If ISPs can read your emails, that stops them from being a common carrier anymore doesn't it? Which then means that they could be held legaly liable for any damages caused by illegal activity via email couldn't they?
How does Spotlight even begin to compare with Launchbar? I can call launchbar from anywhere, customize it to specific sortcuts, have the bar appear anywhere I want it, and I don't have to go to the menubar to get it.
Spotlight is exactly what they say it is, a live system search.
There are two main differences that I see between Konfabulator and Dashboard, and they're important to me.
1) Konfabulator costs money. It's a nice app, it really is. I used it for a while, but it's not to me, worth the $25 they want for it.
2) Konfabulator doesn't hide itself until I need it. It's always there, sitting on the desktop or flaoting above everything else. Dashboard appears only when I want it to and then goes away.
There is no debatability, he is commander in chief, the moment the words "we are under attack" reached him he should have gotten up and commanded. He didn't. That should be all you need to know.
And what would you have had him do in those 5 minutes? Assuming that he didn't need to stay there while the secret service cleared an exit? Would you have liked him to get on the phone and call Washington and tell them.... what? To figure out what the hell is going on? To wake up all the generals? To figure out if more are comming? What would have happened differently had the man jumped up out of his seat screamed out "HOLY SHIT KIDS, WE'RE GOING TO FUCKING DIE!" and then run out of the room? Beleive it or not, the government can operate mostly without a president. Furthermore, there was nothing for him to command, because everything he could have ordered was already being done.
What is debatable is whether or not he should have gone into the classroom in the first place after having been informed of the first attack and having seen the memos al qaeda was planning on attacking the world trade center, and was planning on hijacking airplanes.
1) The memo never said they were planning on attacking the WTC.
2) In the past, Hijackings have been used as hostage situations for political purposes. Something like this was a very remote possibility.
3) After the 1st plane hit, no body knew what had happened, and most people thought it was an accident. Planes have hit the WTC before, and it's not a terrorist attack. No one knew what to think of it until the second one hit.
Not being able to owe a firearm is a good thing, less guns means less people shot. Check the statistics but I'm pretty sure the UK has a much lower amount of Gun crime(ie shotting) than the good old USA.
Do a google for "The Failed Experiment".
But yeah the parent is wrong about rockets. I used to be really into estes rockets and definatly the US was(don't know about these new regulations) a lot easier going that the UK
[Copperud:] (3) No such condition is expressed or implied. The right to keep and bear arms is not said by the amendment to depend on the existence of a militia. No condition is stated or implied as to the relation of the right to keep and bear arms and to the necessity of a well-regulated militia as requisite to the security of a free state. The right to keep and bear arms is deemed unconditional by the entire sentence.
[Copperud:] To the best of my knowledge, there has been no change in the meaning of words or in usage that would affect the meaning of the amendment. If it were written today, it might be put: "Since a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged."
Copperud:] The words "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state," contrary to the interpretation cited in your letter of July 26, 1991, constitute a present participle, rather than a clause. It is used as an adjective, modifying "militia," which is followed by the main clause of the sentence (subject "the right," verb "shall"). The right to keep and bear arms is asserted as essential for maintaining a militia.
Also note please, that the right is asserted as "the right of the people to bear arms". Had the founding fathers (all very bright men, who chose the wording of the constitution very deleiberately) have wanted the right to be restricted to the millitia, then the right would have been declared as "the right of the millitia to bear arms"
If the "right of the people to bear arms" is reserved to the millitia, does that mean that the "right of the people to assemble" is reserved to the millitia? Or the "right of the people to be secure in their persons" is reserved to the militia? Or the "rights retained by the people" is relevant only to the millitia?
Is this the same Europe who's countries feel the need to ban students from wearing religious symbols in school, ban it's citizens from owning firearms and charge a tax simply for owning a TV?
No thanks, I'll stick around here.
No matter where you go, you won't be able to do everything, it's just a matter of which rights you want to give up.
I believe he was refering to the equal oportunity laws, where the government stepped in and told PRIVATE COMPANIES, who they can and can't hire and how much they can and can't hire them for. Truth be told, anti-discrimination laws in regards to private businesses are unconstitutional, but the courts stratched the definition of the interstate commerce clause to regulate that.
Actualy, I can see a great use for just that example alone. Your average business man at any given time probably has at least 1 cell phone, one watch, and one data device on him. Each of those devices has a speaker, and each of them uses it for different purposes. Now imagine, instead of his phone going off or his alarm going off and disturbing those around him, it sends it's tiny signal along his skin to to a small speaker by his ear, which then produces the sound, loud enough for him to hear but soft enough to not disturb others. Instant hands free setup and less annoying for the individual than a headset and wires.
