Have you tried starting with a fresh profile? Firefox's uninstallation leaves the profile in place (in the documents and settings folder), and, unless you manually remove it, any problems with your profile will carry across an uninstall/reinstall cycle.
When only the police and criminals have guns, one of those two groups is going to rule, so you're left with either a police state or a criminal state.
Prove it.
Prove weapons accelerate a fight against an oppressive government, and prove criminals have it easier because the people have less weapons. There must be statistical evidence to support what you're saying in history. If what you're saying is true that is. And personally, I don't think it is.
You're right...let's make sure that only criminals have guns...
The US, with its loose gun laws, must have very low violent crime rates then, if every criminal is too afraid of using their gun because everyone else is carrying one too.
Actually, most nations believed that the Iraqis still had WMDs, in no small part because Saddam hinted they did, so you logic fails. Of course, I suspect your argument is more politics than logic to begin with.
There is a difference between having WMD's and being a threat. The bush administration asserted that Saddam was a military threat, with a large stockpile of chemical and biological weapons and an active nuclear program. The rest of the world pretty much disagreed, supported by what the inspectors on the ground were reporting, which is why you had the german foreign minister saying "You have to make the case. And to make the case in a democracy you must be convinced yourself. I am not convinced. This is my problem. I cannot go to the public and say, 'excuse me, there are reasons for war' when I don't believe in it."
You could take out all the geostationary satellites by putting debris in the same orbit moving in the opposite direction (i.e. against Earth's rotation).
But, since you wouldn't be able to hitch a ride on the earth's rotation, which is a boost of 1000 mph at the equator. So, your rocket would not only have to overcome this rotation, but actually inverse it, meaning it would have to have enough extra oomph to overcome twice the earth's rotation. I'm not up to snuff on rockets, but somehow I'm thinking your run-of-the-mill retrofitted ICBM isn't going to cut it (which is what they're using for these minisats).
That's 3 sources (pantagraph, AP, and an independent article) to support the same allegation, not 9 sources. Besides, if that's the only thing you can find factually inaccurate about fahrenheit 9/11, I will have to conclude fahrenheit 9/11 is extremely factually accurate. After all, for a 2 hour documentary to have only 5 seconds worth of inaccuracy, which doesn't even allege anything that isn't true, is quite the mark of factual excellence.
I'm not really up on things either, but as I understand it tinyx/kdrive/xserver was a rewrite from scratch, and has a vastly simplified architecture and a modern build environment.
I can run multiple X servers running from multiple machines.
X lets you do amazing stuff that is impossible in windows. For example, you can take two different machines running on the same network sitting next to eachother, and use x2x tunneled through ssh to connect together their screens securely into one large desktop. I have a setup with one machine that's always on detecting when the machine right next to it boots up and automatically sharing its desktop with it. The only criticism I can give it is that it's not possible to redirect windows automatically from one X desktop to another.
Even if it was a security bug, it would be extremely scary (since it would demonstrate the lack of adequate quality control), but given that you need to enter a secret code to activate the voter fraud functionality, I would say it is a reasonable thing to say the machines were designed for defrauding the voter. That is truly horrifying.
Your eyes are great at interpolating the blurred images, so you don't notice the low frame rate.
Why aren't graphics companies working on decent motion blur then?
the display rate of an ordinary TV monitor is 50Hz and the consoles, from what I can quickly find on the web, display at this rate.
TV's are interlaced. That is they only display one new frame every 2hz (by showing half a frame every hz). NTSC, with the 60hz cycle, has a 30fps rate.
Having an invitation system is also a great way to mine for friendship information. Just graph the invitations, and you will more or less have a who-knows-who graph (since most people hand out their invitations to their friends).
If storage becomes the main feature of Gmail, people will eventually open up 500 accounts and built a Gmail array for their file storage.
The delay and throughput of internet-based file storage is just not worth it, and with the gmail interface in between it would be even slower. People are doing these things for the novelty factor, but as soon as they figure out that there are easier ways to get the same things done, they'll move on, and this won't be a problem anymore.
