28/33 over here, for someone who has never set foot in the US. Not so much a "Hey look at me!" as much as it's a sad commentary on those who failed this test.
Yeah, one glance at that title and I knew I wouldn't like it.
On the other hand, I found myself driving around like a murderous asshole with "All Nightmare Long" ruining my eardrums earlier today.
It's no Puppets, but they're 25 years older. It's also no Load/Reload/St. Anger, though those albums can still be heard in places (though, thankfully, without the terrible tin-can drums of St. Anger)
Considering the crap they have produced for the last 2 friggin' decades, I'm rather impressed. But I can't see them getting more Puppets-like on the next album, which probably means the next one will be Load all over again.
Their latest album is quite good. Also, before Death Magnetic was released I wouldn't call any album after 1991 "quality"...you don't really think Load was all that good, do you?
You'll have to forgive me if you find my stance offensive, but beer consumption epitomizes stupidity and Lowest Common Denominator thinking.
Fast Food? Not even sure why it was included. It's fine. Reality TV? Fine. Crude Humor? Fine on occasion. Sitcoms? Sometimes incredibly stupid, but mostly fine. Interest in fishing, NASCAR, sports, or other non-nerdy pursuit? Perfectly fine.
Beer? No.
Beer is a trap of the most dangerous and intellectually lethal kind. It encourages people to destroy their livers and mistakenly sleep with really ugly people. Yet like blah blah blah...
I could continue if you like, but I'm sure you'll find my criticism of that elitist nonsense to be an indication of my faux intelligence.
I dislike reality TV as much as the next person, but I'm not sure someone who posts on/. can point fingers at others for time wasting, poor judgement and poor critical thinking.
You'll have to forgive me if you find my stance offensive, but fast food epitomizes stupidity and Lowest Common Denominator thinking.
Reality TV? Not even sure why it was included. It's fine. Beer? Fine. Crude Humor? Fine on occasion. Sitcoms? Sometimes incredibly stupid, but mostly fine. Interest in fishing, NASCAR, sports, or other non-nerdy pursuit? Perfectly fine.
Fast food? No.
Fast food is a trap of the most dangerous and intellectually lethal kind. It encourages people to consume unhealthy food and to emulate the worst cooking habits. Yet like bad cooking, it can become a trap that lures people in and encourages them to become fat, lazy and unhealthy. In effect, it causes you to stoop to the level of those who are too lazy to boil an egg. (Which usually means they're the type to appeal to fatty sex and chubby voyeurism.)
The end result is that your stomach becomes stuck in a quagmire of terrible "food" products that are not edible. Which has negative effects on your thinking, priorities, and thus day to day life.
You may think ill of me all that you want. But "fast food" as it is defined today is NOT something I think any intelligent person should see as "nourishment". And I am highly suspect of anyone who claims otherwise. If anything, they are likely to be faux chefs who would rather put on a show of culinary talent than actually make an effort to *be* culinarily talented.
You'll have to forgive me if you find my stance offensive, but sitcoms epitomize stupidity and Lowest Common Denominator thinking.
Fast Food? Not even sure why it was included. It's fine. Beer? Fine. Crude Humor? Fine on occasion. Reality TV? Sometimes incredibly stupid, but mostly fine. Interest in fishing, NASCAR, sports, or other non-nerdy pursuit? Perfectly fine.
Sitcoms? No.
Sitcoms are a trap of the most dangerous and intellectually lethal kind. They encourage people to track the personal lives of fictional people to a point that makes gossiping look tame. Yet like gossiping, it can become a trap that lures people in and encourages them to waste their time, judgment, and critical thinking. In effect, it causes you to stoop to the level of those who would participate in the activities of having their lives bared for all to see. (Which usually means they're the type to appeal to false sexual tension and cookie-cutter humour.)
The end result is that your thinking becomes stuck in a quagmire of complex personal matters that are not of your own. Which has negative effects on your thinking, priorities, and thus day to day life.
You may think ill of me all that you want. But "sitcoms" as it is defined today are NOT something I think any intelligent person should see as "entertainment". And I am highly suspect of anyone who claims otherwise. If anything, they are likely to be faux intellectuals who would rather put on a show of intelligence than actually make an effort to *be* intelligent.
