Regardless of the technicalities of what the law regarded them as, they were people capable of fighting back, often by breaking the law.
Anytime the law imposes some limitation that a large portion of the population does not like, you will see civil dissobediance.
Here is another example from the auto-industry. You can't drive without insurance, but insurance costs a TON in my city. Any excuse to make it cost more, the insurance companies use gladly. So a lot of the poorer folk can't afford it.
So what do they do? Drive without insurance. Now it's a real problem, we have a lot of people driving without insurance.
It's really just the CRT. I can't stand CRTs anymore. I don't really do much graphic design so that's not too much of an issue for me. I find LCDs to be much much easier on my eyes, and also much sharper (pixels really looks square). Not to mention subpixel antialiasing for fonts is AWSOME. I spend my entire day looking at text, so for me an LCD is top priority.
Oh, not to mention an LCD takes up much less space on my desk and produces far less heat. Both properties are also very very important to me.
But as you said, to each his own. Perhaps a CRT suits your needs better if you are a hardcore designer. CRTs do have better colour contrast than LCDs, but the average person would not be able to notice I doubt.:)
It has a CRT. I will never ever buy another CRT again. LCD is just that much better. Too bad this is not just a box, I really can't stand computers with attached monitors (laptops excepted of course).
What are you on about with the whole "proprietary user id and password" nonsense. We usually call these things just "username" and "password". Proprietary usually refers to some sort of intellectual property of some value, like source code or wiring diagrams or similar.
It's not a synonym for "something I don't like". Weirdo.
Yes, but there is also a concept of civil disobediance. If I recall, civil disobedience also had a large role in freeing the slaves and overcoming unjust laws.
It wasn't really a case of the majority supporting slavery, it was a case of those with money supporting slavery. I assure you none of hte slaves supported it, and they were people too who represented a signficant portion.
Bottom line is that if people don't like a law they will not obey it. Take music downloading for a great example. Corporations are employing ever more tyrrant like tactics to stop it, and all that's happening is their profits are plummeting due to people starting to boycott their products.
And, for those who are going to point out that these are unreasonable restrictions on freedoms, there's no such thing as a "right" to drive. It's a privilege.
True, but you forget one thing, the majority opinion is supposed to run the country. That is democracy. So if a small minority chooses manages to enact laws that the majority does not agree with (speed limiters), then the majority will simply break those laws (some current speeding laws are a great example).
The more the government takes hostile action to prevent it, the more the country becomes ruled by tyranny rather than democracy.
Put a speed limiter on my car and I'll remove it, laws be damned. Some things increase saftey and some increase the police department income. There are some places were lower limits are justified, shool and residential zones are a great example. There are other places, such as some highways, where the limits are far too low and the majority of traffic breaks them as a result.
I'd like to see cops actually CATCHING reckless drivers and racers rather than set up pointless money grabbing speed traps where they pull over people who are doing the same speed as the rest of traffic.
Uh oh. Now you've done it. Expect a ton of GPL nazi's to go on posting about how anything freer than GPL is anarchy and how it's not "free" but "Free" and the four freedoms blah blah blah.
So I would like Mr. Stallman to please stop using the word free interchangebly with GPL'ed software, so as not to confuse readers.
Stallman chose to use the word free precicly *to* confuse people. If you compare the language used on GNU.org to that of cult texts you can find a ton of similarities. It's all very highly manipulative. And it's also very successfull. Most critisism of GNU/Stallman's use of manipulative language is immediatly shunned and attacked as if it came from the devil.
The problem with GNU is that they are not content to lead by example. Instead of simply demonstrating how their development model/philosphy is superior to other methods, they rely on rhetoric and preaching. GNU followers have a *need* to convert you to the GNU way as I'm sure you've noticed.
Still, I commend you for trying to set things right. I tried once, but the eyes of the devoted are blind to any reason.
Half the time the PC versions of the XBOX games are crippled. Notably, many many XBOX games have co-op multiplayer abilities. None of the PC versions have this ability.:(
Halo PC has no co-op. Lord of the Ring PC has no co-op. Doom3 PC will not have co-op, but XBOX version will (makes me sad).
