I believe the original reason for pricing things at (say) $1.99 instead of $2 was to make sure that there was change in every transaction, forcing cashiers to open the till, which cut down on embezzlement.
Do you believe that is the same reason gas is usually priced at an additional 9/10 of a cent? So the cashiers had to split a penny? No, it's clearly a marketing thing, because you probably would stupidly lose customers if you charged $2.00 and the guy across the street charged $1.999. People glance at that first digit and know the one guy is cheaper; only $.001 cheaper, but there's still no need to scan any of the other digits.
. . . there's a game with Play that has you cleaning suds off a window . . . I'm given to stepping back every once in a while and trying to calculate how violently this would have blown my 12-year-old mind...
I agree that the idea of paying $50 to wash windows would have really blown my mind at 12, too. In fact, I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around it today!
What people fail to realize is that there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of people own Macs and many of them are now connected to the Internet.
And they're all broadcasting their IP! Oh no!
Imagine the havoc an OSX based worm would wreak at an art school or a large interior design firm.
Imagine. That's the key. You can only imagine it because it's not happening, unlike the Windows world. You could just as easily imagine some equally unlikely scenario for Linux or, if you like, the sky falling. Until there is an actual, widespread exploit instead of the mere potential for exploit, only idiots will get worked up over the "dangers" of running Unix.
Well, you know those soap chips that are left over when you're almost finished using a bar of soap? My father saves them, and then compresses them into a new bar of soap when he's saved up enough of them.
OK, I don't know if this marks me as cheap or just a geek, but my process for dealing with soap "slivers" is to stick them on the new bar. I really don't see what the point would be in saving a lot of slivers, but when you have one old one and one new one they stick together without much effort, since the wet soap kind of acts like its own glue. Future lathering wears down the old sliver, and eventually the new bar becomes a sliver and the process repeats. Hopefully your father finds this new algorithm useful.:-)
But when it comes to 3rd party development for OS X desktop software? I'm not holding my breath waiting for a glut of new 3rd party apps anytime soon.
If by "anytime soon" you mean "a constant stream for the last 5 years", then there really is no need for you to hold your breath. For example, check out our Mac Aggregate Tracker, which lists new releases from a number of sites. You'll see 3rd party updates numbering over a hundred most weekdays. Exactly how much more 3rd party development do you need?
How hard is it for soldiers to figure out that their commanders/generals are pretty bad people and doing bad things?
It's not nearly that black and white. The soldier get orders to take out an enemy holding civilian hostages: good or bad? That soldier is only there to take action because the President lied about WMD: good or bad? A soldier can easily refuse to obey any order, subject to court martial, and should rightly refuse to obey an illegal order. That's why you shouldn't hold the soldiers responsible for the governments policy. Take it one step too far and you might start to blame even civilians for their government policy, which is what terrorists do.
Tillman is a hero, and you can't control it. So just accept it.
You still don't get it. For all he did, he's still considered a football "hero". That's wrong. Football is a stupid little game and Tillman knew that. What mattered to him is serving his country, and that is something all military personnel make great sacrifices to do. He died in that service and if he wanted to be considered a hero for anything, it would be for that. But he is singled out for fanfare only because of the NFL connection, which disrespects the personal sacrifices made by all who have died in war.
That is not acceptable, but I won't presume to control it. All I can do is distance myself from morons who cheer when a muscle-headed millionaire runs a ball past a line and does a self-aggrandizing dance. Tillman knew that was a meaningless game, and it's sad that he couldn't distance himself far enough away from it; not in going overseas and not in death. I can't control that people think like you do, and the only way I can distance myself here is to make you a foe. I encourage you to actually think about what makes a man a hero. Until you get your priorities straight, you're an unbearable person to be around.
While he probably believed he was fighting for his country, it's still not certain whether he's actually fighting for his country or not.
He was fighting for his country. The real question is whether or not the government is fighting a just war. Like you, I really doubt it. For Tillman's part, he made the decision to enlist just after 9-11. He couldn't know how things would play out. Hell, we still don't know how things are going to play out.
So far the reasons the US Gov have given don't have the smell of truth. Rather fishy - esp when they keep mentioning 9-11 in the same breath as Iraq/Saddam.
