Amen to that, dont ever try to run a hard drive and a CD-RW on the same channel. On a side note, does ATA or this serial ATA offload any of the processing to a special controller, ala SCSI, or is it still handled by the CPU?
First you take five guys who can't sing, and have them sing a song by someone who cant write. Then you pass it through thousands of digital filters, mixers and other doohickey whatsits and arive at something that someone with a gameboy would call music. It really doesn't matter that it's being played out of a speaker the size of a quarter with a range of about 12Hz, it's not music in the first place. Your anology should read "This is like taking a polaroid of a painting, photocopying it onto thermal fax paper , and then running a guassian blur filter on it." You can't call velveeta food.
I'm not saying that I believe A. Non Ymous but it's pretty obvious to me why they are doing it anonymously if they really do plan on paying up. If they release their name(s) they will get sued tomorrow, and the only reason I say tomorrow is because the courts are closed for the day. This is not nessecarily cowardly, IMHO, it's safe and smart.
That's cool if he uses one. I in fact have never once in my entire travels to 6 countries and 40 of the 50 states seen a laptop with linux on it. Not saying that real techies need a huge laptop, just saying that my personal preference is features versus weight, and that the people with small laptops USUALLY have small brains.;)
So you're saying that I cannot say that no moral person ever existed because one may exist in the future. I am not saying that one will not exist, I am saying that one never has existed and that one does not currently exist. In 967 CE if I were to say that Human flight was impossible I would be 100% correct. Please think out your arguments before you try to prove what you cannot. One perfect person existed, and he still exists, he is not in human form on this earth now though, he is inside of me, I know him personally and intamately.
I never bought the argument that a laptop had to be lightweight to be usefull. I used to travel a lot for work, and I carried around a Toshiba Tecra 8000, not exactly the lightest laptop around, and the weight never bothered me. I would much rather have a heavy laptop with a lot of features over one of this super lightweight glorified palm pilots. I always look at the guy on the plane with the top of the line viao that weighs 2 ounces as some stupid exec or saleman who doesn't know his arse from a hole in the ground.
I was watching Who's line is it anyway? last night and they had Collin play a character named Captian Obvious, I thought he did a pretty good job until now.
Show me one then. If there was one in history, surely there is one alive now. There are more people living now than have ever lived before, so show me one.
I know absolutely where morality comes from. I also know that there is only one single solitary person who was ever moral in the entire history of the earth. Let me ask you, since I assume that you believe that we evolved from a lower species, if you do not believe this please accept my appology for this assumption, but for the sake of argument let's just assume. Do animals practice morialty? Where in the theory of survival of the fittest does morality come into play? You have to have a basis for morality somewhere, is it just human enlightenment that led us to of course killing another is wrong? I would really like to know what the answer to that question is in your mind. There is a massive rift between humans and every other species on this planet that no amount of evolution can account for. If you dont believe in God, you have to belive that we are an animal, and I as an animal do not subscribe to the beliefe that killing another is somehow bad. Please provide an argument that gives me a basis for your morals, other than God.
I have only one question to your argument. If there is no God, and we are free to practice any or no religion we want who sets up the rules for us to live by? Who says murder is murder? I for one believe that abortion is murder. Muslims do NOT believe that 9/11 was murder, so who is right? Who is wrong? Without a set of morals based on something you have absolutely no basis to answer. And I can refute any basis you have for morals as long as my "religion" prohibits me from doing that. I should also be able to practice anything I want because you have removed the basis for our society's morals.
Actually you just sparked something in my mind. Isn't our going after Bin Laden and Al Quaida an infringement on Muslims religios freedom? After all in their eyes we are the great satan, and all they are doing is trying to rid the world of evil. Who is to say what is evil and what is not? With a phrase like one nation under God as a basis for our nations foundation I think we have a very good ground to stand on for retaliating against them, but when you remove God completely from our culture you eliminate any ground we have to stand on.
Since this has gotten through our courts I think we also need to remove all of the hate crime laws as they favor one persons religious views over another. If my religion tells me to hate homosexuals I should have every right to destroy them, lest the government infringe on my rights. If I am a homosexual and I hate red necks I should be able to do anything I want to them because my homosexual "religion", for lack of a better term, encourages me to do that.