Unless you were there, anything you "know" about the war means jack.
The same can easily be said about you of course.
Any major TV news outlet is going to blow something like that out of proportion. It creates a sensation. I wouldn't trust them for the time of day, much less accurate news about the war - especially foreign news agencies. We all know how fashionable it is to hate the dumb, fat Americans.
Right. Foreign news sources from places like Canada, the UK, and Europe all conspire to present false information against you poor Americans. Whatever.
Even CNN reported on these things, so did NPR, another us news outlet. I bet if you tried hard, you could even find some hint of this stuff on the Propaganda station, Fox (which I assume you watch regularly given your attitude).
So you want to disbelieve *everything* that all the reporters from all over the world, even your American reporters (one at least who WAS there), are saying just because some propaganda station does not cover it? Or just because Bush changes the topic? You are so blind.
But I don't have time to play 10 hours a week. I maybe can play 5 or 6 on a good week, less on a bad week. Maybe you have to play that much to enjoy them?
I like the concept, and would like to try, but I just can't justify paying that much monthly just to play a game. I get much more value for money out of non-monthly fee based games, and with those I don't feel that I am wasting money by not playing. I play when I want. Not every day, and certainly not 10 hours a week.
I guess they just weren't designed for people like me. Too bad, the concept looks cool.
Ho hum. What a weeny do gooder you are. I speed when I want, regardless of some stupid law. If it's safe, then I'll do it.
Take for instance highway driving. On the highway I drive regularly people *always* speed. And it's not just a few, no, the majority of people go 20 km/h over the limit (120 km/h), a smaller group go 130-140 km/h regularly (third lane, or even second lane depending on the day), and very very very few people go the limit, 100 km/h.
So you have all these weeny do gooders who had the limit lowered from 135 or so to 100 to "improve safety", when in actual fact the speed on the road as not changed much! All that has changed is that cops can now harass you easier. Not all traffic laws are correct.
City street limits are usually ok, but even those can be unreasonable in many cases. For instance, there is one road near by that is *four* lanes wide. What is the speed limit on this road? 40 km/h, for a LONG LONG distance as well. Completly unreasonable for a four lane road. The result? No one travels it. It is pretty much a useless road except for the area residents, who certainly don't need 4 lanes.
Oddly enough, the same philosophy fits computer games (MMPORGS) perfectly as well.
I find MMORPGS to be quite different due to the monthly fee. They are more like: Pay for the original game box, like any other game, then each month continue paying and paying and paying.
At around $20 CAD a month, that is A LOT. My phone bill is only $25 a month and DSL internet $30. If they priced them at around maybe $5 CAD a month ($3-4 US), then I could maybe justify buying one.
are any of the teams contemplating using a helium balloon as the "first stage" of a launch? Or is this allowed? Starting at 50-60 thou feet or above before it lights might be a nice edge....
Yup, the Da Vinci Project is. They are also supposedly good to go within a year. But no launch date has been set yet. And since they launch from Canada, I guess they don't need any license from the USA?
Yeah, I never had any trouble with CUPS either, but ESR did and so did a computer science grad I know who uses Linux for a living. So clearly there are some problems somewhere, which is why I used this example.
Well, this was a perfectly fine post, and not at all inflammatory like your last post. My point was that most of that last post was unnessary and insulting to the original poster and people who have similar opinions.
People take for granted that "Windows is easy" and "Linux is hard" when in reality, it is probably more about familiarity. Computers, in general can make life easy and they can be hard to learn. That was my point. Nothing more.
This is true. But there are still areas where Linux is much much more difficult than Windows regardless of familiarity. This is not something that needs to be defended, but rather recognized and fixed. Many of these areas are in fact actively being worked on by various projects, so things will only improve. Linux has come a long way, and no one is denying that, but it's still not there yet in some areas.
Why would people attack the hospitals filled with their own citizens?
Oh, I don't know. Why don't you ask the looters who looted the hospitals? Citizens were *begging* US troops to stop them, and they did nothing. This is not some fantasy, this happened. It was all over the news, did you miss it? Too busy cheering for your conquering army maybe?
