I'm involved in a project of the latter category, a popular webpage operating from a cheap dedicated machine (single core, 1GB of memory, one logical disk, cheap disk controller with limited I/O bandwidth), and it's a nontrivial task to keep it running smooothly. In a few places it was necessary to do some custom coding at the HTTP server level, use different types of databases to do different things and even utilize specific filesystems for different partitions that hold data of different nature (lots of small, fast-changing files on one, some big, mostly appended to files on another, etc)..... Sure, it *was* a lot of work to do, but still probably less than modifying an existing CMS for such a level of specialization
No offense, but that sounds like false economy; i.e. it would be cheaper to buy a better server than to pay for lots of custom programming, and if you're restricted to that hardware, it sounds like money is an issue. Later on, a popular standardized CMS is likely to get security updates and expanded features, while your client's solution will need further expensive custom programming.
How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development?
Only a little difference: novelty and authority. But the real question is where one stands on the principles involved.
No matter where you are on the political 'spectrum', you're likely to have a different opinion on property rights, as it's one of the key things that places you on that spectrum.
If you are middle of the road, you think, quite possibly you've naturalized your version of property rights, which means that you tend to think of them as natural rights that extend right out to owning anything short of a human, and would be really uncomfortable with the idea of thinking about your attitude as ideology.
If you are completely opposed to the notion of ownership of 'common' resources like land and water, names and culture, and you think stewardship should be organised by some huge strong centralized government, you'd be a socialist dictatorship kind of person. If you think stewardship of common resources should be managed on an ad hoc consensual basis in as regionally-specific a way as possible and regulated at larger scale by multi-party treaties , you'd be in the socio-anarchist ~ tribalist ~ libertarian municipalist quarters.
Stripping land of its use value and strictly keeping it for its exchange value has been justified by broad-scale practice all around you, so it has a venerable history and seems natural. Domain names are new, the 'enclosure of the commons' via real estate has been happening for a very long time. There is an enormous and complex body of arguments against land speculation, some of them very quantifiable (so it's not purely an ideological discussion).
Also, domain names are not owned, they are essentially doled out with tenure grants and a fee. Structurally, they are treated like a common resource that is managed by central authority (more so than land, anyway). There is a different moral and ideological background.
Domainers usurp the original purpose of the domain. These folks seem to add nothing but lost productivity to the process of conducting business or having fun, unless you think the service they provide is the only fair way to do it.
Being legal does not make it legitimate, unless you believe fervently that the State is mother of all and that justice is blind in service of fairness (instead of in despair). There are many (not just marxists and anarchists) who also see land speculators as illegitimate parasites, sucking productivity out of the pockets of hard-working people who actually do worthwhile things with the land.
You can buy 10.3 [panther] or 10.4 [tiger] very cheaply on ebay or craigslist etc., a huge improvement over 10.2, which was never really meant to be used very long, it was a transitional version (despite the hype). 10.3 is where OS X first fulfilled its promise; anyone voluntarily running 10.2 after all these years has dubious computer-fu. In other words, you aren't kinda stuck, you're kinda whiny and definitely missing the point.
You can't run a 10 year old machine with ANY OS from that period and expect to easily surf the modern web without a few upgrades (usually RAM and OS version). Tiger (about $35) runs on a G3 with firewire and 256mb RAM (but turn off stuff like dashboard); and if you only want to spend $15, buy Panther and use the excellent Camino browser.
All my 6+ year-old windows boxes that got upgraded then converted to Linux boxes have all died and gone to scrap, so I don't keep PC boxes around older than about 4 yrs anymore; but I regularly use a 10-year-old iBook G3 running Panther for all kinds of things, including scanning, video capture and logging, and webmail. That thing just won't die, and is probably the best value I've ever gotten out of a computer. Apple mostly used excellent power supplies, so their desktop machines generally keep going too.
Macs are hideously expensive for the level of hardware you get compared to the level of hardware you can get for a PC for the same price. If you can't see the difference between $899 (tops) and $1149 for an iMac and $2300 for a Mac Pro (minimums)*, well, you either have entirely too much money to throw around or you're just a horrible fanboi.
