Not that I'm arguing for the nutters at all, but isn't the mere presence of a resonant metal object enough to cause local disturbances in the wavelength 2x the height of the mast and multiples thereof?
To make matters worse, strictly speaking Y2K16 evaluates to 2160 (think of a 4K7 resistor). It would be more accurate to say Y2K016, in which case the 'K' is completely redundant.
While the brits (and some other commonwealth countries) get Cliff Richard's "Living Doll" in the public domain next year (despite Cliff's best efforts), just as they got "Move It" in 2009.
I've yet to decide whether this is a good or bad:)
Given the past twenty years, I must ask: What on God's green earth makes you think anyone in Congress is going to care about the wording or intention of that piece of paper?
Heh, sure. here it is again with all TLAs (dammit, Three+ Letter Acronyms) expanded:
Another compelling reason to watch Digital Video[1] Discs on a Home Theatre Personal Computer with mplayer[3] instead of a Set-Top Box, along with getting true 23.99 Frame Per Second Digital Video[1] Disc playback (closer to correct speed/pitch) on Phase Alternating Line[2] Digital Video[1] Discs.
User Operation Prohibitions must die.
[1] Yes, I said Digital Video Disc, as it originally was. Digital Versatile Disc is just a stupid backronym invented when they realised they could store more than just video on them. [2] PAL, the Television standard used in much of the world. As opposed to SECAM and NTSC. [3] mplayer, a powerful media player program for Linux.
They are willing to go all the way to murder of their own if they think it will stop them. Not all of them, not by a long shot.
The few principled ones who want to stop abortions and think abortion is murder usually end up pro-choice because they realize that pro-choice pushes education and doesn't push abortions. No they don't, and in what fantasy land does pro-choice policy not push abortions - when a friend of mine discovered she was pregnant, the first thing the doctor said to her was, "... and you... want to keep it?", as if it were some parasitic growth on the side of her nose.
They realize that making it illegal will still result in abortions, but that the illegal ones jeopardize not just the baby's life but the mother's as well, and they realize that a parent that wants to kill their kid before the child is even born may not be the best environment for the child, and that aborting this one so the next, when the time is right, will have a family ready to receive it and a better life is the best thing for all involved So a better life for the kid, who instead of being raised in a bad household is killed before they're subjected to such horror? How merciful. Perhaps you should go find other kids being raised in bad environments and give them a "better life" too before they realise what they're missing out on?
I suspect a lot of these problems would go away if we had a better adoption system. There are a lot of couples who can't conceive for whatever reason who would to raise children as their own. I know couples that have actually done this, despite the adoption system being in a shambles.
The vast, vast, vast majority of abortion cases have absolutely nothing to do with mitigating significant risks to the mother or mercifully euthanasing a non-viable foetus. Vast. It is a convenience issue - the mother doesn't want it, so she kills it and gets on with her life. Often it's documented as "risk of severe mental anguish" or some such to get around legislative issues but that's not relevant here.
Please stop saying that anti-abortionists think women should have no control over their bodies. That is a straw man fallacy. Anti-abortionists (at least the ones I've come across) claim there are two bodies involved in a pregnancy, and the women can do whatever she wants with her body as long as it doesn't harm the other. I realise the "telling women what to do with their bodies" mantra is popular in feminist circles since it can be easily twisted to look like oppression, conveniently ignoring the entire subject of the issue - the child.
Do you really think that all women who have had abortions would have done so if it was not legally offered as a first option by their GP? That claim is ridiculous and doesn't hold up to any kind of scrutiny. I can provide plenty of anecdotes, but won't bother since the plural of such is not considered "data". Yes some women will undoubtedly seek illegal abortions if no other option was legally available just like some people seek out narcotic drugs.
What this can really be boiled down to is whether or not human life itself holds intrinsic value. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't but don't pretend the abortion debate is about anything else.
Another compelling reason to watch DVDs on an HTPC with mplayer instead of a STB, along with getting true 23.99fps DVD playback (closer to correct speed/pitch) on PAL DVDs.
I have yet to see infrastructure anywhere that is owned by the people it serves.
I've seen plenty owned by Governments but that's not really the same, since representative democracies rarely actually represent the will of the people.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope you put all the soil back when you were done.
It could be worse, they could have put it in Perth. Oh wait, they already did.
Correction:
My HTPC is a dual-head linux box with proprietary nVidia driver. One tweak in nvidia-settings and my TV never exhibits any tearing with any player.
I should have said nvidia-settings, not nvoptions.
I fully agree that no one should have to watch videos with vsync off, but IMO that's not the players job but that of the video driver.
Example:
My HTPC is a dual-head linux box with proprietary nVidia driver. One tweak in nvoptions and my TV never exhibits any tearing with any player.
Stop. Please, just... stop.
Not that I'm arguing for the nutters at all, but isn't the mere presence of a resonant metal object enough to cause local disturbances in the wavelength 2x the height of the mast and multiples thereof?