Don't be so quick to assume ignorance. They're trying to nip unknown substances in the bud because they don't know their positive or negative effects. They don't want 50% of their athletes dying of cancer in 10 years because of some neat new designer drug with unexpected side effects, so rather than coordinate drug trials and studies for every single new substance they just prohibit all of them, and as the science comes in they can take some of these chemicals off the banned list.
It's fine for you to say "the science says it's not harmful so they're just preventing me from using a supplement", but it's difficult to say that just because the drug doesn't have 1-5 year effects that it won't have 10-20 year effects.
Thanks! This simple discussion about a dialysis machine quickly devolved into a hackneyed eugenics discussion, so I'm glad to hear that at least one person doesn't think I'm a total twit:-)
Third, not every gene acts in a one-item, good/bad manner. A sensitivity or weakness may be due to a genetic sequence that simultaneously confers other benefits to those that survive, but that simply hasn't had a chance to express in larger numbers due to high infant mortality rates.
IANADoctor, but I seem to recall hearing that the idea that cravings are correlated to missing minerals/vitamins/etc is no longer believed to be correct. We don't get minerals by eating rocks, so why would the body signal a mineral deficiency by triggering a desire for gritty textures?
Off the top of my head, it would seem to me that when we are experiencing a gritty texture in our mouths it is often by accident and rarely nutritious.
On a related note, I put on more baby weight than my wife:-(
Strange that you couldn't find any corroborating evidence of the fact that the shipping boxes for their products are rarely the size of the retail boxes, since it took me and Google 25 seconds to get the links shown below.
Strange that I'm not the only person to receive a small software package in a giant box (sorry, it wasn't Leopard, it was iLife...I guess I have to "concede" that "point").
IIRC, the metabolic benefit is somewhere around 50 calories per pound of muscle.
I liken cardio to the Atkins diet and weight training to the balanced diet (strictly in terms of immediate impact on body composition...I'm ignoring benefits of cardio like the significant benefits to cardiovascular fitness): the former pair will ensure you lose weight quickly but they require vigilant adherence, whereas the latter pair yield more long-term effects.
So, if you need to drop a few pounds to fit into the wedding dress, hit the stairmaster. Otherwise, for general health benefits and long-term weight management you need a balance of running in place/climbing imaginary staircases with repeatedly picking up reasonably heavy things and putting them back down again.
The boxes are indeed small. The packages they place these items in have invariably been huge and wasteful. I could have placed my child in the box with room to spare.
I suspect you're either a case of a packaging shortage or just being dishonest.
You know, there's no better way to get ahead in an argument than to accuse someone else of lying. Or to make the ludicrous suggestion that my observations are due to a packing shortage that spans several years.
In this spirit, I suspect you're either reporting a selective recollection of their packaging practices or just being dishon...oh, whoops! I'm repeating myself there.
...wins the wasteful packaging contest IMHO. My Leopard CD and trackpad protecting sticker arrived in a box that was filled with brown paper and was large enough to fit two LCD monitors. Several years earlier, I ordered a Firewire-to-USB connnector for my old iPod and it arrived in a box that was 5x bigger than the package AND was literally packed with nothing but air...in the form of plastic air-filled balloons. I'm surprised they don't ship their MacBook Air in a depleted uranium case in order to maintain structural integrity.
Further to that, if the transmitter can't survive in a soccer ball (where a well-struck shot probably moves around 120-130 kph) then there's no way it will handle travelling over 200 kph after a serve, followed by a (at least) 100 kph forehand return (a net >-300 kph in a fraction of a second!).
Also, a radio transmitter cannot account for the distortion of a ball upon impact, which will depend on velocity, angle of rotation, angle of impact, surface being played on, etc etc etc...
Please don't lump us all in with those drooling troglodytes. Some of us switched platforms for good reasons and are perfectly honest about the flaws inherent to our system. I've convinced many friends/colleagues to switch but I've probably dissuaded just as many because there was no real tangible benefit to their switching.
There's a lot of Mac hate out there too my friend. It's just that the neophytes who feel morally/socially superior because they have the same white laptop as every other person in the coffeeshop are much louder.
(Disclaimer: I am writing this on a MacBook at a coffeeshop)
P.S. If youget modded as flamebait it might have something to do with the "Mac fangirls" tone of your post.