So not only is there absoultly no proof the CIA funded either the sect called "arab afghans" or Bin Laden. But bin laden himself denies it even though it helps in the PR battle many people like yourself try to use.
Do you really think that Bin Laden would admit to working with the US? He's currently trying to destroy the US and is training thousands to utterly hate them. How would it look for him to be sitting there going "The USA is the great evil of the world...." when one of his students asks "But then why oh glorious rightous leader, did you work with them and accept money, weapons, and training?"
Here, some links. People like me use this argument because it's true. Stop watching your American propaganda station enough to read some independent publications.
Wow. What an ego you have. It constantly amazes me how older folks can sometime be so completly out of it with respect to reality.
So anyone who doesn't agree with you is now a "Troll"?
Can't people see the forest for the religeous trees?!
Where oh where did religion come into play here? If anything, it's you who are using cult tactics to cloud the issue here. You start out your argument by first branding your apponent as a heretic ("Troll"). Absolutly typical.
Then your proceed to accuse the original poster of somehow being a religous zealot, which is really a comment out from nowhere. The function? To furthur distract people from the fanatisim in your own post. If you are accusing someone else of fanatism, certainly you yourself are not a fanatic.
You are just adding more religeon to the noise.
Again, religon has nothing to do with anything here. You are reinforcing your branding. So far, we have your branding and your *claim* that you are forever fixing windows problems.
I've been using Unix for twenty years. Last environment used (before switching to Linux) was Solaris.
Wow. So this is supposed to give your argument some sort of authority? I've been using Unix and Windows about equally. I've used Irix, Solaris, AIX, Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, DOS/Win3.11, Win95, Win98, WinNT, Win2000, and WinXP. And yes, I've actually used all these systems for a significant period of time, more than just dabbling with 'ls' or 'dir'. I can assert my authority just as easily.
Let me tell you, young whipper snapper
More disparaging of the original poster. Again, as with the troll comment, this is intended to make the original poster look unathoritive and stupid. At the same time, this furthur attempts to assert your superiority. Can you not make a reasonable argument without all the manipulation?
when I had my first try at Windows (1998). I about had a nervous breakdown.
Fear mongering, "WOW, the experienced Unix user almost had a nervous breakdown! That must be terrible!". Of course, this comment really doesn't say anything about the usability of Windows as much as is does about your bias against windows. Evidence of this bias? The uncalled for troll comment for one.
I still don't like Windows XP verry well. It just doesn't feel right. Great objectivity there. This comment has no value other than to assert your bias.
Everything is so fucking hard to get done in that stupid practically-windows-only environment, with a command prompt that won't auto-complete! Why is it 2004 and DOS won't auto-complete?! Morons.
This shows a lot of fanatism and fear mongering. I can show you things that are "so f**king hard", but using a GUI computing environment is not one of them. Windows only environment? Yes. And when you use Linux, you are in a Linux only environment. This is the definition of an environment.
DOS does autocomplete btw, but that's not really important. What *is* important is that on Windows 2000/XP you should only need to go to the command line for two things. One, to run ipconfig, and two, boot into the recovery console in case something disasterous happens. Everything else can easily be done through the GUI. Really, in all my time using XP on any one of my friends and families machines, these are the only reasons I ever needed to bring up a command window.
You're missing the very fact that in many, many cases, when "things don't always work right" you can't even get them back to working whatsoever
Really? Funny that I've never encounted such a problem, nor have any of my friends or family. In fact, I've not even *heard* of such a problem with windows from any person I've met. I only hear of these terrible problems from manipulative slashdot comments by people who admit to not even using windows.
as you watch Windows eat itself alive and laugh at you while it makes you play "pin the tail on the problem". It blin
I couldn't have put it better myself. Literally, very well spoken.
I would like to add a comment though. During the looting of Baghdad, the US did not protect hospitals and museums. They did not protect anything in fact, except for one thing, the oil offices. Yes yes, oil can help rebuild Iraq, but it's important to have people be alive to rebuild it for. Surely they could have also spared troops to protect at least one hospital?
It is impossible. A weak country can do this. A strong country can not. Sooner or later someone will ask for help against someone else. A weak country can say: "We can't". A strong one will have to take sides...
