I hate how you type:) in IM or message boards now and they replace the:) with a graphic. I think that ruins it.
Gah, me too. I hate that people are willing to write a parser that matches various different text combos to various different smilies, but are unwilling to write code that allows you to go back and edit posts without having a million break tags in there. Plus, I love putting stuff in parentheses only to find out that "(at a rate of 2%)" has turned into "(at a rate of 2[ZOMG! smiley]"
I do, however, like how the chat in Gmail waits a moment, then *creaaaaaak*, rotates the smiley. It's fucking cute, and I hear the noise everything it happens.:)
It would be nice to come up with better connector technology that protects the optics better however, but LC isn't THAT bad, and can be had for around $16 for a 3M long cable.
If the price of USB cables is any indication, make that $70 at your local electronics retail outlet.:)
Seriously, how many non-techies do you know that think it ACTUALLY costs $18 for a 6ft USB cable?
So if they'd told him repeatedly "Stop resisting or we'll pump you full of lead.", they would have been justified in doing so ?
As others point out, this is a crappy rhetorical question that has no bearing on reality. However, I want to point out that there ARE situations in which an officer says the above and is justified in doing so, such as a situation involving violence or the threat of violence (drop the gun, or we will open fire).
A tazer is designed for situations in which officers can't restrain the person without causing physical harm to the person or risking harm to another greater than the harm that could be caused by the tazer. So they were justified in this situation, and I'm sure everyone's glad nobody got shot.
Yeah, but the thing is that you're cherry picking the best from each category.
That is very true, as is the rest of your comment. But wouldn't you if you were Trent? My justifications for the parts:
1. Sound Quality - why spend 1000 on the preamp and 2000 on your set of mics when you can get THE BEST for 15000? When you're Trent Reznor, I mean.
2. Ease of use - why NOT spend 1k on a keyboard, and buy Protools with the best control interface you can get?
3. Interoperability - why NOT get Mac Pro with all the standard stuff so if you want to send something to somebody else you work with, it's easy? And why not use a system that everyone uses so that you can bring anybody in?
I bet he could put together a very nice studio for less than the cost of a cheap car. (and that's a VERY nice studio).
In a way, yes. In many other ways, no. If I were Trent, I'd have a nice liveroom, just because, which is more than the cost of a car to begin with.
I'd buy a couple Neumann mics for $10k+ And a couple other nice $3k mics I'd probably get the best preamp available, at $2.9k for two channels for an Avalon. I'd probably get two of these. And the Avalon stereo compressor for another 2k. A super awesome mac: 6k (why not get a good one?) Protools with a nice control surface is 9k: http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Control24LE If I were trent, I'd have a digital drum kit for $1k-2k A midi controller that felt nice for $500 or more And a piano is nice. I'd put that in the liveroom. Say $2000 for a reasonably priced good one.
Now this is far short of the million dollar mark, since I was exaggerating for the sake of being on slashdot, but it's still not cheap. So:
30k - mics 8k - preamp and compressor 6k - mac 9k - protools 1k - drums 500 - midi controller 2k - piano 50k - liveroom
So I think we'lre looking at 100k, which is pretty goddamn reasonable. And I'm also not really estimating the cost of a vocal booth, the engineering room. The studio monitors, the headphones, and all the additional hardware. I've really looked into this a lot, and my friend Joe is an audio engineer, which while far from making me an expert, I've at least talked to someone who's not only taken a theoretical studio building class, but also built a studio.
Face it Trent, you've still gotta make a few records for them. Do what Prince did, paint 'slave' on your face and release a few "best of NIN" albums and then do whatever you want on your own label or just sell your stuff online, we'll buy it.
I think he's working on it. Should everyone just do what Prince did? It seems like that would be unoriginal. And the issue is that he criticized the high prices of CDs, and got attacked for it, so he presents an alternate solution.
Garth Brooks, with the commercial clout he had, had the decency to refuse to do business with people who sold his CDs for more than 12 bucks.
Reznor is not in a position to do that until his contract is up (great idea about the shitty best of CDs btw), and he's fighting fire with fire. I think his main point is that he wouldn't buy his OWN music at the prices they sell it for, so why should his fans? Especially loyal, dedicated fans who have supported him for years?
