Its the same thing with God. They talk about divine intervention - aka God.
You've obviously never even looked at the constitution. Go read it yourself.
There is no mention divine intervention. There is no mention of a creator. There is no mention of God.
There are only two times religion is even mentioned is to state no religious test can be mandated for office and no law respecting the establishment of religion can be made.
Looking back on these boards, as well as other companies, is very interesting.
From May 9th... Sales are in talks (Supposedly) that are to be announced within the next month or so, leading to believe that WCOM may become 'Liquidation World' for other Carriers.
You are aware that a large part of the reason that FBI was, until recently, so well handcuffed was *because* they abused their powers by spying on and entrapping people who had nothing to do with terrorism?
While the agents out in the field are hard-working, good people, the bureaucracy that directs the FBI has proven itself, time and time again, to be not just untrustworthy but incompetent as well!
Ever since I got an 80 gig hard drive. I just burn CloneCD images of games I buy and use Daemontools to create a near foolproof virtual CD drive with which to run the game. I don't look around for CDs anymore, I just select the image from the menu and off I go.
The downside is that it takes about twice the space because the install program usually installs the whole kit and kaboodle and then you've got the CD image.
It works over great over LANs too. We put images of commonly used network games(starcraft, red alert 2) on a simple fileserver(my old P-75 w/6 gig HD). Whenever my roommates and I want to play a game, we all point to the same CD image on a network drive and off we go. No digging up CDs or anything. Most times, the games just check the image on startup and never look at it again so the server doesn't get overworked or anything.
Sure, VHS will have to go eventually. and I won't exactly mourn the crap quality. But what's coming down the line?
What's the standard affordable alternative to replace the easy recording ability of VHS?
Before anyone says it, Tivo(and other services like it) ain't it. I can't share it with anyone else over my always-down DSL connection. No one can just hand me a disk of the Angel episode I missed last week or something.
I'm trying to think of a technology that could replace it... maybe a box that could burn VCDs on the fly? The technology's probably at the point that you could do that affordably.
The advantage of this is that people are already used to burning CDs, it's a widely available media, and you probably wouldn't need industry support to make the player. That means you wouldn't need to include DRM or other crap.
It's not clear whether backward last name was the actual password. Both the thank you notice and the news article say that was a password submitted by users.
I think digital is the way of the future but it still has a ways to go. Likely, half of the amazement at the "quality" of digital is from seeing a film without any dirt, grime or other artifacts that go with reels of film.
As others pointed out, the resolution ain't much better than a desktop PC... and it's being projected onto a *huge* screen. I saw Ep 2 from the back of the theatre and I could spot pixelation in text *very* easily. The jagged lines was kind of annoying.
Theatre owners simply can't afford to buy projectors that'll be obsolete in a couple years. The industry is fairly screwed at the moment.
It'll probably take 10 years or so for digital to overtake film projectors, once a high-quality format is agreed upon. But the current tech? No way.
If I remember the problem is that the water eventually gets contaminated enough that it'll start conducting again. And when that happens, fried computer!
They aren't being successful and the "problem" still exists, so you have to change the battlefield.
That's it, though. There isn't a "problem", really. If anything, the "problem" is puritans who either insist that the government dictate what everyone can and cannot see or that *they* get to dictate what everyone can and cannot see.
I think that would break down quickly because there's a difference between "mature", "adult" and "pornographic" content.
The difficulty is that everyone differs on the difference between mature, adult and pornographic.
CBS Radio noted that the filters were blocking a rock band called the Aardvarks. At the beginning of the report, they were playing some of their music in the background.
I think the real danger of "balkanizing" the net into.adult/.kids/.etc like that is that it'll enable the larger ISPs, like MSN, to simply wall-off further sections of the net that they don't like or control. I think they'd jump at the chance to simply drop.adult.
And their subscribers would likely be as unaware of it as they are unaware that they no longer have newsgroup access.
CNN "say that the law takes an inappropriate one-size-fits-all approach that treats children and adults the same"
No, dumbass. CNN did not "say" that. CNN is summarizing what "Critics of the law" say.
