The Bible clearly makes the Sabbath the last day of the week, but does not share how that corresponds to our 7 day week. Yet through extra-biblical sources it is possible to determine that the Sabbath at the time of Christ corresponds to our current 'Saturday.' Therefore it is common Jewish and Christian practice to regard Sunday as the first day of the week (as is also evident from the Portuguese names for the week days). However, the fact that, for example, Russian uses the name "second" for Tuesday, indicates that some nations regard Monday as the first day.
In international standard ISO-8601 the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has decreed that Monday shall be the first day of the week.
aaahh ok, you imported the Illustrator file into Indesign... explains the encapsulation-effect why it looked & smelled like it was converted to 'Outlines':)
>searching the text would be everyone's favorite hobby
well, beats having to go thru the painstaking task of having to zoom in rrrreaallly close (to be readable)... and then having it render slowly while moving about... without loosing focus 'on the target' at hand:-)
... the text of the names,from what I can make out, has been converted from 'Text --> Outline(s)'... meaning the contour of the letters is stored (hence the 'Outline'...)... not the binary equivalent of the letters of, eg., my name!.
but, yeah, if I would figure out the equivalent of my name of the binary of the 'Outline(s)' we'd be in business... just give me the font-name, size, special-font-settings... etc..:-)
YEAH I got that... they are in alphabetical order on the page... but I was referring to them being alphabetical in the bookmarks-section!... that's the point I wanted to make (and I think you misunderstood me)
As it renders slowly, and it's kind'a hard to navigate about when you are zoomed in at 300%.... it would be a breeze if you could just roll down in the bookmarks to your name... *click*.. and *presto* you're at your name!
BTW, what's up with them being alphabetical in/on the page as well?... didn't they tell us when we donated that the names would be totally random?!!
... I'm using Adobe's Acrobat Reader... the thing that ought to be able to search thru text...
but the 'text' of the names, isn't really text-text (as I point out here).
so you can't search for your name.
PS. Since then, I've also tried to 'selecet' with the 'text select'-tool... and paste in into my texteditor... to search... but it's a dead-ends too...
... coz' having 11 Mega d/l reaks like a lot of zealotous... and is kinda a biased number to base the popularity of something... for the mater of a fact, anything... on!
So it's a pleasure to finally find ourself at the time, when we can count the downloads as un-biased.
...As now we know for sure, that other people then biased persons know about Firefox!:)
couldn't they have, eg., bookmarked every single name (in alphabetical order) in the PDF?... in the quest of finding once name... a tid bit... easier?
PS/BTW... yes, I've used the 'find' tool in acrobat reader, but i doesn't work
/* and I'm guess, that's coz' the 'text' isn't text-text, but instead is only the outline of the text... which get treated like 'an object of a kind'... which the 'find' tool can't search....
How I know this?... is becouse I zoomed in to 400%, took the first name 'Oliver', and used 'find' on it... and it displayed: "No occurrences of... Oliver... where found in the document." */
Beeing that these.pdf's don't contain any pictures, and.pdf's are compressed (on the contrary to eg. plain.ps's) - the biggest document (15 pages) of the three is 114,8Kbyte...
To 'Link 2', there doesn't seem to be a corresponding English-version - from my vauge german skills, but mostly deductive skills - I'd say the document is some sort of addmendment to this
org. Link 2 - in English
But maybe someone could translate 'Link 2'?... it's only 5 (five) lines.
PS. Linux ppl, use Acrobat's reader... the native PDF readers seem to have trouble with these PDF's...
... I don't know from what rock you are crawling under from...
but, SpamAssassin 3.x, ain't that good. Though it's not in any way bad. Just that it's not that good-good, that it can effectively protect you against 100% of all da' spam that's thrown at you.
... so if you're not seeing false-positives/false-negatives... then it's coz' your one lucky son of a b1j47(|-|:-)
The thing is, the org. Gimp'rs like the UI as it is (including me) - and 'them' & myself wouldn't like it to change.
Allthough, I'm open miden (enough) to understand that others 'frown' on it. And that you're just used to a different set of mind - in contrast to 'us'. (I see nothing wrong with that, quite the opposite - a diverse culture is a good thing *IMHO*)
So, my proposal would be, to have a GIMP with a UI that can 'morph' between the too by checking for some settings in the Pref's.
So we both can have our 'way' and still get along:-)
AMD doesn't have the manufacturing capacity to supply Dell with enough processors for the desktop.