You're right, the 13 cents he makes per cd should totally be given back. Power to the people!
Don't forget he has to pay for studio time, so make that 13 cents per CD (that's a very good deal, as these things go) minus $200,000 for each project.
How's the math on that? -Nathan PS:I'm sure trent has built his own studio by now and has engineers lapping at his johnson to work on his stuff. But still. I bet the studio cost a couple million.
I said new users. More experienced users would likely use this technology. I have to agree with GP. In my experience, although the 3d effects aren't implicitly useful, they tended to make my computer FEEL more interactive, and I tended to feel less tired after using the computer.
Which I guess sounds weird. Maybe I can get a government grant to study wobbly windows.
Do you think Google's accountants are crooked? I think dealing with the IRS sort of necessitates it. Are their lawyers crooked? I'm sure they can all think crooked, anyway.
Except for the whole anticompetitive practices thing. Exploiting people who are uneducated in a field is unethical. For people who are educated in the field, they may contest the people who don't conduct themselves ethically.
There is a LOT of vendor lock-in for MS Windows, and it's in large part because of their unfair practices, and the free pass they got from the government for disseminating American software on all the world's computers.
Actually, I am. Which is why I support the unseating of every dictator on earth. I have no idea why the left tolerates them so. Because just bombing the fuck out of civilians is not always the best choice. The liberals supported the war when they got spoon-fed bullshit. They should have been more judicious in their processing of information.
You can't just go around killing people because they're bad people, or else we'd have dead cops and politicians (bipartisan, mind you) everywhere.
I'll just run down a few more points: 1. You really don't have a problem with Bush not even giving a stupid press conference about Katrina? Or him turning away Cuban aid (Cuba has a disaster task force that helps many nations in times of crisis) when we weren't helping people? If I were president, I would walk down with some cameras on me, and say, "let's get those people the fuck out of there!" at least. 2. On the false choice thing, I'm not using the false choice as an argument clincher. It's more illustrative. 3. The humanists cared about the people being bombed. We didn't help Rwanda, or Congo, or etfuckingcetera. We didn't do this for the people over there. Do you disagree? 4. 9/11 was not an issue of bad foreign policy. Sorry you had to listen to that argument. However, our current foreign policy is generating more terrorists. Not sure if more than it kills, but it's certainly not operating in a vacuum. 5. Good for you on the midwestern town. I didn't call everyone in the midwest a yokel. Race, however, is an issue. I notice it in my own prejudices, and I wasn't that exposed to US culture growing up in Mexico. I do think that things are getting way better for blacks, but to deny that it's an issue is sort of blind, IMO.
Plus, it's wrong to torture people. It's against our word as a nation, and our constitution. If you want more examples of how our current administration is eroding our rights, just ask.
The distinction you wish for doesn't exist. Outside of politics, it you actually get held to higher standards as you move up the chain. Right. You said it. Outside of politics. You still refuse to actually correlate Bush's crimes with Clinton's crimes. My point is specifically that at different points up and down the chain, people get treated differently. People tend to give the president much license because he's so high-profile.
[Foley] sorta indicated that he was sexually interested in a former employee of legal age. He was roundly condemned by his own party. People are allowed to have as much ass sex as they want, as long as they don't vote against it. Plus, it's telling that the kid turned 18 6 weeks before a recorded interchange.
Grasp the difference yet? I don't think you do. I don't know why I'm expected to do all the grasping around here.
Really, for lies directed at the American people, try any of his state of the union addresses.
[Falsified information and firing based on political beliefs] is normal. Most completely clean house as they enter office and put their own lackeys in place. Well, then, this marks a change for the better now that the likes of Alberto Glz are caught. Let's hope the next Democrat who does it on such a major scale gets caught as well. Washington is a fucking cesspool.
And Democrats don't use fear with respect to Social Security, Health Care, and a host of other issues? I think threatening people with death and destruction is worse than threatening them with bad healthcare. Really, I think the healthcare system is fucked up, but you, like Tom Delay (what a cocksucker, might I add), seem to think that pointing out a problem with the Democrats absolves the president of guilt for killing people.