Some of the problem is adults whacking off in libraries looking at porn. We can protect the kids from that by banning porn altogether.
Then why don't you just deal with the adults who are whacking off in public and leave the rest of us alone? And if you think banning porn will "protect" kids from public indecency, you've got another thing coming. (no pun intended)
Libraries are increasingly having to deal with people doing all sorts of inappropriate things: shooting drugs, having sex, etc. A lot of it is due to the lack of affordable housing and unemployment. People go to the library because it's relatively quie, air conditioned/heated, and they have no where else to go.
Ban the porn and you're still going to have a problem. So why not deal with the actual problem instead of a manufactured "cause" of it?
Another problem is state funds. I for one never want to see my tax dollars being use *even once* for viewing crap like porn. So ban it. If our excuse is that in blocking porn we may also block some other "protected" speech, then we are obviously just making excuses.
And since you're consistant, you'll support the banning of any other pornographic materials at the library as well. That means any books related to sex, anatomy books and the Bible.
And while we're deciding what our tax dollars can and cannot support, let me add my list: Nuclear weapons Corporate subsidies Half the Pentagon's budget White House staff salaries Any program that may benefit you in particular
That CNN report is one side of the story, and doesn't even mention the other side.
Oh look! It's the other side of the story! Didn't read too hard did ya?
"Justice Department lawyers defending the law argued that Internet smut is so pervasive that protections are necessary to keep it away from youngsters, and that the law simply calls for libraries to use the same care in selecting online content that they use for books and magazines.
"They also point out that libraries can simply turn down the federal funding if they want to provide unfiltered Web access."
This is just a case of them furthering their agenda by trying to get poor people on their side.
Again, as it's patently obvious to anyone with half a brain, CNN is summarizing something someone else is saying. In this case, the ACLU.
"Attorneys for the American Library Association and the American Civil Liberties Union contend the law is unenforceable, unconstitutional, vague and overbroad. They say it denies poor people without home computers the same full access to information as their wealthier neighbors."
What about the millions of Americans (including the poor) that don't want their children subject to pornography?
Generally, libraries will not give internet access to children without their parents' permission. Don't want kids looking up porn at the library? Don't give them permission. Problem solved.
If we'd simply apply the decency laws to libraries like we do to our city streets, we'd solve the problem.
I agree. So why would you need to ban pornographic materials if you're enforcing the decency laws? If someone is not being publicly indecent in the library, then why does it matter to you whether they view porn on computers at the library?
for circumventing their fun-generation process by bypassing the purchase of their products? Releasing something for free? Why they're practically thieves!
>>For example, why in the world do people pay three times as much for brand-name sodas over store brands with essentially the same formulation?
Why do I buy Diet Coke instead of Safeway Diet soda? Because Safeway diet soda tastes like crap.
Why do I buy Eggo frozen waffles instead of Safeway frozen waffles? Because Safeway waffles taste like crap.
Why do I buy Freschetta pizzas instead of Safeway frozen pizzas? Because Safeway pizzas taste like crap.
Yes, there are products where the store-brand and name-brand are identical, but where food is concerned, there frequently is a difference. Yes, amazing as it may seem, sometimes, when you pay more money, you aren't just paying for advertising, but you're also paying for a higher quality product.
Personally, I'm still hoping that the cel-shaded Zelda and the "ultra-realistic" in the original Zelda movie are part of the same game... just part of the Dark and Light world respectively.
Slashdot Mirror
"In the year of our lord"
That's it? A date using the Gregorian calendar? How else were they supposed to date the document? That's how all dates back then were written.
Where's the "divine intervention" you claimed was mentioned?
Its the same thing with God. They talk about divine intervention - aka God.
You've obviously never even looked at the constitution. Go read it yourself.
There is no mention divine intervention. There is no mention of a creator. There is no mention of God.
There are only two times religion is even mentioned is to state no religious test can be mandated for office and no law respecting the establishment of religion can be made.
1. The ruling only strikes down the 1954 law which added "under God" to the Pledge.
2. "God" isn't mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. Go read it.