I sourced out discounted hardware at newegg and ncix in order to build a hackintosh (locked-in due to software). A quiet ['silent' in marketbabble] reliable small form factor box with a 24" IPS monitor and all the requisite parts (e.g. firewire800): $142 (CDN) less than a refurb iMac, once free shipping was factored in. I bought from Apple, grumbling.
I gave up some convenient access to ports (need a usb hub) and the second hard drive. I gained a better warranty and some documentation. Plus I didn't have to build and test.
Once you factor in the ridiculous resale value of used Macs, it's actually the same price, or even cheaper -- at least in some parts of the Apple lineup.
One of 'my' non-profits (~200mbrs) uses the software 'Donation' (softwarefornonprofits.com) but most of the users complain about the interface, and there are some problems keeping things in sync.
So, since the website is running Drupal, I'm looking at civicrm as a way to incorporate a back-end. I like the idea of controlling backups remotely and things staying in sync. Not sure about methods of producing tax receipts, or its reliability as a data source for accounting software.
Another possibility we were considering is eBase, a free FileMaker based CRM system for non-profits. I like the filemaker design environment for quick user interfaces, and custom reports etc. It's easy to teach a moderately skilled computer user to administer. But, eBase uses an antiquated file format, not even sure where to get FM v.5. Waiting on an update.
Another non-profit I'm in the middle of setting up plans on having a much larger membership base, with many layers of privilege, and will center on a media-rich website, so we'll probably try CiviCRM.
A souped up router plus USB drive for minimal file/print serving saves tons of power (since the router's going to be running anyway).
Tomato firmware provides excellent bandwidth reports (including a realtime graph and saving logs to a device), and even better, very useable Quality of Service controls plus fine grained control over many aspects of the device (including broadcast power). It is rock solid and easy to use. I find the GUI clearer than almost all stock consumer router software, yet vastly more capable.
For a router with USB ports that can load Tomato, I suggest the Asus Premium models, or the linksys WRTSL54GS (f you can find one). You will need a special version of Tomato that supports USB.
As for the speed of FCP; I can tell you this much: I had a MacBookPro 2.4ghz Core 2 Duo system with 4 MB of RAM. I used it to edit high definition footage what was filmed in AVCHD..... But I make short documentaries for the Web and I do it quickly.
With respect, AVCHD sucks royally for broadcast, and other HDV barely makes it. Unless, of course, you're shooting for the web, or doing real run-and-gun field work or mounting the camera on a plane wing. And you're right, Vegas is the platform of choice for editing AVCHD.
However, a properly funded doc is going to use HDCAM etc. The OP didn't specify their budget or shooting conditions, so it's hard to recommend based on that. (Though I've pulled the HD from a Mac laptop and moved that footage around before -- easy enough, just make sure an external case is in the equipment bag.)
I've directed/produced/crewed for docs and have a few friends doing very well with theatrical releases and international awards. I've taught, managed and run IT for a film school, and much of my current work is support for video production. I have made video with all three major platforms: macs are up and running faster and are usually more reliable in the field, windows can be better for people familiar with the platform (or vegas/premiere), and linux is pretty much only good for audio media production.
Most of the successful productions I've observed or been involved with were prepped on Final Cut and finished on Avids (e.g. The Corporation).
I can tell you that there are two major factors to deal with: 1. the workflow of the editing done at your "HQ" [chuckle] and 2. what the filmmakers' production tools are.
If the main editor is working in Avid, let them suggest your codec specs, and that will direct your software choices. If they're working in FCP, then just get Macs and be done with it. Likewise, on the odd chance your editor is using Premiere or Vegas (a bit unusual for a well-funded production), then consider the same software in the field.
You'll need to consider that the filmmakers might be holding back on you, and you'll discover their preferences or needs in the field... a macbook pro would be the most versatile solution in that situation (runs any software, etc.).
As another poster mentioned, if you're shooting on Panasonic P2 or some other odd media, research the connectivity. FCP can be problematic.
Chances are, though, you'll wind up providing macs for field editing (everyone shooting docs learns FCP sooner or later and it really does simplify some things) and logging, and keep a netbook handy for communications.