It has more to do with when to provide help rather than helping or not. In this case, I supported not helping. The supposed reasons for going to Iraq were all bull. This is why the UN would not agree to it. There were no WMD, and Iraq was not related to the 9/11 terrorists. In fact, I think Saddam and Bin Laden hated one another.
You can't be nice to Palestinians and Israelis at once, for example -- the want each other dead. Even a weaker country like Canada can't do so honestly...
Sure, you can tell them both to stop. That's very honest. Certainly blatently supporting (and giving weapons) to the main agressor is not *helping* the situation any.
Your trolling flamebait conveniently forgets, that "9/11" happened only 9 months into Bush's presidency -- after 8 years under Clinton...
I never claimed 9/11 happend because of Bush. But given recent evidence it does look like Bush is at some fault for not stopping it. Many previous presidents, while much better than Bush, still supported some really immoral and nasty foreign policy. The US has a wonderful habit of appointing or helping get appointed brutal dictators in other countries. Seriously, go read up on the darker sides of US foreign policy sometime.
According to bin Laden's ravings, "9/11" was our punishment for deploying in the holy land of Saudi Arabia, which we did to protect Kuwait -- a Muslim nation, BTW. Was that war also "a lunacy" to you?
If you recall, the UN was involved in that. There was, however, an unrelated war in Afganistan against the Soviets. In this war, the CIA trained Bin Laden so he could fight against the Soviets. They no doubt funneled him money and weapons as well.
You can not justify this hatred and you can not negotiate with such people.
Some of this hatred will be there, but the US just throws fuel on to the fire. Negotiate with such people? Why does the US have such a wonderful history of working with such people before they suddenely become *evil*? The US also worked with Saddam you know. Those chemical weapons? Where do you think Saddam got them from? It was only under UN pressure that the US finally decided to turn on Saddam.
So stop your pitiful preaching -- there are better ways to attack Bush.
I'm not just attacking bush, he does a pretty good job of getting people to dislike him on his own. I'm attacking US foreign policy in general.
Our politicians think that if the Americans would just be nice to everyone all the time, everything would be just fine.
Maybe because this is mostly true. Sure, it may not be 100% fine, but certainly it would be 90% better than now.
It is hardly suprising that a country that both harbours terrorists and is convicted of international terrorism itself (the US) is itself the target of terrorist attacks. It is also no surprise that any countries who condone and support the actions of the US also paints themselves with a big target.
Ostriches on the left, and book-burning, bible-thumping fanatics on the right.
Ostriches? Did you not hear what Chretien said at the UN? He basically told them that the US is responsible for seriously harming the citizens of Iraq and the UN should "not allow one country to act unilaterally". In other words, the UN should have used military force to stop the US. I agree, this was about oil, not terrorism. Although it did *invite* more terrorism in the end. I hardly consider our government to have its "head in the sand" given such comments (and also not going to war with the US).
In the meantime, the US shouldn't trust any person or vehicle coming across their northern border.
I agree, they shouldn't trust anyone going across any of their borders considering a large portion of the world hates them enough to want the entire country obliterated. I truly feel sorry for the 55% of the population who voted against Bush and his lunacy.
Somehow the laws of supply and demand don't work in the record industry and I fail to see how this is not a monopoly/cartel.
Actually, some of the big labels were alrady convicted with price fixing. Wanna know their "punishment"?
Give people who ask (and can show a valid reciet from a given time period) a whole BIG whopping $2! YAY. And they also let them continue price fixing by the way.
Government today "protecting the rich and wealthy from the indignation of equality".
Slashdot Mirror
Regardless of the technicalities of what the law regarded them as, they were people capable of fighting back, often by breaking the law.
Anytime the law imposes some limitation that a large portion of the population does not like, you will see civil dissobediance.
Here is another example from the auto-industry. You can't drive without insurance, but insurance costs a TON in my city. Any excuse to make it cost more, the insurance companies use gladly. So a lot of the poorer folk can't afford it.
So what do they do? Drive without insurance. Now it's a real problem, we have a lot of people driving without insurance.