And if you don't thinking it's a big deal, what if it said "One nation under Allah"? Imagine the outcry from conservatives then!
Looking back on these boards, as well as other companies, is very interesting.
From May 9th...
Sales are in talks (Supposedly) that are to be announced within the next month or so, leading to believe that WCOM may become 'Liquidation World' for other Carriers.
WCOM is ready to fall below a dollar
I thought it was a futuristic jockstrap.
Spoooon!
with their refreshing naivete!
You are aware that a large part of the reason that FBI was, until recently, so well handcuffed was *because* they abused their powers by spying on and entrapping people who had nothing to do with terrorism?
While the agents out in the field are hard-working, good people, the bureaucracy that directs the FBI has proven itself, time and time again, to be not just untrustworthy but incompetent as well!
Why do you hate America so much?
Ever since I got an 80 gig hard drive. I just burn CloneCD images of games I buy and use Daemontools to create a near foolproof virtual CD drive with which to run the game. I don't look around for CDs anymore, I just select the image from the menu and off I go.
The downside is that it takes about twice the space because the install program usually installs the whole kit and kaboodle and then you've got the CD image.
It works over great over LANs too. We put images of commonly used network games(starcraft, red alert 2) on a simple fileserver(my old P-75 w/6 gig HD). Whenever my roommates and I want to play a game, we all point to the same CD image on a network drive and off we go. No digging up CDs or anything. Most times, the games just check the image on startup and never look at it again so the server doesn't get overworked or anything.
Sure, VHS will have to go eventually. and I won't exactly mourn the crap quality. But what's coming down the line?
What's the standard affordable alternative to replace the easy recording ability of VHS?
Before anyone says it, Tivo(and other services like it) ain't it. I can't share it with anyone else over my always-down DSL connection. No one can just hand me a disk of the Angel episode I missed last week or something.
I'm trying to think of a technology that could replace it... maybe a box that could burn VCDs on the fly? The technology's probably at the point that you could do that affordably.
The advantage of this is that people are already used to burning CDs, it's a widely available media, and you probably wouldn't need industry support to make the player. That means you wouldn't need to include DRM or other crap.
It's not clear whether backward last name was the actual password. Both the thank you notice and the news article say that was a password submitted by users.
I think digital is the way of the future but it still has a ways to go. Likely, half of the amazement at the "quality" of digital is from seeing a film without any dirt, grime or other artifacts that go with reels of film.
As others pointed out, the resolution ain't much better than a desktop PC... and it's being projected onto a *huge* screen. I saw Ep 2 from the back of the theatre and I could spot pixelation in text *very* easily. The jagged lines was kind of annoying.
Theatre owners simply can't afford to buy projectors that'll be obsolete in a couple years. The industry is fairly screwed at the moment.
It'll probably take 10 years or so for digital to overtake film projectors, once a high-quality format is agreed upon. But the current tech? No way.
Yeah, you'd think Amazon would get cut some slack for *not* making money.
If I remember the problem is that the water eventually gets contaminated enough that it'll start conducting again. And when that happens, fried computer!
They aren't being successful and the "problem" still exists, so you have to change the battlefield.
That's it, though. There isn't a "problem", really. If anything, the "problem" is puritans who either insist that the government dictate what everyone can and cannot see or that *they* get to dictate what everyone can and cannot see.
I think that would break down quickly because there's a difference between "mature", "adult" and "pornographic" content.
The difficulty is that everyone differs on the difference between mature, adult and pornographic.
CBS Radio noted that the filters were blocking a rock band called the Aardvarks. At the beginning of the report, they were playing some of their music in the background.
I think the real danger of "balkanizing" the net into .adult/.kids/.etc like that is that it'll enable the larger ISPs, like MSN, to simply wall-off further sections of the net that they don't like or control. I think they'd jump at the chance to simply drop .adult.
And their subscribers would likely be as unaware of it as they are unaware that they no longer have newsgroup access.