I agree, but that's a much larger issue. For the purposes of any soldier fighting today, they are doing their duty. Is this something that should have been taken care of over a decade ago with the other Bush? Absolutely. That is not the fault of the men and women over there now, though. I'm not looking to knock anyone down, I'm just trying to point out that too many have put this one man on a high a pedestal for the wrong reason. He may indeed deserve to be called a hero, but not because he used to play in the fucking NFL and not because of the money.
Let's see. Men and women being (again) sent off to die because some guy's daddy took a lickin' a decade ago while trying to prove he wasn't a wimp? Check. Rumblings of reinstating the draft to supply bodies to that unjust effort? Check. Countless acts of lies and deception under the FUD of terrorism? Check. Me being hypersensitive? I don't see it.
Let me tell you why Pat Tillman is a hero: he was the reluctant hero. He didn't want the press machine behind his decision to serve. These facts all contribute to his hero status, in my mind.
Wow, it's amazing that you can say that and still not get my point. You all clearly know he didn't want the fanfare, and yet the media imposes it anyway! That is why you disrespect him directly. If you actually think he was a hero, you would be as disgusted as I am by the coverage his death is getting and the reason it is given.
Don't thank me for words. Words are easy. Thanks go to you and everyone else over there doing their duty. I don't care if being there means you gave up $3 million or just a hound dog named Pooch. I don't even care that there are a lot of things I don't particularly agree with from the political side of the war. Thank you. Thank all of you.
Why didn't they receive front page coverage? They weren't former NFL players. And to think on it, I don't think Pat Tillman would have appreciated being made something special either.
On a bit of a tangent, there has always be something more profound for me about the Unknown Soldier. Local headlines can still be made by people who weren't sports stars, but even then it doesn't feel right because it's like they're trying to force me to know the person, as though reading about them will give the loss more of an impact. For me, that somehow lessens the sacrifice. I'm much more affected knowing that someone put their life on the line for me without them knowing me or me knowing them.
Tillman cut out of a 3.6 million dollar contract to go fight a war for 18 thousand a year.
Money, money, money. That's all I'm hearing from you. You're exactly why I noted the problem in the first place. The money and the game didn't matter to Pat. You all keep bringing it up as though it should make a difference. It's sad because it makes me think that given the choice between money and doing the right thing, most of you would go for the money. Don't try to drag Pat, or any other soldier, down to your level.
Going above and beyond the call of duty is what spereates the heroes from the soldiers.
Absolutely. I respect the hell out of anyone who fights for another person's freedom, but that should not be considered a heroic act, it should be considered a solemn act of every free person. Every time people point to the $3 million as important, they disrespect not only Pat but every other soldier out there who is leaving things at home they value far more than money.
Point to other people who would give up multi-million dollar contracts willingly to fight.
If you think giving up the money was his greatest sacrifice, you dishonor his life. The more people talk about the money or an NFL career, the less they actually think about his reasons for going into combat. It's sickening to see so many people here not get it.
He turned down a 3.6 million dollar contract for a 18k a year job in the Rangers. Plus he fought in Iraq, came back to the US then opted to go to Afghanistan. Everyone who has so far died in this conflict is a hero to me but this guy was extraordinary.
If you really believe that, then why do you (like so many others) latch on to the money as a significant sacrifice he made? He isn't the only one who gave up a lot to fight for what they believed in, but you dirty his accomplishments by putting a dollar figure on his life.
Rubbish, it's not disrespectful to anyone. The guy turned down $ millions . . .
This is directly disrespectful because you are making it firstly about the money when he did not. In that way, yes, he is a far better person than you are, but that doesn't necessarily make him a better person than others who are over there fighting. If he is over there because he thought it was the right thing to do, then everyone over there doing the right thing deserves the same amount of praise. I give it to them. You shit on them by saying they didn't give up $3 million first. You're an asshole not deserving the freedoms provided by the sacrifices made by all our troops.
You belittling his sacrifice and claiming his career was silly is ignorant and disrespectful.
Absolutely wrong. Pat himself knew how unimportant playing football was, and that was why he went to do something significant. You people saying football and money were difficult things to give up are the ones who belittle him. From the linked article:
"My great grandfather was at Pearl Harbor, and a lot of my family has... gone and fought in wars, and I really haven't done a damn thing as far as laying myself on the line like that," Tillman told NBC News in an interview the day after the attacks.
Sadly this invention was too late to save Pat Tillman.