The point is that when we remove God from our society we remove the need for morals, because a moral code is basically what religion is, and what God represents to many people, therefore government can impose no morals on anyone, this means that there can be no laws at all, because laws are just an enforcement of morals. My religion tells me to smoke crack, rape women, and castrate white males, who is to tell me that I am wrong, certainly not the government, I am merely worshiping the way I choose, and you can not tell me otherwise.
You do not have to take having a phrase such as "In God We Trust" imprinted on our money as a form of the government imposing a set of views on you, just as a reminder that this nation was founded based on a certian set of beliefs. If you do not like those beliefs then I would suggest going to another country that put's their trust in King, or Queen, or Allah, or Fairy Jim. The point is that those countrys have a moral code that they live by too, and it is based on an idea.
The problem with this is that you may be able to get God out of society, but you can never get God out of men. Ask yourself why so many people believe in something that CANNOT be tangibly proven? Why some of the most successful, smartest, most powerful people the world has ever known put their faith in a being that has not physically manifested himself in over two thousand years? Because they are stupid? Gullible? Weak, feable minded? I dont know the answer to that question, I dont think anyone does, but removing the word God from our pledge, and from our coinage will not remove God from man.
I for one enjoy this, to me it just points to a battle that has only one outcome, a battle where one side has already lost. And the closer it gets to the buzzer sounding the more the loser trys to win. So take God out of the pledge, remove him from our money, burn his word, and eventually you will probably kill me for worshiping Him, I dont care, He does.
I agree with you, what will be really interesting to see is if Linux will outperform Windows on these so called "table" or "tablet" (M$NBC used both terms) devices. I really think that it will, and if IBM or someone "open sources" a lot of it's voice recognition technology, and with some decent handwriting recognition technology (some probably exists "open source" somewhere) I think Linux may 0wn these. What a distro really needs to provide is something that a home user wants that Windows can't. I'm not sure what that is though.
Since you insist on creating this advanced alien civilization in our image, you must realize that any advanced alien civilization would therefore be able understand our primitive communications methods and be able to respond using the same said methods. The reason there is no response is because no one is listening.
Please disregard my previous post. I have been smoking especially potent crack. I found myself on an alien world called Bdjarneaux surrounded by little poprox eating orange worms, and/. was my only link back to reality. Thank you.
Is that they finally transposed the iPaq and Pocket PC logos. I have been waiting for months for somone at Hewlettcompaqard to pull their head out of their ass and fix this. Finally!! I'm off to BestBuy.
Just this morning I was reading about how Disney is starting to loose money on their animated films. The story is on the front page of todays WSJ and it lays out what the price/performace ratios of the last few movies were.
From the article: The Lion King 1994 Production Budget: $50 million U.S. Box Office Take: $312 million
Hercules 1997 Production Budget: $100 million U.S. Box Office Take: $99 million
Tarzan 1999 Production Budget: $150 million U.S. Box Office Take: $171 million
The Emperor's New Groove 2001 Production Budget: $100 million U.S. Box Office Take: $89.2 million
Lilo & Stitch Production Budget: $80+ million U.S. Box Office Take: Unknown
Of course it could be because of the declining quality of these movies, the only one I've seen is Lion King, which was a pretty good flick IMHO. I wonder if the lower TCO argument of Linux is starting to kick in a little bit. This will be interesting to see.
Who is to say that this red-hot gas being in not arrogant as well? If they do exist, and if they are looking for other life, they are presumably looking for life that resembles them, this begs the question would they recognize us as life? Or are we just conglomerations of biological processes. The reason that we are arrogant is that we were created in the image of our creator, and we thus have the very notion that all life must resemble the life we see on earth ingrained in our very being. There is in fact life other than ours in the universe, it's just in a different realm, and it does not have our form. There is also a different life available for us to live by, that replaces our own, but that is a different subject all together.
This is $0.99 more that I am ever willing to pay a record company for a song. I would gladly give the artist the money, but never the record company. Back to good ole lopster and sending donations directly to artists.
Slashdot Mirror
Amen to that, dont ever try to run a hard drive and a CD-RW on the same channel. On a side note, does ATA or this serial ATA offload any of the processing to a special controller, ala SCSI, or is it still handled by the CPU?
Suggested Resale Price*: Hmmm, that scares me.