CNN "say that the law takes an inappropriate one-size-fits-all approach that treats children and adults the same"
No, dumbass. CNN did not "say" that. CNN is summarizing what "Critics of the law" say.
Some of the problem is adults whacking off in libraries looking at porn. We can protect the kids from that by banning porn altogether.
Then why don't you just deal with the adults who are whacking off in public and leave the rest of us alone? And if you think banning porn will "protect" kids from public indecency, you've got another thing coming. (no pun intended)
Libraries are increasingly having to deal with people doing all sorts of inappropriate things: shooting drugs, having sex, etc. A lot of it is due to the lack of affordable housing and unemployment. People go to the library because it's relatively quie, air conditioned/heated, and they have no where else to go.
Ban the porn and you're still going to have a problem. So why not deal with the actual problem instead of a manufactured "cause" of it?
Another problem is state funds. I for one never want to see my tax dollars being use *even once* for viewing crap like porn. So ban it. If our excuse is that in blocking porn we may also block some other "protected" speech, then we are obviously just making excuses.
And since you're consistant, you'll support the banning of any other pornographic materials at the library as well. That means any books related to sex, anatomy books and the Bible.
And while we're deciding what our tax dollars can and cannot support, let me add my list:
Nuclear weapons
Corporate subsidies
Half the Pentagon's budget
White House staff salaries
Any program that may benefit you in particular
That CNN report is one side of the story, and doesn't even mention the other side.
Oh look! It's the other side of the story! Didn't read too hard did ya?
"Justice Department lawyers defending the law argued that Internet smut is so pervasive that protections are necessary to keep it away from youngsters, and that the law simply calls for libraries to use the same care in selecting online content that they use for books and magazines.
"They also point out that libraries can simply turn down the federal funding if they want to provide unfiltered Web access."
This is just a case of them furthering their agenda by trying to get poor people on their side.
Again, as it's patently obvious to anyone with half a brain, CNN is summarizing something someone else is saying. In this case, the ACLU.
"Attorneys for the American Library Association and the American Civil Liberties Union contend the law is unenforceable, unconstitutional, vague and overbroad. They say it denies poor people without home computers the same full access to information as their wealthier neighbors."
What about the millions of Americans (including the poor) that don't want their children subject to pornography?
Generally, libraries will not give internet access to children without their parents' permission. Don't want kids looking up porn at the library? Don't give them permission. Problem solved.
If we'd simply apply the decency laws to libraries like we do to our city streets, we'd solve the problem.
I agree. So why would you need to ban pornographic materials if you're enforcing the decency laws? If someone is not being publicly indecent in the library, then why does it matter to you whether they view porn on computers at the library?
Tell me why anyone would defend porn?
Cause it's neat.
We only have a surveillance device known as DCS-1000. You civil libertarians are so paranoid. Sheesh.
Qwest DSL is down so often I couldn't violate any bandwidth caps even if I tried.
Hobbyists can't make games with as much quality and well-done graphics as the pros.
At least not this particular hobbyist. No offense, it's far better than what I could do, but let's not oversell things here.
for circumventing their fun-generation process by bypassing the purchase of their products? Releasing something for free? Why they're practically thieves!
>>For example, why in the world do people pay three times as much for brand-name sodas over store brands with essentially the same formulation?
Why do I buy Diet Coke instead of Safeway Diet soda? Because Safeway diet soda tastes like crap.
Why do I buy Eggo frozen waffles instead of Safeway frozen waffles? Because Safeway waffles taste like crap.
Why do I buy Freschetta pizzas instead of Safeway frozen pizzas? Because Safeway pizzas taste like crap.
Yes, there are products where the store-brand and name-brand are identical, but where food is concerned, there frequently is a difference. Yes, amazing as it may seem, sometimes, when you pay more money, you aren't just paying for advertising, but you're also paying for a higher quality product.
Personally, I'm still hoping that the cel-shaded Zelda and the "ultra-realistic" in the original Zelda movie are part of the same game... just part of the Dark and Light world respectively.
That's exactly what it's supposed to be and that's why it's so popular with women. It's the dollhouse they couldn't afford when they were a kid.