How very disrespectful to single out this one man out as "a Hero" for the mere media value that he played in the NFL. His pre-war job was to play a silly game for millions of dollars; how is that significant? It is a sad commentary that that is the reason his death gets any more coverage than other soldiers killed in this political bloodbath. The NFL probably paused for all of 5 seconds before casting him aside and filling his position with someone else, and now they're latching on to mountains of press coverage because he's dead.
It's hard to say that without seeming to take away from Pat or without seeming to sound like a troll, but it had to be said in light of you being moderated up. So, yes, think about why Pat went to fight, but don't forget about all the others who sacrificed to fight and who died without all the fanfare. You should be far more thankful for their history of anonymous sacrifice.
As paper is to clay tablets...yes those clay tablets are still readable and around thousands of years after they were written, while alot of paper has vanished. "books" in electronic only form will vanish even faster than paper.
Time has a funny way of putting things in perspective, for those that want perspective, anyway. The first thing I thought when reading the parent post was how it added to the old "When I was your age" line; to the walking and snow and such, we will be able to add lamentations of carrying stacks of heavy books.
But back to my point about time: history forgets more than it remembers. You boast about how great clay tablets are, but where are the storehouses of knowledge they recorded? There might be only a handful that have usefully survived thousands of years. Some paper may have vanished, but the amount that has survived completely dwarfs the amount of clay recorded content. Likewise, the amount of electronic information published world wide dwarfs the amount of paper published information.
Yes, there is a high possibility that important electronic works will get lost, but you need to balance that with the fact that some of those works would not have, in the past, been saved on paper or even clay tablets. If only 0.1% of knowledge could be recorded on clay, perfect preservation still would have only given us that 0.1%, whereas if recording electronically only gave us 10%, we could preserve just a tenth of it we'd still be doing ten times better than before. The very words you're wrote would have had zero chance lasting over time if it were not for publication in an electronic form.
Ummm, this isn't an Apple fanboy site. Hell, this isn't even apple.slashdot.org. So it's not really the place to boast you paid more for Apple branded upgrade components.
You're clearly not a very bright boy. I'm poking fun at people who pay crap loads for their systems, Mac or PC. Get it now?
If you have to buy the expensive ram, it means you don't have an Opteron!
For a pissing match, it's about what you have to buy, it's about what you can buy.
I built a dual Opteron w/two 1 gig sticks for $1,700... and that was nearly a year ago... the board takes 12 gig.
Then you didn't max out the machine and, had you, you indeed would have paid around double for the RAM compared to the rest of it (12 x $250 = $3000). You went the complete wrong direction as far as this thread is concerned. How cheaply you can slap a box together is best saved for another discussion. That's why I picked Apple installed RAM; it's twice as much as what you can easily get on your own.
It wasn't all that long ago it would cost several times more to max our your RAM than it did to purchase the computer.
It still can. With the mid-line G5 Mac at $2500 and you can fit it for 8GB with an additional $5000. In reality, if you can't still spend more on RAM than the base computer, it says some not-too-nice things about that computer's technology!;-)
I don't see how this is ideal at all. It just seems like a multi-layered dye implementation that is convoluted by application to small spheres instead of to a flat surface. That is, why deal with nano-anything when you can just layer coats of dye on the disk itself? I don't see any way to get 3D storage out of it, either, because you have to get past any one dye layer to get to the next; no bit can be "under" another bit that blocks the same light. For that same reason, I don't see how you can even use a full bit at deeper layers unless all above layers are transparent to non-data colors. That is, with the top layer the light can either go through or be blocked (1 bit), but the second layer can only be reached when the first layer allows the light through, so two layers could seemingly only hold 3 bits, not 4 as the article claims, and the progression would be linear rather than to a power of two, as it also claimed. What am I missing, here?
No, I am not "easily led to believe things". It's just that I tend to take authority figures at the word most of the time, just as most of the rest of the human race does.
You actually support my point. Yes, the vast majority are easily led to believe things! Admitting you're one of the unthinking masses doesn't bolster your position.
For example, you've probably never been to Uzbekistan, and you've probably never even met anyone who's been there, but you don't doubt its existence because others with authority have written about it.