Man, you reek of hypocrisy and are clearly blind to your own side's foibles. Look, I'm not attacking you or claiming you are on their side. You are putting me on the Democrat's side because I'm attacking Republicans. Why don't I create two arbitrary sides here, and we'll call them Nathan (that's me) and fucking moron (that's you). See? I like that better.
No, just stupid, uninformed, illogical, childish dissent. Dissent is important. People being able to speak without being threatened by the government is important. I bet you think that the government should get to decide what is stupid, uninformed, illogical, and childish, too. In Soviet Russia... Oh, wait... there's no punchline!
It isn't our fault that half the Democratic party falls under this category. Right. And half of the Republican party falls into the category of man-who-sucks-on-the-moral-rod-of-truth. In other words, guys who take it up the ass, and talk out against taking it up the ass. Or, hypocrites.
All false choices. I was asking your preference, but I see you use the NeoCon ignorance defense.
First, the odds of any of these things happening to me are trivial no matter who the president is. Not in Iraq. I understand you're not a Humanist. And you're probably very white and have probably never left the country. But the real world exists out there, too. And people are trying to live their lives like yo
Watch the movie Blazing Saddles. You won't regret it. You will also get jokes more often, like the line from the movie above. I was just a wee tot when I'd seen Blazing Saddles in its entirety. I apologize. Lots of loonies around here, you understand.
Actually, any...Republican would have been canned by his own...party just for what he did with Lewinski, let alone what he was accused of doing with Jones or the others. I keep trying to draw the correlation from president to president, and you keep drawing it from president to lower offices. First off, a regular joe, when hit with sexual harassment case, will get utterly screwed. Similarly, a governor or senator will suffer more for it than a president.
The current president has lied directly to the American people, and continues to lie. His administration has falsified information, fired people for political leanings, and committed major fraud using the office of the presidency. He has desecrated the Constitution. He has appointed supreme court justices that prop up his cronies. He has manipulated the state of fear generated by terrorism to control the population, which I think is terrorism in and of itself. He has taken steps to increase the amount of fear people experience. He has given tax cuts worth the national debt--and 3 times the cost of the war--to people in his economic strata, while peppering a few hundred dollars a year on people like you and me. The war was bogus. He is directly responsible for the deaths of our nation's children. He is directly responsible for the deaths of many many innocent Iraqis. He fuels hatred and misunderstanding for Muslims. He pushes miseducation in our schools (intelligent design is not a scientific theory). He puts retarded people to death. He encouraged--still encourages--a climate where dissent equals betrayal to our country.
Not only do Republican politicians still rabidly stand behind him, but it took a long time for ANY Republican citizens to start admitting that maybe he was wrong. He, like Bill Clinton, is president. Many many Democrats turned against Bill Clinton during the Lewinski scandal, but he was not taken down. I understand about the sexual harassment case, however, since Monica Lewinski wasn't behind the case, I have a hard time seeing how it makes much of a difference in the global sense.
Tell me HOW (pray, how) is global terrorism, an unjust war, censorship, stealing, lying, cheating, torturing people, and leaving an entire section of a city to die after a natural disaster that could have been mitigated is dwarfed by a sexual harassment suit? Here's a questionnaire:
1. Would you prefer to be tortured, or sexually harassed? 2. Would you prefer a bomb drop on your house, or be sexually harassed? 3. Would you prefer to be blamed for emboldening the terrorists when you disagree with a politician, or be lied to about sexual harassment? 4. Would you prefer to have a couple billion dollars stolen, or be sexually harassed? 5. Would you prefer to be black in America, or be sexually harassed? (hint: you probably don't know what it's like to be black)
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, you teach him how to set up a chroot jail for his browser is how.
Gah, me too. I hate that people are willing to write a parser that matches various different text combos to various different smilies, but are unwilling to write code that allows you to go back and edit posts without having a million break tags in there. Plus, I love putting stuff in parentheses only to find out that "(at a rate of 2%)" has turned into "(at a rate of 2[ZOMG! smiley]"
I do, however, like how the chat in Gmail waits a moment, then *creaaaaaak*, rotates the smiley. It's fucking cute, and I hear the noise everything it happens.
*creeeeeeaaak*
If the price of USB cables is any indication, make that $70 at your local electronics retail outlet.