I know. :) It's just that people here seemed to be suggesting the eMac for a personal use. I guess if you don't mind CRTs then it could be good.
I hope my next machine (the one that will make me a switcher so to speak) will be a powerbook.
It's really just the CRT. I can't stand CRTs anymore. I don't really do much graphic design so that's not too much of an issue for me. I find LCDs to be much much easier on my eyes, and also much sharper (pixels really looks square). Not to mention subpixel antialiasing for fonts is AWSOME. I spend my entire day looking at text, so for me an LCD is top priority.
:)
Oh, not to mention an LCD takes up much less space on my desk and produces far less heat. Both properties are also very very important to me.
But as you said, to each his own. Perhaps a CRT suits your needs better if you are a hardcore designer. CRTs do have better colour contrast than LCDs, but the average person would not be able to notice I doubt.
It has a CRT. I will never ever buy another CRT again. LCD is just that much better. Too bad this is not just a box, I really can't stand computers with attached monitors (laptops excepted of course).
What are you on about with the whole "proprietary user id and password" nonsense. We usually call these things just "username" and "password". Proprietary usually refers to some sort of intellectual property of some value, like source code or wiring diagrams or similar.
It's not a synonym for "something I don't like". Weirdo.
Yes, but there is also a concept of civil disobediance. If I recall, civil disobedience also had a large role in freeing the slaves and overcoming unjust laws.
It wasn't really a case of the majority supporting slavery, it was a case of those with money supporting slavery. I assure you none of hte slaves supported it, and they were people too who represented a signficant portion.
Bottom line is that if people don't like a law they will not obey it. Take music downloading for a great example. Corporations are employing ever more tyrrant like tactics to stop it, and all that's happening is their profits are plummeting due to people starting to boycott their products.
And, for those who are going to point out that these are unreasonable restrictions on freedoms, there's no such thing as a "right" to drive. It's a privilege.
True, but you forget one thing, the majority opinion is supposed to run the country. That is democracy. So if a small minority chooses manages to enact laws that the majority does not agree with (speed limiters), then the majority will simply break those laws (some current speeding laws are a great example).
The more the government takes hostile action to prevent it, the more the country becomes ruled by tyranny rather than democracy.
Put a speed limiter on my car and I'll remove it, laws be damned. Some things increase saftey and some increase the police department income. There are some places were lower limits are justified, shool and residential zones are a great example. There are other places, such as some highways, where the limits are far too low and the majority of traffic breaks them as a result.
I'd like to see cops actually CATCHING reckless drivers and racers rather than set up pointless money grabbing speed traps where they pull over people who are doing the same speed as the rest of traffic.
Uh oh. Now you've done it. Expect a ton of GPL nazi's to go on posting about how anything freer than GPL is anarchy and how it's not "free" but "Free" and the four freedoms blah blah blah.
So I would like Mr. Stallman to please stop using the word free interchangebly with GPL'ed software, so as not to confuse readers.
Stallman chose to use the word free precicly *to* confuse people. If you compare the language used on GNU.org to that of cult texts you can find a ton of similarities. It's all very highly manipulative. And it's also very successfull. Most critisism of GNU/Stallman's use of manipulative language is immediatly shunned and attacked as if it came from the devil.
The problem with GNU is that they are not content to lead by example. Instead of simply demonstrating how their development model/philosphy is superior to other methods, they rely on rhetoric and preaching. GNU followers have a *need* to convert you to the GNU way as I'm sure you've noticed.
Still, I commend you for trying to set things right. I tried once, but the eyes of the devoted are blind to any reason.
Half the time the PC versions of the XBOX games are crippled. Notably, many many XBOX games have co-op multiplayer abilities. None of the PC versions have this ability. :(
Halo PC has no co-op.
Lord of the Ring PC has no co-op.
Doom3 PC will not have co-op, but XBOX version will (makes me sad).
Unless you were there, anything you "know" about the war means jack.
The same can easily be said about you of course.
Any major TV news outlet is going to blow something like that out of proportion. It creates a sensation. I wouldn't trust them for the time of day, much less accurate news about the war - especially foreign news agencies. We all know how fashionable it is to hate the dumb, fat Americans.
