proper care of the waste and all the other things such as mining a shrinking reserve of usable fuel make nuclear only viable if propped up by massive government subsidies. Why not put those subsidies into wind and other altrnatives? The real solution here is using less energy. Something that for some reason is not mentioned as an option at all.
Rgds,
Arjen
Talking about news; if you enter 'Kucinich' in google news the top hit is Press TV Iran http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=7491§ioni d=3510203. NY Times and Whashington Post are way down the list of 300+.
Most Dutch 'it-education' is really a course in Windows+MS-Office. 90% of teachers (from elementry to university level institutions) have never even heard of any alternatives or have any clue as to what an open standard is. Even a college-level CS education will most often does not include any teaching of the the basic concepts of open standards, free software or opensource development methodologies. We actually have academics praising Microsoft for innovation ... in market approach and marketing. There are some activities in the Netherlands trying to change all this but is is slow going.
Greetings from Amsterdam,
Arjen
Aaarrr matey!
You used to be a pirate? How many ships did you plunder? Or perhaps you mean you infringed on someone's copyright and the actual plundering boats on the high sead was not involved? So let's call ik what is is. By downloading content or software I may or may not break the law, depending on the nature of the content and my location at that time (Sweden and the Netherlands have very different legal systems compared to the US). Completely seperate from this the lawbreaking may or may not be immoral. If you do not believe there may be a big difference between illegal and immoral you nee to study the history of civil disobiedience (or just watch Schindlers list or something).
Is't crystalline carbon after all.
this in one company in serious trouble!
It says so in their own kabinet memo of July 23, 2002 (!!!)
/02
And that makes the attack on Iraq a war crime accoring to the rules laid down after WW-II
(see downingstreetmemo.com)
SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY
DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195
cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell
IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY
Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.
This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.
John Scarlett summarised the intelligence and latest JIC assessment. Saddam's regime was tough and based on extreme fear. The only way to overthrow it was likely to be by massive military action. Saddam was worried and expected an attack, probably by air and land, but he was not convinced that it would be immediate or overwhelming. His regime expected their neighbours to line up with the US. Saddam knew that regular army morale was poor. Real support for Saddam among the public was probably narrowly based.
C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
CDS said that military planners would brief CENTCOM on 1-2 August, Rumsfeld on 3 August and Bush on 4 August.
The two broad US options were:
(a) Generated Start. A slow build-up of 250,000 US troops, a short (72 hour) air campaign, then a move up to Baghdad from the south. Lead time of 90 days (30 days preparation plus 60 days deployment to Kuwait).
(b) Running Start. Use forces already in theatre (3 x 6,000), continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli. Total lead time of 60 days with the air campaign beginning even earlier. A hazardous option.
The US saw the UK (and Kuwait) as essential, with basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus critical for either option. Turkey and other Gulf states were also important, but less vital. The three main options for UK involvement were:
(i) Basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus, plus three SF squadrons.
(ii) As above, with maritime and air assets in addition.
(iii) As above, plus a land contribution of up to 40,000, perhaps with a discrete role in Northern Iraq entering from Turkey, tying down two Iraqi divisions.
The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.
The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.
The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be diff
So prove to us you are a conscious being. For alle we know you could be a very small shell script ;-)
Lee Harvey did not shoot JFK in 1964. Or any other year for that matter ;-)
The Soviet Union folded over a decade ago.
I do. Digital video library. Store your favourite movies, TV-shows and home-movies without burning to CD or DVD.
This may change under the new EU Copyright directive.
Now... That depends on the size of the asteroid now doesn't it?
So a virus like blaster can be lethal!
Scary tought.
Guy 1: "It's midnight, the windows source in leaked, we have 5 moderator point and our sunglasses on..."
Guy 2: "hit it"
Sorry, that image just popped into my head
In the Book 2001 the NSA (or whatever 3-letter agency) did not lie to HAL-9000. HAL was the only crew-member that was fully informed about the nature of the mission (studying the monolith in orbit around Jupiter). It was the instructions not to inform the human crewmembers that led to HAL's nervous breakdown and erratic behaviour.
Funny that this does not make it to the first page :-)
... Linux to have Start Button. Microsoft is working to incorporate the well known "Start" button from the Windows Platform ...
MSN search results
27: Microsoft Linux - the premier linux distro
Learn how you can use Microsoft Linux Technologies to expand your busness or your desktop.
www.mslinux.org
I think you comparison of modern investors to prostitutes (on whatever country's corners) is totally unfair.
To the prostitutes.