You don't really tell us enough to know what your needs are, how big the crew is, how many units, etc.
Re:Drupal cannot currently be taken seriously
on
Front End Drupal
·
· Score: 1
Karim, your site looks great at first but it has a huge navigation bar with mostly non-functional links -- a show-stopper. The site does a great job of promoting objectCMS up to the point where it 1) fails to describe its licensing in any way and 2) doesn't offer a way to download it.
That's completely amateur, with slick gradients and rounded corners attached, especially for a SEO company.
Too bad, I was intrigued, hoping to find a CMS for a large media archive.
There are no conclusive pieces of evidence from the region or Roman records about this Yeshu of Nazar. There are, however, scattered clues outside of the narrative of the faithful (and no, not just the Apocrypha!).
There are sources of information about the historical existence of Jesus in Persia, Kashmir and the Himalaya that are not "persuasive" because they haven't been properly investigated (except by hobbyists or unsystematic scholars following their fancy).
(look up Roza-Bal or 'Yuz Asaf' or "Jami-ut-tuwarik")
The notion of survival (as a human) after crucifixion, then a lifetime of travel and preaching abroad, is dismissed as absurd and ignored very easily, but one of the stronger objections I've heard is distance, which itself is absurd: my ancestors regularly travelled from Venice to Beijing and back -- by foot, and freakin' nasty camels. Better objections come in the form of "the evidence isn't properly documented".
Until someone actually goes in to the sacred shrine in Srinigar and does some sampling, the proof is all circumstantial and textual. There is great danger in studying anything so heretical, however, so the cost-benefit ratio must be poor; don't hold your breath.
There is a tomb in Srinigar, Kashmir, supposedly belonging to the prophet Issa, a Jew who healed people and preached compassion, and was buried there an old man in about 80 C.E.; the tomb is oriented east-west jewish style and the typical buddhist footprints on the lid have these odd crucifixion scars. I've been to the tomb, and wondered at its anonymity.
It's physical evidence, there's some contemporary corroborating textual evidence from the graffiti of stoneworkers at the time. It doesn't fit the standard narrative very well, though, does it? Unless Yeshua/Issa and his followers pulled a clean getaway, then carried on with the mission elsewhere... and the clean getaway involved a good cover story.
I can see why scholars ignore this, however. Simple Game Theory... leave it to the kooks, for now.
Why stop there? I have friends who are worm farmers (yes, really), and after decades of skillful gardening they settled on hay bale gardening: planting right in the top of a bale, with a starter of good soil. They live in dry country and this makes for good water management, and by the end of the season the bale has turned into garden soil. No weeding at all. They grow most of their own food this way.
If an organized group of people orchestrated this attack in order to bring attention to some goal, wouldn't that make them a terrorist group?
Really? Terrorists almost always see themselves as 'freedom fighters' and are usually linked to the receiving end of some kind of occupation. (Militant Islam takes it a notch up, though.)
The object is terror, in order to weaken the resolve of 'the oppressor' --- or to strengthen their resolve in such a way that crackdowns on the oppressed group will spur them to mass resistance.
Either way, terrorism is useless without an accompanying propaganda campaign, which means someone claims responsibility, or at least links the violence to a cause.
Contrast this to my teenage years, where as a suburban youth in high school I witnessed plenty of not-so-petty vandalism carried out in an organised way by one particular group, just for kicks. They were bored bullies. Life and limb of innocent bystanders were at risk in their exploits, and yet they preferred anonymity. (This also taught me that mayhem is relatively easy to cause, even for stupid teenagers... so where are all the bad guys?)
I say that if anonymity is maintained in this case, then it's more like organised crime or espionage than terrorism, and the message being sent was fairly narrowly targeted.
I rarely go to the cinema these days, in part because I have a problem with the persistence of vision. 24 frames per second isn't fast enough for me, and any significant motion on the screen breaks down into a strobe. I'm immediately reminded it's a projection on a screen, and there goes the magic.
I often wonder if I'm alone in the theatre with this problem, or if it's just one more way film will have to change.