Right. Foreign news sources from places like Canada, the UK, and Europe all conspire to present false information against you poor Americans. Whatever.
Even CNN reported on these things, so did NPR, another us news outlet. I bet if you tried hard, you could even find some hint of this stuff on the Propaganda station, Fox (which I assume you watch regularly given your attitude).
So you want to disbelieve *everything* that all the reporters from all over the world, even your American reporters (one at least who WAS there), are saying just because some propaganda station does not cover it? Or just because Bush changes the topic? You are so blind.
But I don't have time to play 10 hours a week. I maybe can play 5 or 6 on a good week, less on a bad week. Maybe you have to play that much to enjoy them?
I like the concept, and would like to try, but I just can't justify paying that much monthly just to play a game. I get much more value for money out of non-monthly fee based games, and with those I don't feel that I am wasting money by not playing. I play when I want. Not every day, and certainly not 10 hours a week.
I guess they just weren't designed for people like me. Too bad, the concept looks cool.
Ho hum. What a weeny do gooder you are. I speed when I want, regardless of some stupid law. If it's safe, then I'll do it.
Take for instance highway driving. On the highway I drive regularly people *always* speed. And it's not just a few, no, the majority of people go 20 km/h over the limit (120 km/h), a smaller group go 130-140 km/h regularly (third lane, or even second lane depending on the day), and very very very few people go the limit, 100 km/h.
So you have all these weeny do gooders who had the limit lowered from 135 or so to 100 to "improve safety", when in actual fact the speed on the road as not changed much! All that has changed is that cops can now harass you easier. Not all traffic laws are correct.
City street limits are usually ok, but even those can be unreasonable in many cases. For instance, there is one road near by that is *four* lanes wide. What is the speed limit on this road? 40 km/h, for a LONG LONG distance as well. Completly unreasonable for a four lane road. The result? No one travels it. It is pretty much a useless road except for the area residents, who certainly don't need 4 lanes.
Oddly enough, the same philosophy fits computer games (MMPORGS) perfectly as well.
I find MMORPGS to be quite different due to the monthly fee. They are more like: Pay for the original game box, like any other game, then each month continue paying and paying and paying.
At around $20 CAD a month, that is A LOT. My phone bill is only $25 a month and DSL internet $30. If they priced them at around maybe $5 CAD a month ($3-4 US), then I could maybe justify buying one.
are any of the teams contemplating using a helium balloon as the "first stage" of a launch? Or is this allowed? Starting at 50-60 thou feet or above before it lights might be a nice edge....
c hn icalMain.html
Yup, the Da Vinci Project is. They are also supposedly good to go within a year. But no launch date has been set yet. And since they launch from Canada, I guess they don't need any license from the USA?
http://www.davinciproject.com/beta/Technical/Te
Yeah, I never had any trouble with CUPS either, but ESR did and so did a computer science grad I know who uses Linux for a living. So clearly there are some problems somewhere, which is why I used this example.
Well, this was a perfectly fine post, and not at all inflammatory like your last post. My point was that most of that last post was unnessary and insulting to the original poster and people who have similar opinions.
People take for granted that "Windows is easy" and "Linux is hard" when in reality, it is probably more about familiarity. Computers, in general can make life easy and they can be hard to learn. That was my point. Nothing more.
This is true. But there are still areas where Linux is much much more difficult than Windows regardless of familiarity. This is not something that needs to be defended, but rather recognized and fixed. Many of these areas are in fact actively being worked on by various projects, so things will only improve. Linux has come a long way, and no one is denying that, but it's still not there yet in some areas.
Why would people attack the hospitals filled with their own citizens?
Oh, I don't know. Why don't you ask the looters who looted the hospitals? Citizens were *begging* US troops to stop them, and they did nothing. This is not some fantasy, this happened. It was all over the news, did you miss it? Too busy cheering for your conquering army maybe?
So not only is there absoultly no proof the CIA funded either the sect called "arab afghans" or Bin Laden. But bin laden himself denies it even though it helps in the PR battle many people like yourself try to use.