Are consumers actually getting to the point where they buy what they need rather than the high end, of what they want?
Not if the computer industry can do anything about it!
"trdrstv, meet Windows Vista. Vista, meet..." TRDRSTV IS TRYING TO SHAKE YOUR HAND. CANCEL OR ALLOW?
"Allow."
"THE FEATURE "HANDSHAKE" IS ONLY AVAILABLE TO VISTA PREMIUM USERS. PLEASE INSTALL A TERABYTE OF RAM BEFORE UPGRADING."
"You talk about "pro-MS" propaganda, but you're the one desperately searching for things to shit on."
Holy irrational sense of indignation Batman! You're taking this very light criticism of a piece of software pretty seriously, don't you think?
"They're three distinct things, and Vista dropped OCA."
Right, but their press release makes it SOUND like there's 3 crash information collection programs. That's what I emphasized in my post.
Go back and read my post again. See my point? See how I was being more tongue-in-cheek than critical? Notice that I pointed out that all big companies - not just MS - are in the business of PR-spin? Good!
Now take a few deep breaths and calm down. I suggest you stop "desperately searching for things to shit on", because if you react this way to every/. comment you perceive as being anti-MS you're going to have an aneurysm.
"The information we collect thanks to tools like the Customer Experience Improvement Program, Online Crash Analysis, and Windows Error Reporting..."
For a company so adept at spinning information into pro-MS propaganda (much like any big company, mind you), you would think that they would do a better job of obfuscating the fact that they have at least 3 different channels for collecting program crash information!
Wow, you touched off a decent fight here, didn't you?:-)
I'm not sure it's entirely correct to say that religion is not a factor in Canadian elections. Sure, we don't print off big banners proclaiming our religious affiliations and our political leaders don't parrot the tired "Well, as a Christian with a great respect for family values and the sanctity of life and morals and bla bla bla..." religious rhetoric everytime they answer a question. However, I'm not sure that much of the disdain many Canadians direct towards Harper isn't at least partly because of the social and religious conservatism of his party. They definitely try to appeal to a Christian conservative base and that is more successful in some regions than others, as what flies in Alberta probably won't work in Quebec for example, and there's a good reason large parts of Atlantic Canada often vote in stark opposition to the rest of the country. Harper definitely speaks a different language in Duceppe's neck of the woods:-)
I think it comes down to our overall centre-left politics and to the regionalism inherent to Canadian politics. Generally, we tend to be more concerned with ascertaining whether their policies will make Canada a better country than what religious text they keep on their nighttable. What a concept.
My first video game experience was on a Coleco Gemini, which I played until it's innards fried. This was replaced with an Atari 2600 (which I also played to death), followed by a Nintendo (dead), a Super Nintendo (broken) and a PlayStation (still kicking). Then it was PC games for quite some time, but now that I am a Mac zealot with an underpowered video card I'm gravitating towards Guitar Hero games on consoles once again...
The death of the Gemini was also my first of many encounters with the mysterious blue smoke of fried electronics:-)
Add me to the chorus. In fact, I've found Leopard to run smoother and faster than Tiger (Spotlight is actually somewhat quick now, for example)...so much so that it makes me wonder how a group of people can have such a negative experience. Is it a particular driver in a particular version of a particular Apple product, or perhaps a 3rd-party app?
At the risk of sounding like a fanboi, go buy a Mac:-) I bought a G3 iBook off a friend of mine for $150 that I handed down to my sister a few months ago. The computer is about 3.5-4 years old, IIRC, it still has a max of about 3 hrs battery life and it is running the latest (well, next-to-latest) operating system available.
I'm not really advocating one system over another here; that was more of a joke. My point is that, contrary to your post, laptops can and do last more than 2 years. It was my primary system up until April of this year and I took it everywhere I went, including on the bus and in my bike's pannier bags.
Also in opposition to your post, I think that users are more likely to tolerate applications running slower on a laptop than on a desktop because their desktop is supposed to be the high-powered system. In my experience with friends and family as the go-to-tech-guy, they feel their desktops become obsolete faster than the laptops.
Slashdot Mirror
28/33 over here, for someone who has never set foot in the US. Not so much a "Hey look at me!" as much as it's a sad commentary on those who failed this test.
Yeah, one glance at that title and I knew I wouldn't like it.