You'd be wrong to think that. I will not only doubt that authority, I will actively question why they are writing about those things when there are more significant topics closer to home that should be discussed instead. Part of the problem with the US being the only remaining superpower is that it sticks its nose in everywhere it pleases. Nasty stuff is going on in countries all over the globe, and we can't assume we can solve everyone else's problems. I would say we haven't got a particularly good grasp on our own problems, so I will definitely question the existence of Uzbekistan on the political chart.
Regarding the Pentagon, I submit for your consideration that you've drawn the wrong conclusion. Rather than assuming that the Pentagon made an error in judgment by hiring me, you should question whether your assessment of my character is accurate, especially since the people who hired me, who recommended me, and so forth obviously know me quite a bit better than you possibly could.
You mean I should ignore everything you've actually written here and instead take at blind faith the judgment of some unknown stranger regarding a job you could easily lie about having held? With that kind of reasoning, is it any wonder I consider you a troll? From where I sit, my assessment puts your intellectual skills at maybe 15 years old. That's a collective score you share with the "girlfriend" character, too, because the answers you two give are just so similarly flawed at a basic level that I have to assume she's a fabrication.
I find it rather hard to comprehend how you misunderstood what I was writing about in my blog, BTW.
Most people who write blogs have comprehension issues. They seem to think everyone wants them rambling on about garbage like why they pick their teeth from right to left instead of left to right (or, in your case, inane particulars about how you read your email). If you can't be bothered to collect and structure your thoughts into accessible communication, I don't care! Take the time to write a proper review instead of drooling out words and call the puddle a review. Your girlfriend claims to be a graduate with honors in English and the two of you can't get that together? Sheesh!
In that light, instead of heaping me with scorn, why don't you recommend some resources to me for learning about compiling Linux applications for OS X, since, as I've said, I want to pursue it, and you seem to be implying that you know quite a bit about it?
Since neither of you could even be bothered to name a single application, it was kind of hard (read: impossible) to really help. I've already suggested fink to avoid even having to compile a lot of apps. My suggestion is to post to Usenet in the Mac groups asking for help on specific topics. Hell, I've had zero indication you've even bothered to do a simple Google search on the issue you claim has been such a hardship on your relationship! As amusing as it has been, I'm growing tired of your troll.
I'd love to know how somebody with a 'reading comprehension problem' earned her bachelor's in English with honors from a university regarded worldwide as one of the most academically stringent.
HOLY SHIT, I'll be laughing about this all week! This is exactly the issue I called your boyfriend on regarding the Pentagon in the post you responded to. Talk about reading comprehension problems! BWHAHAHAHA!
You are trying to appeal to an authority to make your point, but the reality is that not only is that engaging in a fallacy, it drags the authority down with you because you actually do represent them as a graduate. Please name the institution if you have the guts, because I would hate to keep in high regard any institution that would graduate you with honors. Do you see the mistake you've made yet?
I would say that the person with an attitude problem is the one making wildly inaccurate assumptions about other human beings without knowing them.
That could be, but you've not shown me to be inaccurate in any way. Worse, you've essentially demonstrated everything I faulted you for. At times like these, I really wish I was less accurate. I certain expect to be inaccurate and wildly wrong; I'm here waiting and hoping to be revealed as the idiot I know I am. Even that simple task eludes you.
Yes: I get a kind-hearted, intelligent boyfriend, and obviously whatever partner you end up having will be a vicious bitch. Assuming you can attract one, which I *seriously* doubt given your attitude -- few people like to date an asshole.
Are you kidding? Chicks dig bad boys! But I will grant you that they never stay with bad boys. The reason, however, is interesting. You see, at some point a woman (and I believe this is intentional) fabricates an issue that is obviously false, and then demands agreement from her boyfriend. The wussy guy eventually gives a "yes, dear" and willfully castrates himself for the remainder of the relationship. I, on the other hand, will not lie like that to protect feelings or smooth things over. That is the end of things, usually.
But am I really the asshole in that scenario? Is standing up for what is true now an asshole activity? If you think so, it says more about you than it does about me. It seems to say that kind people suck because they're more interested in doing what is proper than in doing what is right. By that measure, I think I would very much like to find someone you consider a vicious bitch.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe the original reason for pricing things at (say) $1.99 instead of $2 was to make sure that there was change in every transaction, forcing cashiers to open the till, which cut down on embezzlement.