This *kinda* goes hand-in-hand with my earlier rejected story I tried to submit:
Subject: Will AMD be shooting itself in the foot again?
theinquirer.net1st reported that AMD in a bold move " has signed a deal with Chartered Semiconductor - a Singapore foundry - to make 64-bit processors under licence". Then contituned to elaborate on the story, that "AMD move to Chartered is insurance policy", where they take help from Nathan Brookwood (senior chip analyst at Insight64.com) totry to make sense of the move.
.. anyway, to my recollection (I'm not a Mac-guru), but the FS they use, HFS+, stores 'Resource forks' and 'Metadata' strait into/in the FS itself (granted, exactly what sort of type this 'Metadata' is, I don't know...might be other sort/type of 'Metadata' then what we are discussing here...)
how about from inside the file? (think in the lines of id3v2-tag-like something....)
The backdraw of putting the metadata inside the FS / Letting the FS handle it... is: Interperability with other FS's and/or other computers/users.
It's all fine and dandy, if you copy from a HFS+ FS to another, or send an Apple.dmg file to another apple user (this is btw, how apple seems to have chosen to deal with the problem... but it only works for apple-to-apple users, as IIRC there isn't an open standard implementation...). But say you want to send that.txt file of yours to me, you on Mac OS X and I'm on Linux... you read the file of the FS while you leave the Metadata on the FS, and then you send it to me. So all Metadata you've had about that file stored in your FS stays there, while I only get the content of the file and know when I recived it from you.
So unless the Metadata is stored inside the files, like may file types have started to do, and Everyone has adopted the same standard - we are going to hit a snag. I mean 85-90% of the world doesn't do 'Apple's implementation'... they do Zip/tar.gz/Tar.bz2/etc..etc.. and IIRC none of them does store the resource-forks/metadata and what not else Apple does store in the.dmg-file that is stored in their HFS+ FS...
Put in simple terms, MetaData in FS implementation(s) insn't FS agnostic - while a 'Metadata in file' approach is.
In other words, "We don't own any of this. We use it. If you use MS software to access these protocols, here's the (extremely liberal and almost nonexistant) 'license' to do so." Nothing to see here.
Aren't we still juming our horse!?!
I think we'd need to do two things, 1st) review how many of those 'protocols' M$ is partly responsible by somehow beeing one of the sponsors/developers/partners behind them - and review what ever agreement(s) there are and what they entitle M$ to do with the final protocol. 2nd) review how many of the rest of the 1st M$ isn't part of but they have asked the 'owners' to be able to make them part of the license we just read - and review what ever agreement(s) there are and what they entitle M$ to do.
then, let's 'stick it to them' for all the items/things they missed/aren't entitled to... etc.
I haven't done such a review, yet (and won't have time to do one either), but if you or someone else has time - lets do it 1st before we 'bash'. Common courtesy where I live; +plus, it would help beeing taken seriously and not come of like a 'Wacky/Looney [OSS] user'.
Slashdot Mirror
but sure/yes, I do get your point. :-)
Where he reiterates the same FUD. Heck, he only took an old story, modified it to look different, and posted it again.
Smells fishy to me, if you ask me.
The Bible clearly makes the Sabbath the last day of the week, but does not share how that corresponds to our 7 day week. Yet through extra-biblical sources it is possible to determine that the Sabbath at the time of Christ corresponds to our current 'Saturday.' Therefore it is common Jewish and Christian practice to regard Sunday as the first day of the week (as is also evident from the Portuguese names for the week days). However, the fact that, for example, Russian uses the name "second" for Tuesday, indicates that some nations regard Monday as the first day.
In international standard ISO-8601 the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has decreed that Monday shall be the first day of the week.
So, actually, it depends rather on you (your beliefs) and how the people from your country choose to go ... BTW, here's a helpfull link to discover who choose what :)
- >searching the text would be everyone's favorite hobby
well, beats having to go thru the painstaking task of having to zoom in rrrreaallly close (to be readable)him, him!!!
but, yeah, if I would figure out the equivalent of my name of the binary of the 'Outline(s)' we'd be in business ... just give me the font-name, size, special-font-settings ... etc .. :-)
him, Him!!!
him, Him!!!
As it renders slowly, and it's kind'a hard to navigate about when you are zoomed in at 300% .... it would be a breeze if you could just roll down in the bookmarks to your name ... *click* .. and *presto* you're at your name!
BTW, what's up with them being alphabetical in/on the page as well?
but the 'text' of the names, isn't really text-text (as I point out here).
so you can't search for your name.
PS. Since then, I've also tried to 'selecet' with the 'text select'-tool
So it's a pleasure to finally find ourself at the time, when we can count the downloads as un-biased.