On the other hand, I found myself driving around like a murderous asshole with "All Nightmare Long" ruining my eardrums earlier today.
It's no Puppets, but they're 25 years older. It's also no Load/Reload/St. Anger, though those albums can still be heard in places (though, thankfully, without the terrible tin-can drums of St. Anger)
Considering the crap they have produced for the last 2 friggin' decades, I'm rather impressed. But I can't see them getting more Puppets-like on the next album, which probably means the next one will be Load all over again.
Their latest album is quite good. Also, before Death Magnetic was released I wouldn't call any album after 1991 "quality"...you don't really think Load was all that good, do you?
You'll have to forgive me if you find my stance offensive, but beer consumption epitomizes stupidity and Lowest Common Denominator thinking.
Fast Food? Not even sure why it was included. It's fine.
Reality TV? Fine.
Crude Humor? Fine on occasion.
Sitcoms? Sometimes incredibly stupid, but mostly fine.
Interest in fishing, NASCAR, sports, or other non-nerdy pursuit? Perfectly fine.
Beer? No.
Beer is a trap of the most dangerous and intellectually lethal kind. It encourages people to destroy their livers and mistakenly sleep with really ugly people. Yet like blah blah blah...
I could continue if you like, but I'm sure you'll find my criticism of that elitist nonsense to be an indication of my faux intelligence.
I dislike reality TV as much as the next person, but I'm not sure someone who posts on /. can point fingers at others for time wasting, poor judgement and poor critical thinking.
You'll have to forgive me if you find my stance offensive, but fast food epitomizes stupidity and Lowest Common Denominator thinking.
Reality TV? Not even sure why it was included. It's fine.
Beer? Fine.
Crude Humor? Fine on occasion.
Sitcoms? Sometimes incredibly stupid, but mostly fine.
Interest in fishing, NASCAR, sports, or other non-nerdy pursuit? Perfectly fine.
Fast food? No.
Fast food is a trap of the most dangerous and intellectually lethal kind. It encourages people to consume unhealthy food and to emulate the worst cooking habits. Yet like bad cooking, it can become a trap that lures people in and encourages them to become fat, lazy and unhealthy. In effect, it causes you to stoop to the level of those who are too lazy to boil an egg. (Which usually means they're the type to appeal to fatty sex and chubby voyeurism.)
The end result is that your stomach becomes stuck in a quagmire of terrible "food" products that are not edible. Which has negative effects on your thinking, priorities, and thus day to day life.
You may think ill of me all that you want. But "fast food" as it is defined today is NOT something I think any intelligent person should see as "nourishment". And I am highly suspect of anyone who claims otherwise. If anything, they are likely to be faux chefs who would rather put on a show of culinary talent than actually make an effort to *be* culinarily talented.
You'll have to forgive me if you find my stance offensive, but sitcoms epitomize stupidity and Lowest Common Denominator thinking.
Fast Food? Not even sure why it was included. It's fine.
Beer? Fine.
Crude Humor? Fine on occasion.
Reality TV? Sometimes incredibly stupid, but mostly fine.
Interest in fishing, NASCAR, sports, or other non-nerdy pursuit? Perfectly fine.
Sitcoms? No.
Sitcoms are a trap of the most dangerous and intellectually lethal kind. They encourage people to track the personal lives of fictional people to a point that makes gossiping look tame. Yet like gossiping, it can become a trap that lures people in and encourages them to waste their time, judgment, and critical thinking. In effect, it causes you to stoop to the level of those who would participate in the activities of having their lives bared for all to see. (Which usually means they're the type to appeal to false sexual tension and cookie-cutter humour.)
The end result is that your thinking becomes stuck in a quagmire of complex personal matters that are not of your own. Which has negative effects on your thinking, priorities, and thus day to day life.
You may think ill of me all that you want. But "sitcoms" as it is defined today are NOT something I think any intelligent person should see as "entertainment". And I am highly suspect of anyone who claims otherwise. If anything, they are likely to be faux intellectuals who would rather put on a show of intelligence than actually make an effort to *be* intelligent.
Don't be so quick to assume ignorance. They're trying to nip unknown substances in the bud because they don't know their positive or negative effects. They don't want 50% of their athletes dying of cancer in 10 years because of some neat new designer drug with unexpected side effects, so rather than coordinate drug trials and studies for every single new substance they just prohibit all of them, and as the science comes in they can take some of these chemicals off the banned list.