You do realize that two companies can apply for and recieve patents for the same basic idea, provided that the two patets are sufficiently different. Patents don't just protect ideas, they protect implimentations, hence the reason patents are public. Anyone can use your idea, they just have to improve it.
As an example, AM radio and FM radio are two different implimentations of the same basic idea. They're more likely than not, sufficiently different to warrant seperate patents.
How insightful. Blame the customer for being poorly informed.
Yes, I will. If people are going to buy a product they need to be well informed about that product, including any planned or upcoming releases. Be intelligent and take responsibility for your decisions. It's not like it was a secret that new stuff was due.
Your statement would make sense if this was the first time Apple did this sort of thing.
Actualy, the more it happens, the more it makes sense that you should be paying attention to product cycles.
I used to have to monitor the spy sites who would watch the plastic production facilities for discontinuing work on current products to know there was a new one on the way from Apple.
Or, you could realize that Apple has a ~6 month product release cycle and not buy new machines without checking up on when the next one's are due.
Another example is their Operating System releases. No direct upgrade path from Jaguar to Panther, and the same looks to be true from Panther to Tiger.
WTF?
Oh sure, every year or two let's sink another $120+ USD into a new OS that isn't more then a glorified SP with a few goodies thrown in to make me giggle.
I often wonder at how much the shit people bitch about dealing with on the phone with tech support is their own problem. In roughly 10 years that I've owned or worked with macs, I've called Apple tech support plenty of times, for everything ranging from software help to a failed logic board. And in all that time, I've talked to one rep who wasn't helpful, friendly and useful.
Now, Apple's tech support has changed since it started this is true. It used to be you could call them at any time, and even if you weren't in waranty, they would help you out provided it didn't need a hardware replacement. But even now, I've only ever had one problem. And that wasn't even a huge problem, it was just less helpful than I would have liked, and it was solved by calling back and speaking to someone else.
I've never once had any major problems, and the one thing that was consistant through it all was I treated their tech people as decent normal human beings who deserved a measure of respect.
If you go into it with respect, and the expectation that something will be done, something always gets done. If you go into it thinking it's going to be a war, no one is going to walk away happy.
What if a doctor were to go watch a movie and one of his patients started dying and he needed to be contacted?
They get another doctor. What if the doctor is stuck in traffic and can't get where he needs to be? What if he gets hit by a bus crossing the street. What if the doctor suffers amnesia? What if? What if? What if?
There are hundreds of senarios that are conceivable where the doctor on call would not be reachable or able to make it in time, and if that's the case what do you think the hospitals do? Sit around pissing their pants?
If the doctor is really worried, he asks to speak to the manager before he goes in, gives the guy his phone and says if this rings, get me immediately because it's a medical emergency.
[A]cting pursuant to the Constitution and [the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002] is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
include ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-kld) tr.v. included, including, includes
1) To take in as a part, element, or member. 2) To contain as a secondary or subordinate element. 3) To consider with or place into a group, class, or total: thanked the host for including us.
You think there wouldn't be evidence of abuse here? Every protest is full of at least half a dozen wannabe journalists with cameras just waiting to catch police beating the shit out of a granny. And if you think images of people writhing in pain aren't going to be damning evidence, you're lying to yourself.
Bullshit. That's the location of the audio files, not of the database.
It took me all of 10 seconds to make an alias (File-> Make Alias) change the name from iTunes Music Library Alias to iTunes Music Library and copy the file to all my users home directories. And then, not only did I move my Library file out of my user folder, I moved it off my harddisk and on to a USB keychain. And it worked. How amazing is that?
Bullshit, that's copying all the files already in the library to a central location. I want to copy files to that location and iTunes to notice them (=adding them to the library DB).
So you want iTunes to take files that it isn't aware of, copy them to a different directory and then become aware of the files? Doesn't that sound slightly contrdictory to you? Or do you mean you want it to copy files to the library folder as you add them? IN which case I suggest you check the options again.
Slashdot Mirror
If ISPs can read your emails, that stops them from being a common carrier anymore doesn't it? Which then means that they could be held legaly liable for any damages caused by illegal activity via email couldn't they?
How does Spotlight even begin to compare with Launchbar? I can call launchbar from anywhere, customize it to specific sortcuts, have the bar appear anywhere I want it, and I don't have to go to the menubar to get it.
Spotlight is exactly what they say it is, a live system search.