First you take five guys who can't sing, and have them sing a song by someone who cant write. Then you pass it through thousands of digital filters, mixers and other doohickey whatsits and arive at something that someone with a gameboy would call music. It really doesn't matter that it's being played out of a speaker the size of a quarter with a range of about 12Hz, it's not music in the first place. Your anology should read "This is like taking a polaroid of a painting, photocopying it onto thermal fax paper , and then running a guassian blur filter on it." You can't call velveeta food.
You mean like the theory of evolution?
I'm not saying that I believe A. Non Ymous but it's pretty obvious to me why they are doing it anonymously if they really do plan on paying up. If they release their name(s) they will get sued tomorrow, and the only reason I say tomorrow is because the courts are closed for the day. This is not nessecarily cowardly, IMHO, it's safe and smart.
I think we need a new mod. (-1 Spelling/Grammar Whore)
Too bad that button would really just add another morsel of food onto the menu of some dictator.
That's cool if he uses one. I in fact have never once in my entire travels to 6 countries and 40 of the 50 states seen a laptop with linux on it. Not saying that real techies need a huge laptop, just saying that my personal preference is features versus weight, and that the people with small laptops USUALLY have small brains. ;)
So you're saying that I cannot say that no moral person ever existed because one may exist in the future. I am not saying that one will not exist, I am saying that one never has existed and that one does not currently exist. In 967 CE if I were to say that Human flight was impossible I would be 100% correct. Please think out your arguments before you try to prove what you cannot. One perfect person existed, and he still exists, he is not in human form on this earth now though, he is inside of me, I know him personally and intamately.
I never bought the argument that a laptop had to be lightweight to be usefull. I used to travel a lot for work, and I carried around a Toshiba Tecra 8000, not exactly the lightest laptop around, and the weight never bothered me. I would much rather have a heavy laptop with a lot of features over one of this super lightweight glorified palm pilots. I always look at the guy on the plane with the top of the line viao that weighs 2 ounces as some stupid exec or saleman who doesn't know his arse from a hole in the ground.
Does my idea for dehydrated water count?
Why dont the developers sue M$, doesn't this violate their right of ownership or something? Or is the XBox just leased from M$?
I was watching Who's line is it anyway? last night and they had Collin play a character named Captian Obvious, I thought he did a pretty good job until now.
Show me one then. If there was one in history, surely there is one alive now. There are more people living now than have ever lived before, so show me one.
I know absolutely where morality comes from. I also know that there is only one single solitary person who was ever moral in the entire history of the earth. Let me ask you, since I assume that you believe that we evolved from a lower species, if you do not believe this please accept my appology for this assumption, but for the sake of argument let's just assume. Do animals practice morialty? Where in the theory of survival of the fittest does morality come into play? You have to have a basis for morality somewhere, is it just human enlightenment that led us to of course killing another is wrong? I would really like to know what the answer to that question is in your mind. There is a massive rift between humans and every other species on this planet that no amount of evolution can account for. If you dont believe in God, you have to belive that we are an animal, and I as an animal do not subscribe to the beliefe that killing another is somehow bad. Please provide an argument that gives me a basis for your morals, other than God.
I have only one question to your argument. If there is no God, and we are free to practice any or no religion we want who sets up the rules for us to live by? Who says murder is murder? I for one believe that abortion is murder. Muslims do NOT believe that 9/11 was murder, so who is right? Who is wrong? Without a set of morals based on something you have absolutely no basis to answer. And I can refute any basis you have for morals as long as my "religion" prohibits me from doing that. I should also be able to practice anything I want because you have removed the basis for our society's morals.
Actually you just sparked something in my mind. Isn't our going after Bin Laden and Al Quaida an infringement on Muslims religios freedom? After all in their eyes we are the great satan, and all they are doing is trying to rid the world of evil. Who is to say what is evil and what is not? With a phrase like one nation under God as a basis for our nations foundation I think we have a very good ground to stand on for retaliating against them, but when you remove God completely from our culture you eliminate any ground we have to stand on.
Since this has gotten through our courts I think we also need to remove all of the hate crime laws as they favor one persons religious views over another. If my religion tells me to hate homosexuals I should have every right to destroy them, lest the government infringe on my rights. If I am a homosexual and I hate red necks I should be able to do anything I want to them because my homosexual "religion", for lack of a better term, encourages me to do that.