Besides, if you're using gmail for personal storage, you can just email yourself the files you want as attachments. And if you're using it to host stuff, you're going to have to run elaborate scripts, which waste tons of bandwidth uselessly copying data, and since bandwidth is more expensive than disk space, it would be more cost-effective to just get more disk space on your webserver account than to use elaborate gmail-interfacing scripts.
a good consumer display has a ~20ms response time; 1 / 20ms = 50 Hz, not even 60 fps, but good enough for TV's 30 fps.
You know, fps is a funny thing. Gamers can have huge issues with getting only 30fps in a computer game, yet if you put them behind a playstation or xbox, also running at 30fps, they don't have any problems with it anymore. And 30 fps is even high. Movies are only 24 fps, and you never read movie reviews going "man, I wish the framerate had been higher"
If you want to watch TV without killing your eyes, you may want to get a 100Hz TV. This translates into a 10ms LCD.
100 hz tv's show the same image multiple times (or interpolate) so as to reduce flicker by lighting up the tube more often. LCD's are always-on, so this is irrelevant to them. 100 hz tv's are still showing the same 30fps signal.
When you have the ultra rich not paying taxes AND lobbying to pay FEWER taxes, then you have wealth concentrating in the upper levels.
For an actual statistic that supports this, take a look at the GINI index, which represents income inequality. Here's a CIA comparison of GINI numbers a few years ago, with which you should keep in mind that the current GINI index of the US is currently 46.6 and showing no signs of stabilizing.
Do you know what a high US trade deficit means? It means other countries are sending a shit load of valuable stuff to the US and the US is giving them fuck all in return. Sounds like a raw deal for someone, but whoever that someone is, it ain't anyone in the US.
No, it means that the money used to pay for goods and services imported from foreign nations far outweighs the money received in payment for goods and services exported. The higher the trade deficit, the more you're funding foreign economies.
Now, as long as you have capital investment from foreign nations which outstrips the trade deficit, this is not a problem, and currently this is the case, but I would keep an eye on the international investment balance, since the trade deficit is growing a lot faster than the investment balance.
Those taxes are only a percentage of the money made, 34 percent to be exact, and so the corporate profits would have to be three times the income paid for the off-shored jobs in order for it to equalise the loss to people of nike off-shoring jobs. Do you honestly believe that is the case?
It's called taxes. If you make a six-figure income, in most states the government will take 40-50% of it. If you work hard at avoiding taxes (residing in a favorable state, using loopholes, etc.) you can generally get it down to around 25%, but it's still nothing to be sneezed at.
For a low range in the six figures this is true, but as you progress towards the richer and then the wealthy, the actual percentage of assets paid in taxes drops dramatically. And let's face it, the people making money from off-shoring aren't in the low range of 6 figures. This is because most of the money the federal government gets from the rich and the wealthy comes from capital gains tax (the sale of shares) or dividends tax. The bush tax cuts have dramatically reduced these. Also, you have to actually sell your shares or get dividends for this to kick in. If, like Bill Gates, you keep your fortune in paper, then you are not taxed at all.
Also, lately there has been a wave of corporate off-shoring (also known as inversion), where you reincorporate in a tax shelter (like the tax-free bermuda), so that you pay dramatically less taxes. It's part of the reason why 60 percent of US corporations didn't pay any taxes between 1996 and 2000 (microsoft being one of those 60 percent).
But it is dumb to say that the average Joe in the US gets no benefit if some rich honcho makes a few billion bucks from some folks in India.
Objectively true, some of that money does flow back to regular people. But more is lost by off-shoring than comes back in corporate profits, since only a percentage of the profits gets spent or reinvested inside the US.
Slashdot Mirror
Desktop Linux really needs a unified place for specifying what application handles what mimetypes or protocols.
Something like this?
I like visiting the freedesktop.org specs page, it makes me feel like the linux desktop is finally standardizing.
Have you tried starting with a fresh profile? Firefox's uninstallation leaves the profile in place (in the documents and settings folder), and, unless you manually remove it, any problems with your profile will carry across an uninstall/reinstall cycle.
Thank you. That's annoyance fixed, several to go...