Seriously, how many non-techies do you know that think it ACTUALLY costs $18 for a 6ft USB cable?
I certainly agree. I've got a fairly nice setup for about $5k.
Goddamnit, I'm just now getting out of debt. Congratulate me. Yay. But the point is, I get what you're getting at.
it's a joke about Steve Jobs. Laugh, bitches.
It's like an iPhone with words on the screen, that's what. Stupid words. Shut up.
--Steve
So ..... McBride is blaming competition?
I think so, and my official response is (take note):
Is widdle McBwide gots a boo boo? Oh, noes! Wed me come ovew a kiss it and make it aww beddew.
As others point out, this is a crappy rhetorical question that has no bearing on reality. However, I want to point out that there ARE situations in which an officer says the above and is justified in doing so, such as a situation involving violence or the threat of violence (drop the gun, or we will open fire).
A tazer is designed for situations in which officers can't restrain the person without causing physical harm to the person or risking harm to another greater than the harm that could be caused by the tazer. So they were justified in this situation, and I'm sure everyone's glad nobody got shot.
16MB of RAM is enough for anybody. I mean, c'mon.
-Nathan
That is very true, as is the rest of your comment. But wouldn't you if you were Trent? My justifications for the parts:
1. Sound Quality - why spend 1000 on the preamp and 2000 on your set of mics when you can get THE BEST for 15000? When you're Trent Reznor, I mean.
2. Ease of use - why NOT spend 1k on a keyboard, and buy Protools with the best control interface you can get?
3. Interoperability - why NOT get Mac Pro with all the standard stuff so if you want to send something to somebody else you work with, it's easy? And why not use a system that everyone uses so that you can bring anybody in?
In a way, yes. In many other ways, no. If I were Trent, I'd have a nice liveroom, just because, which is more than the cost of a car to begin with.
I'd buy a couple Neumann mics for $10k+
And a couple other nice $3k mics
I'd probably get the best preamp available, at $2.9k for two channels for an Avalon. I'd probably get two of these.
And the Avalon stereo compressor for another 2k.
A super awesome mac: 6k (why not get a good one?)
Protools with a nice control surface is 9k: http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Control24LE
If I were trent, I'd have a digital drum kit for $1k-2k
A midi controller that felt nice for $500 or more
And a piano is nice. I'd put that in the liveroom. Say $2000 for a reasonably priced good one.
Now this is far short of the million dollar mark, since I was exaggerating for the sake of being on slashdot, but it's still not cheap. So:
30k - mics
8k - preamp and compressor
6k - mac
9k - protools
1k - drums
500 - midi controller
2k - piano
50k - liveroom
So I think we'lre looking at 100k, which is pretty goddamn reasonable. And I'm also not really estimating the cost of a vocal booth, the engineering room. The studio monitors, the headphones, and all the additional hardware. I've really looked into this a lot, and my friend Joe is an audio engineer, which while far from making me an expert, I've at least talked to someone who's not only taken a theoretical studio building class, but also built a studio.
I think he's working on it. Should everyone just do what Prince did? It seems like that would be unoriginal. And the issue is that he criticized the high prices of CDs, and got attacked for it, so he presents an alternate solution.
Garth Brooks, with the commercial clout he had, had the decency to refuse to do business with people who sold his CDs for more than 12 bucks.
Reznor is not in a position to do that until his contract is up (great idea about the shitty best of CDs btw), and he's fighting fire with fire. I think his main point is that he wouldn't buy his OWN music at the prices they sell it for, so why should his fans? Especially loyal, dedicated fans who have supported him for years?
Don't forget he has to pay for studio time, so make that 13 cents per CD (that's a very good deal, as these things go) minus $200,000 for each project.
How's the math on that?
-Nathan
PS:I'm sure trent has built his own studio by now and has engineers lapping at his johnson to work on his stuff. But still. I bet the studio cost a couple million.
hahaha, Insightful.
Right, but see, I'm saying, "Microsoft is unethical"
You're saying, "Everyone is unethical"
I'm saying some people get upset about certain things, and they serve as watchdogs for the rest of us. Chizzax, sweet flomie.
I said new users. More experienced users would likely use this technology.