Do you believe that is the same reason gas is usually priced at an additional 9/10 of a cent? So the cashiers had to split a penny? No, it's clearly a marketing thing, because you probably would stupidly lose customers if you charged $2.00 and the guy across the street charged $1.999. People glance at that first digit and know the one guy is cheaper; only $.001 cheaper, but there's still no need to scan any of the other digits.
. . . there's a game with Play that has you cleaning suds off a window . . . I'm given to stepping back every once in a while and trying to calculate how violently this would have blown my 12-year-old mind...
I agree that the idea of paying $50 to wash windows would have really blown my mind at 12, too. In fact, I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around it today!
What people fail to realize is that there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of people own Macs and many of them are now connected to the Internet.
And they're all broadcasting their IP! Oh no!
Imagine the havoc an OSX based worm would wreak at an art school or a large interior design firm.
Imagine. That's the key. You can only imagine it because it's not happening, unlike the Windows world. You could just as easily imagine some equally unlikely scenario for Linux or, if you like, the sky falling. Until there is an actual, widespread exploit instead of the mere potential for exploit, only idiots will get worked up over the "dangers" of running Unix.
Well, you know those soap chips that are left over when you're almost finished using a bar of soap? My father saves them, and then compresses them into a new bar of soap when he's saved up enough of them.
OK, I don't know if this marks me as cheap or just a geek, but my process for dealing with soap "slivers" is to stick them on the new bar. I really don't see what the point would be in saving a lot of slivers, but when you have one old one and one new one they stick together without much effort, since the wet soap kind of acts like its own glue. Future lathering wears down the old sliver, and eventually the new bar becomes a sliver and the process repeats. Hopefully your father finds this new algorithm useful. :-)
But when it comes to 3rd party development for OS X desktop software? I'm not holding my breath waiting for a glut of new 3rd party apps anytime soon.
If by "anytime soon" you mean "a constant stream for the last 5 years", then there really is no need for you to hold your breath. For example, check out our Mac Aggregate Tracker, which lists new releases from a number of sites. You'll see 3rd party updates numbering over a hundred most weekdays. Exactly how much more 3rd party development do you need?
How hard is it for soldiers to figure out that their commanders/generals are pretty bad people and doing bad things?
It's not nearly that black and white. The soldier get orders to take out an enemy holding civilian hostages: good or bad? That soldier is only there to take action because the President lied about WMD: good or bad? A soldier can easily refuse to obey any order, subject to court martial, and should rightly refuse to obey an illegal order. That's why you shouldn't hold the soldiers responsible for the governments policy. Take it one step too far and you might start to blame even civilians for their government policy, which is what terrorists do.
Tillman is a hero, and you can't control it. So just accept it.
You still don't get it. For all he did, he's still considered a football "hero". That's wrong. Football is a stupid little game and Tillman knew that. What mattered to him is serving his country, and that is something all military personnel make great sacrifices to do. He died in that service and if he wanted to be considered a hero for anything, it would be for that. But he is singled out for fanfare only because of the NFL connection, which disrespects the personal sacrifices made by all who have died in war.
That is not acceptable, but I won't presume to control it. All I can do is distance myself from morons who cheer when a muscle-headed millionaire runs a ball past a line and does a self-aggrandizing dance. Tillman knew that was a meaningless game, and it's sad that he couldn't distance himself far enough away from it; not in going overseas and not in death. I can't control that people think like you do, and the only way I can distance myself here is to make you a foe. I encourage you to actually think about what makes a man a hero. Until you get your priorities straight, you're an unbearable person to be around.
While he probably believed he was fighting for his country, it's still not certain whether he's actually fighting for his country or not.
He was fighting for his country. The real question is whether or not the government is fighting a just war. Like you, I really doubt it. For Tillman's part, he made the decision to enlist just after 9-11. He couldn't know how things would play out. Hell, we still don't know how things are going to play out.
So far the reasons the US Gov have given don't have the smell of truth. Rather fishy - esp when they keep mentioning 9-11 in the same breath as Iraq/Saddam.
I agree, but that's a much larger issue. For the purposes of any soldier fighting today, they are doing their duty. Is this something that should have been taken care of over a decade ago with the other Bush? Absolutely. That is not the fault of the men and women over there now, though. I'm not looking to knock anyone down, I'm just trying to point out that too many have put this one man on a high a pedestal for the wrong reason. He may indeed deserve to be called a hero, but not because he used to play in the fucking NFL and not because of the money.