PS/BTW
/* and I'm guess, that's coz' the 'text' isn't text-text, but instead is only the outline of the text ... which get treated like 'an object of a kind' ... which the 'find' tool can't search ....
How I know this? ... is becouse I zoomed in to 400%, took the first name 'Oliver', and used 'find' on it ... and it displayed: "No occurrences of ... Oliver ... where found in the document." */
that makes (more) sense, now :)
Here's the Link to my post (for more info).
Link 1 - in English
To 'Link 2', there doesn't seem to be a corresponding English-version - from my vauge german skills, but mostly deductive skills - I'd say the document is some sort of addmendment to this org. Link 2 - in English
But maybe someone could translate 'Link 2'? ... it's only 5 (five) lines.
PS. Linux ppl, use Acrobat's reader ... the native PDF readers seem to have trouble with these PDF's...
but, SpamAssassin 3.x, ain't that good. Though it's not in any way bad. Just that it's not that good-good, that it can effectively protect you against 100% of all da' spam that's thrown at you.
PS. I'm using SpamAssassin 3.0
sh == bash in other words....
*what a goofball mistake :)*
The thing is, the org. Gimp'rs like the UI as it is (including me) - and 'them' & myself wouldn't like it to change.
Allthough, I'm open miden (enough) to understand that others 'frown' on it. And that you're just used to a different set of mind - in contrast to 'us'. (I see nothing wrong with that, quite the opposite - a diverse culture is a good thing *IMHO*)
So, my proposal would be, to have a GIMP with a UI that can 'morph' between the too by checking for some settings in the Pref's.
So we both can have our 'way' and still get along :-)
- AMD doesn't have the manufacturing capacity to supply Dell with enough processors for the desktop.
This *kinda* goes hand-in-hand with my earlier rejected story I tried to submit:theinquirer.net 1st reported that AMD in a bold move " has signed a deal with Chartered Semiconductor - a Singapore foundry - to make 64-bit processors under licence". Then contituned to elaborate on the story, that " AMD move to Chartered is insurance policy ", where they take help from Nathan Brookwood (senior chip analyst at Insight64.com) totry to make sense of the move.
aahha, like 'fam (file alteration monitor)' we have in *nix :-)
The backdraw of putting the metadata inside the FS / Letting the FS handle it ... is: Interperability with other FS's and/or other computers/users.
It's all fine and dandy, if you copy from a HFS+ FS to another, or send an Apple .dmg file to another apple user (this is btw, how apple seems to have chosen to deal with the problem... but it only works for apple-to-apple users, as IIRC there isn't an open standard implementation...). But say you want to send that .txt file of yours to me, you on Mac OS X and I'm on Linux ... you read the file of the FS while you leave the Metadata on the FS, and then you send it to me. So all Metadata you've had about that file stored in your FS stays there, while I only get the content of the file and know when I recived it from you.
So unless the Metadata is stored inside the files, like may file types have started to do, and Everyone has adopted the same standard - we are going to hit a snag. I mean 85-90% of the world doesn't do 'Apple's implementation' ... they do Zip/tar.gz/Tar.bz2/etc..etc.. and IIRC none of them does store the resource-forks/metadata and what not else Apple does store in the .dmg-file that is stored in their HFS+ FS...
Put in simple terms, MetaData in FS implementation(s) insn't FS agnostic - while a 'Metadata in file' approach is.
- Good, you've RTFA. Now go all the way and RTFL (read the f*ing license). [...]
exactly, as I've also quote the same piece of the license,[...]
- In other words, "We don't own any of this. We use it. If you use MS software to access these protocols, here's the (extremely liberal and almost nonexistant) 'license' to do so." Nothing to see here.
Aren't we still juming our horse!?!I think we'd need to do two things, 1st) review how many of those 'protocols' M$ is partly responsible by somehow beeing one of the sponsors/developers/partners behind them - and review what ever agreement(s) there are and what they entitle M$ to do with the final protocol. 2nd) review how many of the rest of the 1st M$ isn't part of but they have asked the 'owners' to be able to make them part of the license we just read - and review what ever agreement(s) there are and what they entitle M$ to do.
then, let's 'stick it to them' for all the items/things they missed/aren't entitled to... etc.
I haven't done such a review, yet (and won't have time to do one either), but if you or someone else has time - lets do it 1st before we 'bash'. Common courtesy where I live; +plus, it would help beeing taken seriously and not come of like a 'Wacky/Looney [OSS] user'.