There are two main differences that I see between Konfabulator and Dashboard, and they're important to me.
1) Konfabulator costs money. It's a nice app, it really is. I used it for a while, but it's not to me, worth the $25 they want for it.
2) Konfabulator doesn't hide itself until I need it. It's always there, sitting on the desktop or flaoting above everything else. Dashboard appears only when I want it to and then goes away.
Find for me the statement telling the president that they planned to use hijacked planes for use as missiles.
No, it didn't. Please actualy read the report.
We really don't. Perhaps you should read the constitution, it's written to give the president a very minimal role.
There is no debatability, he is commander in chief, the moment the words "we are under attack" reached him he should have gotten up and commanded. He didn't. That should be all you need to know.
And what would you have had him do in those 5 minutes? Assuming that he didn't need to stay there while the secret service cleared an exit? Would you have liked him to get on the phone and call Washington and tell them.... what? To figure out what the hell is going on? To wake up all the generals? To figure out if more are comming? What would have happened differently had the man jumped up out of his seat screamed out "HOLY SHIT KIDS, WE'RE GOING TO FUCKING DIE!" and then run out of the room? Beleive it or not, the government can operate mostly without a president. Furthermore, there was nothing for him to command, because everything he could have ordered was already being done.
What is debatable is whether or not he should have gone into the classroom in the first place after having been informed of the first attack and having seen the memos al qaeda was planning on attacking the world trade center, and was planning on hijacking airplanes.
1) The memo never said they were planning on attacking the WTC.
2) In the past, Hijackings have been used as hostage situations for political purposes. Something like this was a very remote possibility.
3) After the 1st plane hit, no body knew what had happened, and most people thought it was an accident. Planes have hit the WTC before, and it's not a terrorist attack. No one knew what to think of it until the second one hit.
Not being able to owe a firearm is a good thing, less guns means less people shot. Check the statistics but I'm pretty sure the UK has a much lower amount of Gun crime(ie shotting) than the good old USA.
Do a google for "The Failed Experiment".
But yeah the parent is wrong about rockets. I used to be really into estes rockets and definatly the US was(don't know about these new regulations) a lot easier going that the UK
The new regulations don't affect estes.
LTFEL -- that's Learn the Fscking English Language
Here's a link to help you out
Incase you don't click the link:
[Copperud:] (3) No such condition is expressed or implied. The right to keep and bear arms is not said by the amendment to depend on the existence of a militia. No condition is stated or implied as to the relation of the right to keep and bear arms and to the necessity of a well-regulated militia as requisite to the security of a free state. The right to keep and bear arms is deemed unconditional by the entire sentence.
[Copperud:] To the best of my knowledge, there has been no change in the meaning of words or in usage that would affect the meaning of the amendment. If it were written today, it might be put: "Since a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged."
Copperud:] The words "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state," contrary to the interpretation cited in your letter of July 26, 1991, constitute a present participle, rather than a clause. It is used as an adjective, modifying "militia," which is followed by the main clause of the sentence (subject "the right," verb "shall"). The right to keep and bear arms is asserted as essential for maintaining a militia.
Also note please, that the right is asserted as "the right of the people to bear arms". Had the founding fathers (all very bright men, who chose the wording of the constitution very deleiberately) have wanted the right to be restricted to the millitia, then the right would have been declared as "the right of the millitia to bear arms"
So... if the right to bear arms should not apply to modern day guns, should the right to free speech not apply to the internet?
If the "right of the people to bear arms" is reserved to the millitia, does that mean that the "right of the people to assemble" is reserved to the millitia? Or the "right of the people to be secure in their persons" is reserved to the militia? Or the "rights retained by the people" is relevant only to the millitia?
Is this the same Europe who's countries feel the need to ban students from wearing religious symbols in school, ban it's citizens from owning firearms and charge a tax simply for owning a TV?
No thanks, I'll stick around here.
No matter where you go, you won't be able to do everything, it's just a matter of which rights you want to give up.
I believe he was refering to the equal oportunity laws, where the government stepped in and told PRIVATE COMPANIES, who they can and can't hire and how much they can and can't hire them for. Truth be told, anti-discrimination laws in regards to private businesses are unconstitutional, but the courts stratched the definition of the interstate commerce clause to regulate that.
Actualy, I can see a great use for just that example alone. Your average business man at any given time probably has at least 1 cell phone, one watch, and one data device on him. Each of those devices has a speaker, and each of them uses it for different purposes. Now imagine, instead of his phone going off or his alarm going off and disturbing those around him, it sends it's tiny signal along his skin to to a small speaker by his ear, which then produces the sound, loud enough for him to hear but soft enough to not disturb others. Instant hands free setup and less annoying for the individual than a headset and wires.