I have to agree with GP. In my experience, although the 3d effects aren't implicitly useful, they tended to make my computer FEEL more interactive, and I tended to feel less tired after using the computer.
Which I guess sounds weird. Maybe I can get a government grant to study wobbly windows.
Do you think Google's accountants are crooked?
I think dealing with the IRS sort of necessitates it. Are their lawyers crooked? I'm sure they can all think crooked, anyway.
Except for the whole anticompetitive practices thing. Exploiting people who are uneducated in a field is unethical. For people who are educated in the field, they may contest the people who don't conduct themselves ethically.
There is a LOT of vendor lock-in for MS Windows, and it's in large part because of their unfair practices, and the free pass they got from the government for disseminating American software on all the world's computers.
Everyone remember to click right through the EULA like they do in the instructional video, or it won't work. :)
Actually, I am. Which is why I support the unseating of every dictator on earth. I have no idea why the left tolerates them so.
Because just bombing the fuck out of civilians is not always the best choice. The liberals supported the war when they got spoon-fed bullshit. They should have been more judicious in their processing of information.
You can't just go around killing people because they're bad people, or else we'd have dead cops and politicians (bipartisan, mind you) everywhere.
I'll just run down a few more points:
1. You really don't have a problem with Bush not even giving a stupid press conference about Katrina? Or him turning away Cuban aid (Cuba has a disaster task force that helps many nations in times of crisis) when we weren't helping people? If I were president, I would walk down with some cameras on me, and say, "let's get those people the fuck out of there!" at least.
2. On the false choice thing, I'm not using the false choice as an argument clincher. It's more illustrative.
3. The humanists cared about the people being bombed. We didn't help Rwanda, or Congo, or etfuckingcetera. We didn't do this for the people over there. Do you disagree?
4. 9/11 was not an issue of bad foreign policy. Sorry you had to listen to that argument. However, our current foreign policy is generating more terrorists. Not sure if more than it kills, but it's certainly not operating in a vacuum.
5. Good for you on the midwestern town. I didn't call everyone in the midwest a yokel. Race, however, is an issue. I notice it in my own prejudices, and I wasn't that exposed to US culture growing up in Mexico. I do think that things are getting way better for blacks, but to deny that it's an issue is sort of blind, IMO.
6. On the levees, what do you make of the following excerpts from the briefing of which GWB was a part, in light of the Katrina aftermath
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Z23TcgeF5q4&mode=related&search=
They go over EVERYTHING that happens! Bush assures everyone that they are fully prepared to help during the storm, and that they will move in assets.
Why is this not a problem for you? If you answer ONE question, please answer this one.
-Nathan
Plus, it's wrong to torture people. It's against our word as a nation, and our constitution. If you want more examples of how our current administration is eroding our rights, just ask.
The distinction you wish for doesn't exist. Outside of politics, it you actually get held to higher standards as you move up the chain.
Right. You said it. Outside of politics. You still refuse to actually correlate Bush's crimes with Clinton's crimes. My point is specifically that at different points up and down the chain, people get treated differently. People tend to give the president much license because he's so high-profile.
[Foley] sorta indicated that he was sexually interested in a former employee of legal age. He was roundly condemned by his own party.
People are allowed to have as much ass sex as they want, as long as they don't vote against it. Plus, it's telling that the kid turned 18 6 weeks before a recorded interchange.
Grasp the difference yet?
I don't think you do. I don't know why I'm expected to do all the grasping around here.
Documentation, please. I have yet to find a liberal that can stand up to such a simple challenge.
OK, Katrina:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/02/fema.tapes/index.html
WMDs, and on my fear-as-manipulation claim:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYI7JXGqd0o
The war in Iraq:
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/
9/11:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/index.htm
Really, for lies directed at the American people, try any of his state of the union addresses.
[Falsified information and firing based on political beliefs] is normal. Most completely clean house as they enter office and put their own lackeys in place.
Well, then, this marks a change for the better now that the likes of Alberto Glz are caught. Let's hope the next Democrat who does it on such a major scale gets caught as well. Washington is a fucking cesspool.
And Democrats don't use fear with respect to Social Security, Health Care, and a host of other issues?