What are the other ones?
But is that crystal shell on the back of a turtle?
When only the police and criminals have guns, one of those two groups is going to rule, so you're left with either a police state or a criminal state.
Prove it.
Prove weapons accelerate a fight against an oppressive government, and prove criminals have it easier because the people have less weapons. There must be statistical evidence to support what you're saying in history. If what you're saying is true that is. And personally, I don't think it is.
You're right...let's make sure that only criminals have guns...
The US, with its loose gun laws, must have very low violent crime rates then, if every criminal is too afraid of using their gun because everyone else is carrying one too.
Actually, most nations believed that the Iraqis still had WMDs, in no small part because Saddam hinted they did, so you logic fails. Of course, I suspect your argument is more politics than logic to begin with.
There is a difference between having WMD's and being a threat. The bush administration asserted that Saddam was a military threat, with a large stockpile of chemical and biological weapons and an active nuclear program. The rest of the world pretty much disagreed, supported by what the inspectors on the ground were reporting, which is why you had the german foreign minister saying "You have to make the case. And to make the case in a democracy you must be convinced yourself. I am not convinced. This is my problem. I cannot go to the public and say, 'excuse me, there are reasons for war' when I don't believe in it."
You could take out all the geostationary satellites by putting debris in the same orbit moving in the opposite direction (i.e. against Earth's rotation).
But, since you wouldn't be able to hitch a ride on the earth's rotation, which is a boost of 1000 mph at the equator. So, your rocket would not only have to overcome this rotation, but actually inverse it, meaning it would have to have enough extra oomph to overcome twice the earth's rotation. I'm not up to snuff on rockets, but somehow I'm thinking your run-of-the-mill retrofitted ICBM isn't going to cut it (which is what they're using for these minisats).
That's 3 sources (pantagraph, AP, and an independent article) to support the same allegation, not 9 sources. Besides, if that's the only thing you can find factually inaccurate about fahrenheit 9/11, I will have to conclude fahrenheit 9/11 is extremely factually accurate. After all, for a 2 hour documentary to have only 5 seconds worth of inaccuracy, which doesn't even allege anything that isn't true, is quite the mark of factual excellence.
I'm not really up on things either, but as I understand it tinyx/kdrive/xserver was a rewrite from scratch, and has a vastly simplified architecture and a modern build environment.
Maybe Xorg will get really gutsy at some point, and give us X11R7.
As I understand it, when they move to the kdrive-based driver framework, they'll bump it up to r7.
I can run multiple X servers running from multiple machines.
X lets you do amazing stuff that is impossible in windows. For example, you can take two different machines running on the same network sitting next to eachother, and use x2x tunneled through ssh to connect together their screens securely into one large desktop. I have a setup with one machine that's always on detecting when the machine right next to it boots up and automatically sharing its desktop with it. The only criticism I can give it is that it's not possible to redirect windows automatically from one X desktop to another.
And how do you know their ATM's are secure?
That's a feature that is. Not a security hole.
Even if it was a security bug, it would be extremely scary (since it would demonstrate the lack of adequate quality control), but given that you need to enter a secret code to activate the voter fraud functionality, I would say it is a reasonable thing to say the machines were designed for defrauding the voter. That is truly horrifying.
Your eyes are great at interpolating the blurred images, so you don't notice the low frame rate.
Why aren't graphics companies working on decent motion blur then?
the display rate of an ordinary TV monitor is 50Hz and the consoles, from what I can quickly find on the web, display at this rate.
TV's are interlaced. That is they only display one new frame every 2hz (by showing half a frame every hz). NTSC, with the 60hz cycle, has a 30fps rate.
It would be surprising if a free iPod didn't have a deciding effect on 95% of the applicants.
My school offers free colocation to students. Had I known that before I enrolled, I wouldn't have doubted so much about whether or not to go there.
Having an invitation system is also a great way to mine for friendship information. Just graph the invitations, and you will more or less have a who-knows-who graph (since most people hand out their invitations to their friends).
If storage becomes the main feature of Gmail, people will eventually open up 500 accounts and built a Gmail array for their file storage.