It's fine for you to say "the science says it's not harmful so they're just preventing me from using a supplement", but it's difficult to say that just because the drug doesn't have 1-5 year effects that it won't have 10-20 year effects.
Thanks! This simple discussion about a dialysis machine quickly devolved into a hackneyed eugenics discussion, so I'm glad to hear that at least one person doesn't think I'm a total twit :-)
Third, not every gene acts in a one-item, good/bad manner. A sensitivity or weakness may be due to a genetic sequence that simultaneously confers other benefits to those that survive, but that simply hasn't had a chance to express in larger numbers due to high infant mortality rates.
IANADoctor, but I seem to recall hearing that the idea that cravings are correlated to missing minerals/vitamins/etc is no longer believed to be correct. We don't get minerals by eating rocks, so why would the body signal a mineral deficiency by triggering a desire for gritty textures?
Off the top of my head, it would seem to me that when we are experiencing a gritty texture in our mouths it is often by accident and rarely nutritious.
On a related note, I put on more baby weight than my wife :-(
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls...
Strange that you couldn't find any corroborating evidence of the fact that the shipping boxes for their products are rarely the size of the retail boxes, since it took me and Google 25 seconds to get the links shown below.
Strange that I'm not the only person to receive a small software package in a giant box (sorry, it wasn't Leopard, it was iLife...I guess I have to "concede" that "point").
http://www.ehmac.ca/anything-mac/36603-why-apple-products-cost-so-much-answer.html
http://cvillain.com/2008/04/22/at-apple-computer-we-even-package-the-packaging/
http://www.devindra.org/tech/2007/05/06/an-example-of-apple-going-green/
Jackass.
IIRC, the metabolic benefit is somewhere around 50 calories per pound of muscle.
I liken cardio to the Atkins diet and weight training to the balanced diet (strictly in terms of immediate impact on body composition...I'm ignoring benefits of cardio like the significant benefits to cardiovascular fitness): the former pair will ensure you lose weight quickly but they require vigilant adherence, whereas the latter pair yield more long-term effects.
So, if you need to drop a few pounds to fit into the wedding dress, hit the stairmaster. Otherwise, for general health benefits and long-term weight management you need a balance of running in place/climbing imaginary staircases with repeatedly picking up reasonably heavy things and putting them back down again.
The boxes are indeed small. The packages they place these items in have invariably been huge and wasteful. I could have placed my child in the box with room to spare.
I suspect you're either a case of a packaging shortage or just being dishonest.
You know, there's no better way to get ahead in an argument than to accuse someone else of lying. Or to make the ludicrous suggestion that my observations are due to a packing shortage that spans several years.
In this spirit, I suspect you're either reporting a selective recollection of their packaging practices or just being dishon...oh, whoops! I'm repeating myself there.
...wins the wasteful packaging contest IMHO. My Leopard CD and trackpad protecting sticker arrived in a box that was filled with brown paper and was large enough to fit two LCD monitors.
Several years earlier, I ordered a Firewire-to-USB connnector for my old iPod and it arrived in a box that was 5x bigger than the package AND was literally packed with nothing but air...in the form of plastic air-filled balloons.
I'm surprised they don't ship their MacBook Air in a depleted uranium case in order to maintain structural integrity.
Further to that, if the transmitter can't survive in a soccer ball (where a well-struck shot probably moves around 120-130 kph) then there's no way it will handle travelling over 200 kph after a serve, followed by a (at least) 100 kph forehand return (a net >-300 kph in a fraction of a second!).
Also, a radio transmitter cannot account for the distortion of a ball upon impact, which will depend on velocity, angle of rotation, angle of impact, surface being played on, etc etc etc...
He's moved on, departed from the Big Electron. He was a giant and will be missed. I have taken one of his phrases to heart:
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that."
RIP Mr Carlin.
Please don't lump us all in with those drooling troglodytes. Some of us switched platforms for good reasons and are perfectly honest about the flaws inherent to our system. I've convinced many friends/colleagues to switch but I've probably dissuaded just as many because there was no real tangible benefit to their switching.