Maybe you are hypersensitive?
Let's see. Men and women being (again) sent off to die because some guy's daddy took a lickin' a decade ago while trying to prove he wasn't a wimp? Check. Rumblings of reinstating the draft to supply bodies to that unjust effort? Check. Countless acts of lies and deception under the FUD of terrorism? Check. Me being hypersensitive? I don't see it.
Let me tell you why Pat Tillman is a hero: he was the reluctant hero. He didn't want the press machine behind his decision to serve. These facts all contribute to his hero status, in my mind.
Wow, it's amazing that you can say that and still not get my point. You all clearly know he didn't want the fanfare, and yet the media imposes it anyway! That is why you disrespect him directly. If you actually think he was a hero, you would be as disgusted as I am by the coverage his death is getting and the reason it is given.
Thank you very much.
Don't thank me for words. Words are easy. Thanks go to you and everyone else over there doing their duty. I don't care if being there means you gave up $3 million or just a hound dog named Pooch. I don't even care that there are a lot of things I don't particularly agree with from the political side of the war. Thank you. Thank all of you.
Why didn't they receive front page coverage? They weren't former NFL players. And to think on it, I don't think Pat Tillman would have appreciated being made something special either.
On a bit of a tangent, there has always be something more profound for me about the Unknown Soldier. Local headlines can still be made by people who weren't sports stars, but even then it doesn't feel right because it's like they're trying to force me to know the person, as though reading about them will give the loss more of an impact. For me, that somehow lessens the sacrifice. I'm much more affected knowing that someone put their life on the line for me without them knowing me or me knowing them.
Here's hoping you never make the headlines.
Tillman cut out of a 3.6 million dollar contract to go fight a war for 18 thousand a year.
Money, money, money. That's all I'm hearing from you. You're exactly why I noted the problem in the first place. The money and the game didn't matter to Pat. You all keep bringing it up as though it should make a difference. It's sad because it makes me think that given the choice between money and doing the right thing, most of you would go for the money. Don't try to drag Pat, or any other soldier, down to your level.
You missed the point. The reason Tillman is a hero is that he turned down millions to fight for his country, and protect freedom.
You're disgusting. It is you who misses the point. To Pat, it wasn't about money. You lessen his sacrifice when you equate it to money.
And they have killed a hero now.
Now? News flash for you, son; they've been killing that kind of hero for over a year.
Going above and beyond the call of duty is what spereates the heroes from the soldiers.
Absolutely. I respect the hell out of anyone who fights for another person's freedom, but that should not be considered a heroic act, it should be considered a solemn act of every free person. Every time people point to the $3 million as important, they disrespect not only Pat but every other soldier out there who is leaving things at home they value far more than money.
Point to other people who would give up multi-million dollar contracts willingly to fight.
If you think giving up the money was his greatest sacrifice, you dishonor his life. The more people talk about the money or an NFL career, the less they actually think about his reasons for going into combat. It's sickening to see so many people here not get it.
He turned down a 3.6 million dollar contract for a 18k a year job in the Rangers. Plus he fought in Iraq, came back to the US then opted to go to Afghanistan. Everyone who has so far died in this conflict is a hero to me but this guy was extraordinary.
If you really believe that, then why do you (like so many others) latch on to the money as a significant sacrifice he made? He isn't the only one who gave up a lot to fight for what they believed in, but you dirty his accomplishments by putting a dollar figure on his life.
Rubbish, it's not disrespectful to anyone. The guy turned down $ millions . . .
This is directly disrespectful because you are making it firstly about the money when he did not. In that way, yes, he is a far better person than you are, but that doesn't necessarily make him a better person than others who are over there fighting. If he is over there because he thought it was the right thing to do, then everyone over there doing the right thing deserves the same amount of praise. I give it to them. You shit on them by saying they didn't give up $3 million first. You're an asshole not deserving the freedoms provided by the sacrifices made by all our troops.
You belittling his sacrifice and claiming his career was silly is ignorant and disrespectful.
Absolutely wrong. Pat himself knew how unimportant playing football was, and that was why he went to do something significant. You people saying football and money were difficult things to give up are the ones who belittle him. From the linked article:
"My great grandfather was at Pearl Harbor, and a lot of my family has ... gone and fought in wars, and I really haven't done a damn thing as far as laying myself on the line like that," Tillman told NBC News in an interview the day after the attacks.