Ask any economist and they'll tell you that wars are not only not inevitable, but there is no rational explanation for them at all, if by "rational" you mean "economically rational." There is a serious problem in economics called "the war puzzle" or "the war problem" that tries to figure out why the hell people ever go to war, because it is never economically rational for either side to do so, regardless of outcome.
Why would you ask an economist? They generally don't factor in the self-interest of a small elite or the way perfectly reasonable small conflicts aggregate into war under political nudges.
Ask someone who was inside the development and waging of Total War: Smedley Butler, a celebrated Marine and General. He wrote "War is a Racket" back in the '30's.
It's pretty obvious that war is highly profitable to a very few, and that the very many are highly susceptible to jingoism, nationalism, and political maneuvering. If fear concentrates power, and crisis provides economic opportunities, then war will appeal to strategists who think they'll win and can convince others of it too. Civilization brings out the worst in the mega-troupe, it's a mixed blessing for hominids fresh off the savannah.
Yah, those were pretty loud! Had to stuff one in a padded cabinet, otherwise what was the point of $500 speakers?
The newer top end machines are still only quiet when not under heavy load. It's the imacs and the mini that are mostly quiet. Anything with 8 cores and a giant render is going to need some serious cooling.
A lot of people, for example, don't care about FireWire 800, 802.11n, or ExpressCard, or dual-layer DVD-RW, and a machine lacking these can easily be cheaper.
Or, for that matter, quiet. Geeks comparing printed specs are deaf, unless they've actually bothered to cost out quiet computing.
While desktop Macs aren't silent, they're generally very quiet, and it carries tangible value.
I couldn't build a silent small-form hackintosh with IPS monitor for video editing for the same price I got a refurb iMac 24", it would have been about $150 (+ shipping) more just in parts from ncix, plus lots of labour and a dozen different warranties to worry about.
What Ferrari has is a lot of hype going for it. It is one of the ultimate "conspicuous consumption" vehicles. That hype gets conflated with various actual physical characteristics.
That's great -- you are such a nerd! It's obvious that the Ferrari offers something very tangible to a single male: statistically verifiable privileged access to fine-looking females.
The "Toyota" in this case is not infact a quality Japanese car but a piece of crap from Detroit and the "Ferrari" is not something that costs 15x more, it is something that costs perhaps 2x more and will last at a minimum 3 times longer.
The comparison I make for my customers is between a toyota and a lada, since I'm likely the one who'll be doing the servicing, and I'd rather not. The apple customers just come back way less, and though any TCO observation I have is small-scale and anecdotal, for many of my point-and-click customers, a Mac is a better value over 5 years (especially if you consider resale value). To be fair, I have done quite a few xp to ubuntu/opensuse conversions for people as well, and refuse to do malware cleanups any more, which around here cost them about $125.
Many cars at 10 years old are better and more desirable than an new vehicle that Detroit makes.
My 14-year-old Ford Escort wagon is so good mainly because it was designed by mazda.
I'll bite: It's a laptop without a screen, not a mid-range desktop. It's a specialized small-form factor "silent" computer, even smaller than a shuttle, with the premium to match. It has no way to add better graphics capability. It has a very expensive and limited hard drive upgrade path. It's a fantastic piece of engineering and design, I've deployed plenty of them as very reliable, quiet, and energy-efficient admin workstations and SOHO servers, but it's no good for my desktop.
The Mac Pro for people like me is overkill. A $1200 single-processor headless mac with a couple of expansion slots and room for an extra 3.5" HD in a quiet mid-size tower would be perfect.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm involved in a project of the latter category, a popular webpage operating from a cheap dedicated machine (single core, 1GB of memory, one logical disk, cheap disk controller with limited I/O bandwidth), and it's a nontrivial task to keep it running smooothly. In a few places it was necessary to do some custom coding at the HTTP server level, use different types of databases to do different things and even utilize specific filesystems for different partitions that hold data of different nature (lots of small, fast-changing files on one, some big, mostly appended to files on another, etc). .... Sure, it *was* a lot of work to do, but still probably less than modifying an existing CMS for such a level of specialization
No offense, but that sounds like false economy; i.e. it would be cheaper to buy a better server than to pay for lots of custom programming, and if you're restricted to that hardware, it sounds like money is an issue. Later on, a popular standardized CMS is likely to get security updates and expanded features, while your client's solution will need further expensive custom programming.