I think threatening people with death and destruction is worse than threatening them with bad healthcare. Really, I think the healthcare system is fucked up, but you, like Tom Delay (what a cocksucker, might I add), seem to think that pointing out a problem with the Democrats absolves the president of guilt for killing people.
Man, you reek of hypocrisy and are clearly blind to your own side's foibles.
Look, I'm not attacking you or claiming you are on their side. You are putting me on the Democrat's side because I'm attacking Republicans. Why don't I create two arbitrary sides here, and we'll call them Nathan (that's me) and fucking moron (that's you). See? I like that better.
No, just stupid, uninformed, illogical, childish dissent.
Dissent is important. People being able to speak without being threatened by the government is important. I bet you think that the government should get to decide what is stupid, uninformed, illogical, and childish, too. In Soviet Russia... Oh, wait... there's no punchline!
It isn't our fault that half the Democratic party falls under this category.
Right. And half of the Republican party falls into the category of man-who-sucks-on-the-moral-rod-of-truth. In other words, guys who take it up the ass, and talk out against taking it up the ass. Or, hypocrites.
All false choices.
I was asking your preference, but I see you use the NeoCon ignorance defense.
First, the odds of any of these things happening to me are trivial no matter who the president is.
Not in Iraq. I understand you're not a Humanist. And you're probably very white and have probably never left the country. But the real world exists out there, too. And people are trying to live their lives like yo
Yeah, like Lawyers have.
And Doctors, the same who diagnose bogus psychological diseases in children just so they get kickbacks from the drug companies.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. At least most of the IT people aren't DOING anything with the data they collect. Just being nosy.
Watch the movie Blazing Saddles. You won't regret it. You will also get jokes more often, like the line from the movie above.
I was just a wee tot when I'd seen Blazing Saddles in its entirety. I apologize. Lots of loonies around here, you understand.
Of which I am one, no doubt.
Cheers,
Nathan
Actually, any...Republican would have been canned by his own...party just for what he did with Lewinski, let alone what he was accused of doing with Jones or the others.
I keep trying to draw the correlation from president to president, and you keep drawing it from president to lower offices. First off, a regular joe, when hit with sexual harassment case, will get utterly screwed. Similarly, a governor or senator will suffer more for it than a president.
The current president has lied directly to the American people, and continues to lie. His administration has falsified information, fired people for political leanings, and committed major fraud using the office of the presidency. He has desecrated the Constitution. He has appointed supreme court justices that prop up his cronies. He has manipulated the state of fear generated by terrorism to control the population, which I think is terrorism in and of itself. He has taken steps to increase the amount of fear people experience. He has given tax cuts worth the national debt--and 3 times the cost of the war--to people in his economic strata, while peppering a few hundred dollars a year on people like you and me. The war was bogus. He is directly responsible for the deaths of our nation's children. He is directly responsible for the deaths of many many innocent Iraqis. He fuels hatred and misunderstanding for Muslims. He pushes miseducation in our schools (intelligent design is not a scientific theory). He puts retarded people to death. He encouraged--still encourages--a climate where dissent equals betrayal to our country.
Not only do Republican politicians still rabidly stand behind him, but it took a long time for ANY Republican citizens to start admitting that maybe he was wrong. He, like Bill Clinton, is president. Many many Democrats turned against Bill Clinton during the Lewinski scandal, but he was not taken down. I understand about the sexual harassment case, however, since Monica Lewinski wasn't behind the case, I have a hard time seeing how it makes much of a difference in the global sense.
Tell me HOW (pray, how) is global terrorism, an unjust war, censorship, stealing, lying, cheating, torturing people, and leaving an entire section of a city to die after a natural disaster that could have been mitigated is dwarfed by a sexual harassment suit? Here's a questionnaire:
1. Would you prefer to be tortured, or sexually harassed?
2. Would you prefer a bomb drop on your house, or be sexually harassed?
3. Would you prefer to be blamed for emboldening the terrorists when you disagree with a politician, or be lied to about sexual harassment?
4. Would you prefer to have a couple billion dollars stolen, or be sexually harassed?
5. Would you prefer to be black in America, or be sexually harassed? (hint: you probably don't know what it's like to be black)