I prefer this one:
http://xkcd.com/404/
I'm not so concerned if it's slightly less accurate than the iphone. I'm more interested in whether one can use it with a stylus or gloved hands.
I suspect GP meant EBCDIC specifically.
To make matters worse, strictly speaking Y2K16 evaluates to 2160 (think of a 4K7 resistor). It would be more accurate to say Y2K016, in which case the 'K' is completely redundant.
Yet another reason to stop buying crap made in China - "Designed" in California or otherwise.
In my country I at least have a choice. I hope you do too.
How about security updates?
We have to stop that wrong lizard from getting in, after all.
You should have gotten a +5 for that.
Funny or Insightful I'm not sure, but +5 nonetheless.
While the brits (and some other commonwealth countries) get Cliff Richard's "Living Doll" in the public domain next year (despite Cliff's best efforts), just as they got "Move It" in 2009.
I've yet to decide whether this is a good or bad :)
I don't think you've been paying attention.
Given the past twenty years, I must ask: What on God's green earth makes you think anyone in Congress is going to care about the wording or intention of that piece of paper?
I stopped watching at this point. I'm amazed I made it that far, actually.
Heh, sure. here it is again with all TLAs (dammit, Three+ Letter Acronyms) expanded:
Another compelling reason to watch Digital Video[1] Discs on a Home Theatre Personal Computer with mplayer[3] instead of a Set-Top Box, along with getting true 23.99 Frame Per Second Digital Video[1] Disc playback (closer to correct speed/pitch) on Phase Alternating Line[2] Digital Video[1] Discs.
User Operation Prohibitions must die.
[1] Yes, I said Digital Video Disc, as it originally was. Digital Versatile Disc is just a stupid backronym invented when they realised they could store more than just video on them.
[2] PAL, the Television standard used in much of the world. As opposed to SECAM and NTSC.
[3] mplayer, a powerful media player program for Linux.
They are willing to go all the way to murder of their own if they think it will stop them.
Not all of them, not by a long shot.
The few principled ones who want to stop abortions and think abortion is murder usually end up pro-choice because they realize that pro-choice pushes education and doesn't push abortions.
No they don't, and in what fantasy land does pro-choice policy not push abortions - when a friend of mine discovered she was pregnant, the first thing the doctor said to her was, "... and you... want to keep it?", as if it were some parasitic growth on the side of her nose.
They realize that making it illegal will still result in abortions, but that the illegal ones jeopardize not just the baby's life but the mother's as well, and they realize that a parent that wants to kill their kid before the child is even born may not be the best environment for the child, and that aborting this one so the next, when the time is right, will have a family ready to receive it and a better life is the best thing for all involved
So a better life for the kid, who instead of being raised in a bad household is killed before they're subjected to such horror? How merciful. Perhaps you should go find other kids being raised in bad environments and give them a "better life" too before they realise what they're missing out on?
I suspect a lot of these problems would go away if we had a better adoption system. There are a lot of couples who can't conceive for whatever reason who would to raise children as their own. I know couples that have actually done this, despite the adoption system being in a shambles.
So... why not just compile the PHP (into C++ or directly into asm) and be done with it?
Don't be stupid.
The vast, vast, vast majority of abortion cases have absolutely nothing to do with mitigating significant risks to the mother or mercifully euthanasing a non-viable foetus. Vast. It is a convenience issue - the mother doesn't want it, so she kills it and gets on with her life. Often it's documented as "risk of severe mental anguish" or some such to get around legislative issues but that's not relevant here.
Please stop saying that anti-abortionists think women should have no control over their bodies. That is a straw man fallacy. Anti-abortionists (at least the ones I've come across) claim there are two bodies involved in a pregnancy, and the women can do whatever she wants with her body as long as it doesn't harm the other. I realise the "telling women what to do with their bodies" mantra is popular in feminist circles since it can be easily twisted to look like oppression, conveniently ignoring the entire subject of the issue - the child.
Do you really think that all women who have had abortions would have done so if it was not legally offered as a first option by their GP? That claim is ridiculous and doesn't hold up to any kind of scrutiny. I can provide plenty of anecdotes, but won't bother since the plural of such is not considered "data". Yes some women will undoubtedly seek illegal abortions if no other option was legally available just like some people seek out narcotic drugs.
What this can really be boiled down to is whether or not human life itself holds intrinsic value. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't but don't pretend the abortion debate is about anything else.
Another compelling reason to watch DVDs on an HTPC with mplayer instead of a STB, along with getting true 23.99fps DVD playback (closer to correct speed/pitch) on PAL DVDs.
UOPs must die.
Why are laptop hard drives more expensive than desktop ones?
I suspect the answer is the same for both questions.
I have yet to see infrastructure anywhere that is owned by the people it serves.
I've seen plenty owned by Governments but that's not really the same, since representative democracies rarely actually represent the will of the people.
E3M3
'nuff said.