Unless you're a volunteer, of course.
it'd be like our present day society meeting the cro-magnum.
Cro-magnum? Like, this guy? Related to Flintlock Sapiens or the earlier Flintknap Sapiens, I think.
How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development?
Only a little difference: novelty and authority. But the real question is where one stands on the principles involved.
No matter where you are on the political 'spectrum', you're likely to have a different opinion on property rights, as it's one of the key things that places you on that spectrum.
If you are middle of the road, you think, quite possibly you've naturalized your version of property rights, which means that you tend to think of them as natural rights that extend right out to owning anything short of a human, and would be really uncomfortable with the idea of thinking about your attitude as ideology.
If you are completely opposed to the notion of ownership of 'common' resources like land and water, names and culture, and you think stewardship should be organised by some huge strong centralized government, you'd be a socialist dictatorship kind of person. If you think stewardship of common resources should be managed on an ad hoc consensual basis in as regionally-specific a way as possible and regulated at larger scale by multi-party treaties , you'd be in the socio-anarchist ~ tribalist ~ libertarian municipalist quarters.
Stripping land of its use value and strictly keeping it for its exchange value has been justified by broad-scale practice all around you, so it has a venerable history and seems natural. Domain names are new, the 'enclosure of the commons' via real estate has been happening for a very long time. There is an enormous and complex body of arguments against land speculation, some of them very quantifiable (so it's not purely an ideological discussion).
Also, domain names are not owned, they are essentially doled out with tenure grants and a fee. Structurally, they are treated like a common resource that is managed by central authority (more so than land, anyway). There is a different moral and ideological background.
Domainers usurp the original purpose of the domain. These folks seem to add nothing but lost productivity to the process of conducting business or having fun, unless you think the service they provide is the only fair way to do it.
Being legal does not make it legitimate, unless you believe fervently that the State is mother of all and that justice is blind in service of fairness (instead of in despair). There are many (not just marxists and anarchists) who also see land speculators as illegitimate parasites, sucking productivity out of the pockets of hard-working people who actually do worthwhile things with the land.
You can buy 10.3 [panther] or 10.4 [tiger] very cheaply on ebay or craigslist etc., a huge improvement over 10.2, which was never really meant to be used very long, it was a transitional version (despite the hype). 10.3 is where OS X first fulfilled its promise; anyone voluntarily running 10.2 after all these years has dubious computer-fu. In other words, you aren't kinda stuck, you're kinda whiny and definitely missing the point.
You can't run a 10 year old machine with ANY OS from that period and expect to easily surf the modern web without a few upgrades (usually RAM and OS version). Tiger (about $35) runs on a G3 with firewire and 256mb RAM (but turn off stuff like dashboard); and if you only want to spend $15, buy Panther and use the excellent Camino browser.
All my 6+ year-old windows boxes that got upgraded then converted to Linux boxes have all died and gone to scrap, so I don't keep PC boxes around older than about 4 yrs anymore; but I regularly use a 10-year-old iBook G3 running Panther for all kinds of things, including scanning, video capture and logging, and webmail. That thing just won't die, and is probably the best value I've ever gotten out of a computer. Apple mostly used excellent power supplies, so their desktop machines generally keep going too.
Macs are hideously expensive for the level of hardware you get compared to the level of hardware you can get for a PC for the same price. If you can't see the difference between $899 (tops) and $1149 for an iMac and $2300 for a Mac Pro (minimums)*, well, you either have entirely too much money to throw around or you're just a horrible fanboi.
I sourced out discounted hardware at newegg and ncix in order to build a hackintosh (locked-in due to software). A quiet ['silent' in marketbabble] reliable small form factor box with a 24" IPS monitor and all the requisite parts (e.g. firewire800): $142 (CDN) less than a refurb iMac, once free shipping was factored in. I bought from Apple, grumbling.