Sadly this invention was too late to save Pat Tillman.
How very disrespectful to single out this one man out as "a Hero" for the mere media value that he played in the NFL. His pre-war job was to play a silly game for millions of dollars; how is that significant? It is a sad commentary that that is the reason his death gets any more coverage than other soldiers killed in this political bloodbath. The NFL probably paused for all of 5 seconds before casting him aside and filling his position with someone else, and now they're latching on to mountains of press coverage because he's dead.
It's hard to say that without seeming to take away from Pat or without seeming to sound like a troll, but it had to be said in light of you being moderated up. So, yes, think about why Pat went to fight, but don't forget about all the others who sacrificed to fight and who died without all the fanfare. You should be far more thankful for their history of anonymous sacrifice.
As paper is to clay tablets...yes those clay tablets are still readable and around thousands of years after they were written, while alot of paper has vanished. "books" in electronic only form will vanish even faster than paper.
Time has a funny way of putting things in perspective, for those that want perspective, anyway. The first thing I thought when reading the parent post was how it added to the old "When I was your age" line; to the walking and snow and such, we will be able to add lamentations of carrying stacks of heavy books.
But back to my point about time: history forgets more than it remembers. You boast about how great clay tablets are, but where are the storehouses of knowledge they recorded? There might be only a handful that have usefully survived thousands of years. Some paper may have vanished, but the amount that has survived completely dwarfs the amount of clay recorded content. Likewise, the amount of electronic information published world wide dwarfs the amount of paper published information.
Yes, there is a high possibility that important electronic works will get lost, but you need to balance that with the fact that some of those works would not have, in the past, been saved on paper or even clay tablets. If only 0.1% of knowledge could be recorded on clay, perfect preservation still would have only given us that 0.1%, whereas if recording electronically only gave us 10%, we could preserve just a tenth of it we'd still be doing ten times better than before. The very words you're wrote would have had zero chance lasting over time if it were not for publication in an electronic form.
Ummm, this isn't an Apple fanboy site. Hell, this isn't even apple.slashdot.org. So it's not really the place to boast you paid more for Apple branded upgrade components.
You're clearly not a very bright boy. I'm poking fun at people who pay crap loads for their systems, Mac or PC. Get it now?
If you have to buy the expensive ram, it means you don't have an Opteron!
For a pissing match, it's about what you have to buy, it's about what you can buy.
I built a dual Opteron w/two 1 gig sticks for $1,700... and that was nearly a year ago... the board takes 12 gig.
Then you didn't max out the machine and, had you, you indeed would have paid around double for the RAM compared to the rest of it (12 x $250 = $3000). You went the complete wrong direction as far as this thread is concerned. How cheaply you can slap a box together is best saved for another discussion. That's why I picked Apple installed RAM; it's twice as much as what you can easily get on your own.
It wasn't all that long ago it would cost several times more to max our your RAM than it did to purchase the computer.
It still can. With the mid-line G5 Mac at $2500 and you can fit it for 8GB with an additional $5000. In reality, if you can't still spend more on RAM than the base computer, it says some not-too-nice things about that computer's technology! ;-)
3 bits, not 4
Er, that should have been states, not bits.
I don't see how this is ideal at all. It just seems like a multi-layered dye implementation that is convoluted by application to small spheres instead of to a flat surface. That is, why deal with nano-anything when you can just layer coats of dye on the disk itself? I don't see any way to get 3D storage out of it, either, because you have to get past any one dye layer to get to the next; no bit can be "under" another bit that blocks the same light. For that same reason, I don't see how you can even use a full bit at deeper layers unless all above layers are transparent to non-data colors. That is, with the top layer the light can either go through or be blocked (1 bit), but the second layer can only be reached when the first layer allows the light through, so two layers could seemingly only hold 3 bits, not 4 as the article claims, and the progression would be linear rather than to a power of two, as it also claimed. What am I missing, here?
No, I am not "easily led to believe things". It's just that I tend to take authority figures at the word most of the time, just as most of the rest of the human race does.
You actually support my point. Yes, the vast majority are easily led to believe things! Admitting you're one of the unthinking masses doesn't bolster your position.