There's a lot of Mac hate out there too my friend. It's just that the neophytes who feel morally/socially superior because they have the same white laptop as every other person in the coffeeshop are much louder.
(Disclaimer: I am writing this on a MacBook at a coffeeshop)
P.S. If youget modded as flamebait it might have something to do with the "Mac fangirls" tone of your post.
Are consumers actually getting to the point where they buy what they need rather than the high end, of what they want?
/end_gibberish
Not if the computer industry can do anything about it!
"trdrstv, meet Windows Vista. Vista, meet..." TRDRSTV IS TRYING TO SHAKE YOUR HAND. CANCEL OR ALLOW?
"Allow."
"THE FEATURE "HANDSHAKE" IS ONLY AVAILABLE TO VISTA PREMIUM USERS. PLEASE INSTALL A TERABYTE OF RAM BEFORE UPGRADING."
Holy irrational sense of indignation Batman! You're taking this very light criticism of a piece of software pretty seriously, don't you think?
"They're three distinct things, and Vista dropped OCA."
Right, but their press release makes it SOUND like there's 3 crash information collection programs. That's what I emphasized in my post.
Go back and read my post again. See my point? See how I was being more tongue-in-cheek than critical? Notice that I pointed out that all big companies - not just MS - are in the business of PR-spin? Good!
Now take a few deep breaths and calm down. I suggest you stop "desperately searching for things to shit on", because if you react this way to every /. comment you perceive as being anti-MS you're going to have an aneurysm.
For a company so adept at spinning information into pro-MS propaganda (much like any big company, mind you), you would think that they would do a better job of obfuscating the fact that they have at least 3 different channels for collecting program crash information!
Wow, you touched off a decent fight here, didn't you? :-)
..." religious rhetoric everytime they answer a question. However, I'm not sure that much of the disdain many Canadians direct towards Harper isn't at least partly because of the social and religious conservatism of his party. They definitely try to appeal to a Christian conservative base and that is more successful in some regions than others, as what flies in Alberta probably won't work in Quebec for example, and there's a good reason large parts of Atlantic Canada often vote in stark opposition to the rest of the country. Harper definitely speaks a different language in Duceppe's neck of the woods :-)
I'm not sure it's entirely correct to say that religion is not a factor in Canadian elections. Sure, we don't print off big banners proclaiming our religious affiliations and our political leaders don't parrot the tired "Well, as a Christian with a great respect for family values and the sanctity of life and morals and bla bla bla
I think it comes down to our overall centre-left politics and to the regionalism inherent to Canadian politics. Generally, we tend to be more concerned with ascertaining whether their policies will make Canada a better country than what religious text they keep on their nighttable. What a concept.
My first video game experience was on a Coleco Gemini, which I played until it's innards fried. This was replaced with an Atari 2600 (which I also played to death), followed by a Nintendo (dead), a Super Nintendo (broken) and a PlayStation (still kicking). Then it was PC games for quite some time, but now that I am a Mac zealot with an underpowered video card I'm gravitating towards Guitar Hero games on consoles once again...
:-)
The death of the Gemini was also my first of many encounters with the mysterious blue smoke of fried electronics
Add me to the chorus. In fact, I've found Leopard to run smoother and faster than Tiger (Spotlight is actually somewhat quick now, for example)...so much so that it makes me wonder how a group of people can have such a negative experience. Is it a particular driver in a particular version of a particular Apple product, or perhaps a 3rd-party app?
At the risk of sounding like a fanboi, go buy a Mac :-) I bought a G3 iBook off a friend of mine for $150 that I handed down to my sister a few months ago. The computer is about 3.5-4 years old, IIRC, it still has a max of about 3 hrs battery life and it is running the latest (well, next-to-latest) operating system available.
I'm not really advocating one system over another here; that was more of a joke. My point is that, contrary to your post, laptops can and do last more than 2 years. It was my primary system up until April of this year and I took it everywhere I went, including on the bus and in my bike's pannier bags.
Also in opposition to your post, I think that users are more likely to tolerate applications running slower on a laptop than on a desktop because their desktop is supposed to be the high-powered system. In my experience with friends and family as the go-to-tech-guy, they feel their desktops become obsolete faster than the laptops.
I've found the filters to be fine so far. Perhaps something is wrong with your Mail?