I gave up some convenient access to ports (need a usb hub) and the second hard drive. I gained a better warranty and some documentation. Plus I didn't have to build and test.
Once you factor in the ridiculous resale value of used Macs, it's actually the same price, or even cheaper -- at least in some parts of the Apple lineup.
One of 'my' non-profits (~200mbrs) uses the software 'Donation' (softwarefornonprofits.com) but most of the users complain about the interface, and there are some problems keeping things in sync.
So, since the website is running Drupal, I'm looking at civicrm as a way to incorporate a back-end. I like the idea of controlling backups remotely and things staying in sync. Not sure about methods of producing tax receipts, or its reliability as a data source for accounting software.
Another possibility we were considering is eBase, a free FileMaker based CRM system for non-profits. I like the filemaker design environment for quick user interfaces, and custom reports etc. It's easy to teach a moderately skilled computer user to administer. But, eBase uses an antiquated file format, not even sure where to get FM v.5. Waiting on an update.
Another non-profit I'm in the middle of setting up plans on having a much larger membership base, with many layers of privilege, and will center on a media-rich website, so we'll probably try CiviCRM.
A souped up router plus USB drive for minimal file/print serving saves tons of power (since the router's going to be running anyway).
Tomato firmware provides excellent bandwidth reports (including a realtime graph and saving logs to a device), and even better, very useable Quality of Service controls plus fine grained control over many aspects of the device (including broadcast power). It is rock solid and easy to use. I find the GUI clearer than almost all stock consumer router software, yet vastly more capable.
For a router with USB ports that can load Tomato, I suggest the Asus Premium models, or the linksys WRTSL54GS (f you can find one). You will need a special version of Tomato that supports USB.
Check the wikipedia page for an overview, and for the USB + FTP + Samba mod see this thread on the Linksys community forum.
As for the speed of FCP; I can tell you this much: I had a MacBookPro 2.4ghz Core 2 Duo system with 4 MB of RAM. I used it to edit high definition footage what was filmed in AVCHD..... But I make short documentaries for the Web and I do it quickly.
With respect, AVCHD sucks royally for broadcast, and other HDV barely makes it. Unless, of course, you're shooting for the web, or doing real run-and-gun field work or mounting the camera on a plane wing. And you're right, Vegas is the platform of choice for editing AVCHD.
However, a properly funded doc is going to use HDCAM etc. The OP didn't specify their budget or shooting conditions, so it's hard to recommend based on that. (Though I've pulled the HD from a Mac laptop and moved that footage around before -- easy enough, just make sure an external case is in the equipment bag.)
I've directed/produced/crewed for docs and have a few friends doing very well with theatrical releases and international awards. I've taught, managed and run IT for a film school, and much of my current work is support for video production. I have made video with all three major platforms: macs are up and running faster and are usually more reliable in the field, windows can be better for people familiar with the platform (or vegas/premiere), and linux is pretty much only good for audio media production.
Most of the successful productions I've observed or been involved with were prepped on Final Cut and finished on Avids (e.g. The Corporation).
I can tell you that there are two major factors to deal with:
1. the workflow of the editing done at your "HQ" [chuckle] and
2. what the filmmakers' production tools are.
If the main editor is working in Avid, let them suggest your codec specs, and that will direct your software choices. If they're working in FCP, then just get Macs and be done with it. Likewise, on the odd chance your editor is using Premiere or Vegas (a bit unusual for a well-funded production), then consider the same software in the field.
You'll need to consider that the filmmakers might be holding back on you, and you'll discover their preferences or needs in the field... a macbook pro would be the most versatile solution in that situation (runs any software, etc.).
As another poster mentioned, if you're shooting on Panasonic P2 or some other odd media, research the connectivity. FCP can be problematic.
Chances are, though, you'll wind up providing macs for field editing (everyone shooting docs learns FCP sooner or later and it really does simplify some things) and logging, and keep a netbook handy for communications.
You don't really tell us enough to know what your needs are, how big the crew is, how many units, etc.