You do realize that two companies can apply for and recieve patents for the same basic idea, provided that the two patets are sufficiently different. Patents don't just protect ideas, they protect implimentations, hence the reason patents are public. Anyone can use your idea, they just have to improve it.
As an example, AM radio and FM radio are two different implimentations of the same basic idea. They're more likely than not, sufficiently different to warrant seperate patents.
How insightful. Blame the customer for being poorly informed.
Yes, I will. If people are going to buy a product they need to be well informed about that product, including any planned or upcoming releases. Be intelligent and take responsibility for your decisions. It's not like it was a secret that new stuff was due.
Your statement would make sense if this was the first time Apple did this sort of thing.
Actualy, the more it happens, the more it makes sense that you should be paying attention to product cycles.
I used to have to monitor the spy sites who would watch the plastic production facilities for discontinuing work on current products to know there was a new one on the way from Apple.
Or, you could realize that Apple has a ~6 month product release cycle and not buy new machines without checking up on when the next one's are due.
Another example is their Operating System releases. No direct upgrade path from Jaguar to Panther, and the same looks to be true from Panther to Tiger.
WTF?
Oh sure, every year or two let's sink another $120+ USD into a new OS that isn't more then a glorified SP with a few goodies thrown in to make me giggle.
I see you've subscribed to redhat.
I often wonder at how much the shit people bitch about dealing with on the phone with tech support is their own problem. In roughly 10 years that I've owned or worked with macs, I've called Apple tech support plenty of times, for everything ranging from software help to a failed logic board. And in all that time, I've talked to one rep who wasn't helpful, friendly and useful.
Now, Apple's tech support has changed since it started this is true. It used to be you could call them at any time, and even if you weren't in waranty, they would help you out provided it didn't need a hardware replacement. But even now, I've only ever had one problem. And that wasn't even a huge problem, it was just less helpful than I would have liked, and it was solved by calling back and speaking to someone else.
I've never once had any major problems, and the one thing that was consistant through it all was I treated their tech people as decent normal human beings who deserved a measure of respect.
If you go into it with respect, and the expectation that something will be done, something always gets done. If you go into it thinking it's going to be a war, no one is going to walk away happy.
What if a doctor were to go watch a movie and one of his patients started dying and he needed to be contacted?
They get another doctor. What if the doctor is stuck in traffic and can't get where he needs to be? What if he gets hit by a bus crossing the street. What if the doctor suffers amnesia? What if? What if? What if?
There are hundreds of senarios that are conceivable where the doctor on call would not be reachable or able to make it in time, and if that's the case what do you think the hospitals do? Sit around pissing their pants?
If the doctor is really worried, he asks to speak to the manager before he goes in, gives the guy his phone and says if this rings, get me immediately because it's a medical emergency.
Well of course it isn't funny dipshit, you didn't spell it right.
Parlez-vous anglais? Parce-que votre anglais et votre Français sont très terrible.
To counter. 9/11 is included in his declaration of a war on terrorism. IOW, Terrorism as a whole != 9/11.
[A]cting pursuant to the Constitution and [the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002] is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
include ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-kld)
tr.v. included, including, includes
1) To take in as a part, element, or member.
2) To contain as a secondary or subordinate element.
3) To consider with or place into a group, class, or total: thanked the host for including us.
You think there wouldn't be evidence of abuse here? Every protest is full of at least half a dozen wannabe journalists with cameras just waiting to catch police beating the shit out of a granny. And if you think images of people writhing in pain aren't going to be damning evidence, you're lying to yourself.
The rest of us will wait, as it consumes less time and energy that could be better spent elsewhere.
Bullshit. That's the location of the audio files, not of the database.
It took me all of 10 seconds to make an alias (File-> Make Alias) change the name from iTunes Music Library Alias to iTunes Music Library and copy the file to all my users home directories. And then, not only did I move my Library file out of my user folder, I moved it off my harddisk and on to a USB keychain. And it worked. How amazing is that?
Bullshit, that's copying all the files already in the library to a central location. I want to copy files to that location and iTunes to notice them (=adding them to the library DB).
So you want iTunes to take files that it isn't aware of, copy them to a different directory and then become aware of the files? Doesn't that sound slightly contrdictory to you? Or do you mean you want it to copy files to the library folder as you add them? IN which case I suggest you check the options again.