9 15 01o.html
Do you really think that Bin Laden would admit to working with the US? He's currently trying to destroy the US and is training thousands to utterly hate them. How would it look for him to be sitting there going "The USA is the great evil of the world...." when one of his students asks "But then why oh glorious rightous leader, did you work with them and accept money, weapons, and training?"
Here, some links. People like me use this argument because it's true. Stop watching your American propaganda station enough to read some independent publications.
http://www.zmag.org/chomb92.htm
http://www.davidicke.net/newsroom/america/usa/0
One development cost for two different platforms = huge savings.
6 .h tml
So I guess you missed the news on XNA?
http://www.arstechnica.com/news/posts/108023853
Wow. What an ego you have. It constantly amazes me how older folks can sometime be so completly out of it with respect to reality.
So anyone who doesn't agree with you is now a "Troll"?
Can't people see the forest for the religeous trees?!
Where oh where did religion come into play here? If anything, it's you who are using cult tactics to cloud the issue here. You start out your argument by first branding your apponent as a heretic ("Troll"). Absolutly typical.
Then your proceed to accuse the original poster of somehow being a religous zealot, which is really a comment out from nowhere. The function? To furthur distract people from the fanatisim in your own post. If you are accusing someone else of fanatism, certainly you yourself are not a fanatic.
You are just adding more religeon to the noise.
Again, religon has nothing to do with anything here. You are reinforcing your branding. So far, we have your branding and your *claim* that you are forever fixing windows problems.
I've been using Unix for twenty years. Last environment used (before switching to Linux) was Solaris.
Wow. So this is supposed to give your argument some sort of authority? I've been using Unix and Windows about equally. I've used Irix, Solaris, AIX, Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, DOS/Win3.11, Win95, Win98, WinNT, Win2000, and WinXP. And yes, I've actually used all these systems for a significant period of time, more than just dabbling with 'ls' or 'dir'. I can assert my authority just as easily.
Let me tell you, young whipper snapper
More disparaging of the original poster. Again, as with the troll comment, this is intended to make the original poster look unathoritive and stupid. At the same time, this furthur attempts to assert your superiority. Can you not make a reasonable argument without all the manipulation?
when I had my first try at Windows (1998). I about had a nervous breakdown.
Fear mongering, "WOW, the experienced Unix user almost had a nervous breakdown! That must be terrible!". Of course, this comment really doesn't say anything about the usability of Windows as much as is does about your bias against windows. Evidence of this bias? The uncalled for troll comment for one.
I still don't like Windows XP verry well. It just doesn't feel right.
Great objectivity there. This comment has no value other than to assert your bias.
Everything is so fucking hard to get done in that stupid practically-windows-only environment, with a command prompt that won't auto-complete! Why is it 2004 and DOS won't auto-complete?! Morons.
This shows a lot of fanatism and fear mongering. I can show you things that are "so f**king hard", but using a GUI computing environment is not one of them. Windows only environment? Yes. And when you use Linux, you are in a Linux only environment. This is the definition of an environment.
DOS does autocomplete btw, but that's not really important. What *is* important is that on Windows 2000/XP you should only need to go to the command line for two things. One, to run ipconfig, and two, boot into the recovery console in case something disasterous happens. Everything else can easily be done through the GUI. Really, in all my time using XP on any one of my friends and families machines, these are the only reasons I ever needed to bring up a command window.
You're missing the very fact that in many, many cases, when "things don't always work right" you can't even get them back to working whatsoever
Really? Funny that I've never encounted such a problem, nor have any of my friends or family. In fact, I've not even *heard* of such a problem with windows from any person I've met. I only hear of these terrible problems from manipulative slashdot comments by people who admit to not even using windows.
as you watch Windows eat itself alive and laugh at you while it makes you play "pin the tail on the problem". It blin
I couldn't have put it better myself. Literally, very well spoken.
I would like to add a comment though. During the looting of Baghdad, the US did not protect hospitals and museums. They did not protect anything in fact, except for one thing, the oil offices. Yes yes, oil can help rebuild Iraq, but it's important to have people be alive to rebuild it for. Surely they could have also spared troops to protect at least one hospital?