For example, you've probably never been to Uzbekistan, and you've probably never even met anyone who's been there, but you don't doubt its existence because others with authority have written about it.
You'd be wrong to think that. I will not only doubt that authority, I will actively question why they are writing about those things when there are more significant topics closer to home that should be discussed instead. Part of the problem with the US being the only remaining superpower is that it sticks its nose in everywhere it pleases. Nasty stuff is going on in countries all over the globe, and we can't assume we can solve everyone else's problems. I would say we haven't got a particularly good grasp on our own problems, so I will definitely question the existence of Uzbekistan on the political chart.
Regarding the Pentagon, I submit for your consideration that you've drawn the wrong conclusion. Rather than assuming that the Pentagon made an error in judgment by hiring me, you should question whether your assessment of my character is accurate, especially since the people who hired me, who recommended me, and so forth obviously know me quite a bit better than you possibly could.
You mean I should ignore everything you've actually written here and instead take at blind faith the judgment of some unknown stranger regarding a job you could easily lie about having held? With that kind of reasoning, is it any wonder I consider you a troll? From where I sit, my assessment puts your intellectual skills at maybe 15 years old. That's a collective score you share with the "girlfriend" character, too, because the answers you two give are just so similarly flawed at a basic level that I have to assume she's a fabrication.
I find it rather hard to comprehend how you misunderstood what I was writing about in my blog, BTW.
Most people who write blogs have comprehension issues. They seem to think everyone wants them rambling on about garbage like why they pick their teeth from right to left instead of left to right (or, in your case, inane particulars about how you read your email). If you can't be bothered to collect and structure your thoughts into accessible communication, I don't care! Take the time to write a proper review instead of drooling out words and call the puddle a review. Your girlfriend claims to be a graduate with honors in English and the two of you can't get that together? Sheesh!
In that light, instead of heaping me with scorn, why don't you recommend some resources to me for learning about compiling Linux applications for OS X, since, as I've said, I want to pursue it, and you seem to be implying that you know quite a bit about it?
Since neither of you could even be bothered to name a single application, it was kind of hard (read: impossible) to really help. I've already suggested fink to avoid even having to compile a lot of apps. My suggestion is to post to Usenet in the Mac groups asking for help on specific topics. Hell, I've had zero indication you've even bothered to do a simple Google search on the issue you claim has been such a hardship on your relationship! As amusing as it has been, I'm growing tired of your troll.
I'd love to know how somebody with a 'reading comprehension problem' earned her bachelor's in English with honors from a university regarded worldwide as one of the most academically stringent.
HOLY SHIT, I'll be laughing about this all week! This is exactly the issue I called your boyfriend on regarding the Pentagon in the post you responded to. Talk about reading comprehension problems! BWHAHAHAHA!
You are trying to appeal to an authority to make your point, but the reality is that not only is that engaging in a fallacy, it drags the authority down with you because you actually do represent them as a graduate. Please name the institution if you have the guts, because I would hate to keep in high regard any institution that would graduate you with honors. Do you see the mistake you've made yet?
I would say that the person with an attitude problem is the one making wildly inaccurate assumptions about other human beings without knowing them.
That could be, but you've not shown me to be inaccurate in any way. Worse, you've essentially demonstrated everything I faulted you for. At times like these, I really wish I was less accurate. I certain expect to be inaccurate and wildly wrong; I'm here waiting and hoping to be revealed as the idiot I know I am. Even that simple task eludes you.
Yes: I get a kind-hearted, intelligent boyfriend, and obviously whatever partner you end up having will be a vicious bitch. Assuming you can attract one, which I *seriously* doubt given your attitude -- few people like to date an asshole.
Are you kidding? Chicks dig bad boys! But I will grant you that they never stay with bad boys. The reason, however, is interesting. You see, at some point a woman (and I believe this is intentional) fabricates an issue that is obviously false, and then demands agreement from her boyfriend. The wussy guy eventually gives a "yes, dear" and willfully castrates himself for the remainder of the relationship. I, on the other hand, will not lie like that to protect feelings or smooth things over. That is the end of things, usually.
But am I really the asshole in that scenario? Is standing up for what is true now an asshole activity? If you think so, it says more about you than it does about me. It seems to say that kind people suck because they're more interested in doing what is proper than in doing what is right. By that measure, I think I would very much like to find someone you consider a vicious bitch.