The delay and throughput of internet-based file storage is just not worth it, and with the gmail interface in between it would be even slower. People are doing these things for the novelty factor, but as soon as they figure out that there are easier ways to get the same things done, they'll move on, and this won't be a problem anymore.
Besides, if you're using gmail for personal storage, you can just email yourself the files you want as attachments. And if you're using it to host stuff, you're going to have to run elaborate scripts, which waste tons of bandwidth uselessly copying data, and since bandwidth is more expensive than disk space, it would be more cost-effective to just get more disk space on your webserver account than to use elaborate gmail-interfacing scripts.
a good consumer display has a ~20ms response time; 1 / 20ms = 50 Hz, not even 60 fps, but good enough for TV's 30 fps.
You know, fps is a funny thing. Gamers can have huge issues with getting only 30fps in a computer game, yet if you put them behind a playstation or xbox, also running at 30fps, they don't have any problems with it anymore. And 30 fps is even high. Movies are only 24 fps, and you never read movie reviews going "man, I wish the framerate had been higher"
If you want to watch TV without killing your eyes, you may want to get a 100Hz TV. This translates into a 10ms LCD.
100 hz tv's show the same image multiple times (or interpolate) so as to reduce flicker by lighting up the tube more often. LCD's are always-on, so this is irrelevant to them. 100 hz tv's are still showing the same 30fps signal.
When you have the ultra rich not paying taxes AND lobbying to pay FEWER taxes, then you have wealth concentrating in the upper levels.
For an actual statistic that supports this, take a look at the GINI index, which represents income inequality. Here's a CIA comparison of GINI numbers a few years ago, with which you should keep in mind that the current GINI index of the US is currently 46.6 and showing no signs of stabilizing.
Do you know what a high US trade deficit means? It means other countries are sending a shit load of valuable stuff to the US and the US is giving them fuck all in return. Sounds like a raw deal for someone, but whoever that someone is, it ain't anyone in the US.
No, it means that the money used to pay for goods and services imported from foreign nations far outweighs the money received in payment for goods and services exported. The higher the trade deficit, the more you're funding foreign economies.
Now, as long as you have capital investment from foreign nations which outstrips the trade deficit, this is not a problem, and currently this is the case, but I would keep an eye on the international investment balance, since the trade deficit is growing a lot faster than the investment balance.
The Bush administration's Gregory Mankiw says it's all good, and exporting jobs is just a new way to do trade.
Hmm, I guess the trade deficit must be at an all time low then.
Those taxes are only a percentage of the money made, 34 percent to be exact, and so the corporate profits would have to be three times the income paid for the off-shored jobs in order for it to equalise the loss to people of nike off-shoring jobs. Do you honestly believe that is the case?
It's called taxes. If you make a six-figure income, in most states the government will take 40-50% of it. If you work hard at avoiding taxes (residing in a favorable state, using loopholes, etc.) you can generally get it down to around 25%, but it's still nothing to be sneezed at.
For a low range in the six figures this is true, but as you progress towards the richer and then the wealthy, the actual percentage of assets paid in taxes drops dramatically. And let's face it, the people making money from off-shoring aren't in the low range of 6 figures. This is because most of the money the federal government gets from the rich and the wealthy comes from capital gains tax (the sale of shares) or dividends tax. The bush tax cuts have dramatically reduced these. Also, you have to actually sell your shares or get dividends for this to kick in. If, like Bill Gates, you keep your fortune in paper, then you are not taxed at all.
Also, lately there has been a wave of corporate off-shoring (also known as inversion), where you reincorporate in a tax shelter (like the tax-free bermuda), so that you pay dramatically less taxes. It's part of the reason why 60 percent of US corporations didn't pay any taxes between 1996 and 2000 (microsoft being one of those 60 percent).
But it is dumb to say that the average Joe in the US gets no benefit if some rich honcho makes a few billion bucks from some folks in India.
Objectively true, some of that money does flow back to regular people. But more is lost by off-shoring than comes back in corporate profits, since only a percentage of the profits gets spent or reinvested inside the US.