The point is that when we remove God from our society we remove the need for morals, because a moral code is basically what religion is, and what God represents to many people, therefore government can impose no morals on anyone, this means that there can be no laws at all, because laws are just an enforcement of morals. My religion tells me to smoke crack, rape women, and castrate white males, who is to tell me that I am wrong, certainly not the government, I am merely worshiping the way I choose, and you can not tell me otherwise.
You do not have to take having a phrase such as "In God We Trust" imprinted on our money as a form of the government imposing a set of views on you, just as a reminder that this nation was founded based on a certian set of beliefs. If you do not like those beliefs then I would suggest going to another country that put's their trust in King, or Queen, or Allah, or Fairy Jim. The point is that those countrys have a moral code that they live by too, and it is based on an idea.
The problem with this is that you may be able to get God out of society, but you can never get God out of men. Ask yourself why so many people believe in something that CANNOT be tangibly proven? Why some of the most successful, smartest, most powerful people the world has ever known put their faith in a being that has not physically manifested himself in over two thousand years? Because they are stupid? Gullible? Weak, feable minded? I dont know the answer to that question, I dont think anyone does, but removing the word God from our pledge, and from our coinage will not remove God from man.
I for one enjoy this, to me it just points to a battle that has only one outcome, a battle where one side has already lost. And the closer it gets to the buzzer sounding the more the loser trys to win. So take God out of the pledge, remove him from our money, burn his word, and eventually you will probably kill me for worshiping Him, I dont care, He does.
Signed,
A stupid, gullible, weak feable minded person
I agree with you, what will be really interesting to see is if Linux will outperform Windows on these so called "table" or "tablet" (M$NBC used both terms) devices. I really think that it will, and if IBM or someone "open sources" a lot of it's voice recognition technology, and with some decent handwriting recognition technology (some probably exists "open source" somewhere) I think Linux may 0wn these. What a distro really needs to provide is something that a home user wants that Windows can't. I'm not sure what that is though.
Since you insist on creating this advanced alien civilization in our image, you must realize that any advanced alien civilization would therefore be able understand our primitive communications methods and be able to respond using the same said methods. The reason there is no response is because no one is listening.
Root canal + Proctological Exam for $275
Please disregard my previous post. I have been smoking especially potent crack. I found myself on an alien world called Bdjarneaux surrounded by little poprox eating orange worms, and /. was my only link back to reality. Thank you.
Is that they finally transposed the iPaq and Pocket PC logos. I have been waiting for months for somone at Hewlettcompaqard to pull their head out of their ass and fix this. Finally!! I'm off to BestBuy.
Just this morning I was reading about how Disney is starting to loose money on their animated films. The story is on the front page of todays WSJ and it lays out what the price/performace ratios of the last few movies were.
From the article:
The Lion King 1994
Production Budget: $50 million
U.S. Box Office Take: $312 million
Hercules 1997
Production Budget: $100 million
U.S. Box Office Take: $99 million
Tarzan 1999
Production Budget: $150 million
U.S. Box Office Take: $171 million
The Emperor's New Groove 2001
Production Budget: $100 million
U.S. Box Office Take: $89.2 million
Lilo & Stitch
Production Budget: $80+ million
U.S. Box Office Take: Unknown
Of course it could be because of the declining quality of these movies, the only one I've seen is Lion King, which was a pretty good flick IMHO. I wonder if the lower TCO argument of Linux is starting to kick in a little bit. This will be interesting to see.
Who is to say that this red-hot gas being in not arrogant as well? If they do exist, and if they are looking for other life, they are presumably looking for life that resembles them, this begs the question would they recognize us as life? Or are we just conglomerations of biological processes. The reason that we are arrogant is that we were created in the image of our creator, and we thus have the very notion that all life must resemble the life we see on earth ingrained in our very being. There is in fact life other than ours in the universe, it's just in a different realm, and it does not have our form. There is also a different life available for us to live by, that replaces our own, but that is a different subject all together.
This is $0.99 more that I am ever willing to pay a record company for a song. I would gladly give the artist the money, but never the record company. Back to good ole lopster and sending donations directly to artists.