It is impossible. A weak country can do this. A strong country can not. Sooner or later someone will ask for help against someone else. A weak country can say: "We can't". A strong one will have to take sides...
It has more to do with when to provide help rather than helping or not. In this case, I supported not helping. The supposed reasons for going to Iraq were all bull. This is why the UN would not agree to it. There were no WMD, and Iraq was not related to the 9/11 terrorists. In fact, I think Saddam and Bin Laden hated one another.
You can't be nice to Palestinians and Israelis at once, for example -- the want each other dead. Even a weaker country like Canada can't do so honestly...
Sure, you can tell them both to stop. That's very honest. Certainly blatently supporting (and giving weapons) to the main agressor is not *helping* the situation any.
Your trolling flamebait conveniently forgets, that "9/11" happened only 9 months into Bush's presidency -- after 8 years under Clinton...
I never claimed 9/11 happend because of Bush. But given recent evidence it does look like Bush is at some fault for not stopping it. Many previous presidents, while much better than Bush, still supported some really immoral and nasty foreign policy. The US has a wonderful habit of appointing or helping get appointed brutal dictators in other countries. Seriously, go read up on the darker sides of US foreign policy sometime.
According to bin Laden's ravings, "9/11" was our punishment for deploying in the holy land of Saudi Arabia, which we did to protect Kuwait -- a Muslim nation, BTW. Was that war also "a lunacy" to you?
If you recall, the UN was involved in that. There was, however, an unrelated war in Afganistan against the Soviets. In this war, the CIA trained Bin Laden so he could fight against the Soviets. They no doubt funneled him money and weapons as well.
You can not justify this hatred and you can not negotiate with such people.
Some of this hatred will be there, but the US just throws fuel on to the fire. Negotiate with such people? Why does the US have such a wonderful history of working with such people before they suddenely become *evil*? The US also worked with Saddam you know. Those chemical weapons? Where do you think Saddam got them from? It was only under UN pressure that the US finally decided to turn on Saddam.
So stop your pitiful preaching -- there are better ways to attack Bush.
I'm not just attacking bush, he does a pretty good job of getting people to dislike him on his own. I'm attacking US foreign policy in general.
Our politicians think that if the Americans would just be nice to everyone all the time, everything would be just fine.
Maybe because this is mostly true. Sure, it may not be 100% fine, but certainly it would be 90% better than now.
It is hardly suprising that a country that both harbours terrorists and is convicted of international terrorism itself (the US) is itself the target of terrorist attacks. It is also no surprise that any countries who condone and support the actions of the US also paints themselves with a big target.
Ostriches on the left, and book-burning, bible-thumping fanatics on the right.
Ostriches? Did you not hear what Chretien said at the UN? He basically told them that the US is responsible for seriously harming the citizens of Iraq and the UN should "not allow one country to act unilaterally". In other words, the UN should have used military force to stop the US. I agree, this was about oil, not terrorism. Although it did *invite* more terrorism in the end. I hardly consider our government to have its "head in the sand" given such comments (and also not going to war with the US).
In the meantime, the US shouldn't trust any person or vehicle coming across their northern border.
I agree, they shouldn't trust anyone going across any of their borders considering a large portion of the world hates them enough to want the entire country obliterated. I truly feel sorry for the 55% of the population who voted against Bush and his lunacy.
That's fine by me, many
Apparantly, the G&M can't tell the difference between Wildman and Wildfire. Or, worse, between Paul Allen and Bill Gates.
Huh? What are you on about? The G&M article, as well as all the other news sources reporting this, all have it straight.
Wildfire = shipnam
Wildman = surname of spokesperson for Da Vinci project
Bill Gates = Chairman and Cheif Technology Officer
Paul Allen = CEO
Somehow the laws of supply and demand don't work in the record industry and I fail to see how this is not a monopoly/cartel.
Actually, some of the big labels were alrady convicted with price fixing. Wanna know their "punishment"?
Give people who ask (and can show a valid reciet from a given time period) a whole BIG whopping $2! YAY. And they also let them continue price fixing by the way.
Government today "protecting the rich and wealthy from the indignation of equality".