Karim, your site looks great at first but it has a huge navigation bar with mostly non-functional links -- a show-stopper. The site does a great job of promoting objectCMS up to the point where it 1) fails to describe its licensing in any way and 2) doesn't offer a way to download it.
That's completely amateur, with slick gradients and rounded corners attached, especially for a SEO company.
Too bad, I was intrigued, hoping to find a CMS for a large media archive.
There are no conclusive pieces of evidence from the region or Roman records about this Yeshu of Nazar. There are, however, scattered clues outside of the narrative of the faithful (and no, not just the Apocrypha!).
There are sources of information about the historical existence of Jesus in Persia, Kashmir and the Himalaya that are not "persuasive" because they haven't been properly investigated (except by hobbyists or unsystematic scholars following their fancy).
(look up Roza-Bal or 'Yuz Asaf' or "Jami-ut-tuwarik")
The notion of survival (as a human) after crucifixion, then a lifetime of travel and preaching abroad, is dismissed as absurd and ignored very easily, but one of the stronger objections I've heard is distance, which itself is absurd: my ancestors regularly travelled from Venice to Beijing and back -- by foot, and freakin' nasty camels. Better objections come in the form of "the evidence isn't properly documented".
Until someone actually goes in to the sacred shrine in Srinigar and does some sampling, the proof is all circumstantial and textual. There is great danger in studying anything so heretical, however, so the cost-benefit ratio must be poor; don't hold your breath.
There is a tomb in Srinigar, Kashmir, supposedly belonging to the prophet Issa, a Jew who healed people and preached compassion, and was buried there an old man in about 80 C.E.; the tomb is oriented east-west jewish style and the typical buddhist footprints on the lid have these odd crucifixion scars. I've been to the tomb, and wondered at its anonymity.
It's physical evidence, there's some contemporary corroborating textual evidence from the graffiti of stoneworkers at the time. It doesn't fit the standard narrative very well, though, does it? Unless Yeshua/Issa and his followers pulled a clean getaway, then carried on with the mission elsewhere... and the clean getaway involved a good cover story.
I can see why scholars ignore this, however. Simple Game Theory... leave it to the kooks, for now.
Just so they scrub it for head lice!
Human head lice are so specialized that they really can't live off of a nice warm head for very long at all. So, wrong cooties to worry about.
Why stop there? I have friends who are worm farmers (yes, really), and after decades of skillful gardening they settled on hay bale gardening: planting right in the top of a bale, with a starter of good soil. They live in dry country and this makes for good water management, and by the end of the season the bale has turned into garden soil. No weeding at all. They grow most of their own food this way.
If an organized group of people orchestrated this attack in order to bring attention to some goal, wouldn't that make them a terrorist group?
Really? Terrorists almost always see themselves as 'freedom fighters' and are usually linked to the receiving end of some kind of occupation. (Militant Islam takes it a notch up, though.)
The object is terror, in order to weaken the resolve of 'the oppressor' --- or to strengthen their resolve in such a way that crackdowns on the oppressed group will spur them to mass resistance.
Either way, terrorism is useless without an accompanying propaganda campaign, which means someone claims responsibility, or at least links the violence to a cause.
Contrast this to my teenage years, where as a suburban youth in high school I witnessed plenty of not-so-petty vandalism carried out in an organised way by one particular group, just for kicks. They were bored bullies. Life and limb of innocent bystanders were at risk in their exploits, and yet they preferred anonymity. (This also taught me that mayhem is relatively easy to cause, even for stupid teenagers... so where are all the bad guys?)
I say that if anonymity is maintained in this case, then it's more like organised crime or espionage than terrorism, and the message being sent was fairly narrowly targeted.
the only reason to subvert the system is to do something illegal...
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
1: There are many fair use possibilities that this system could infringe on.
2: Copyright infringement's illegality varies depending on your local legal system.
3: The fuzzy areas of fair use can arguably be extended pretty far into mashups and remixing.
I rarely go to the cinema these days, in part because I have a problem with the persistence of vision. 24 frames per second isn't fast enough for me, and any significant motion on the screen breaks down into a strobe. I'm immediately reminded it's a projection on a screen, and there goes the magic.
I often wonder if I'm alone in the theatre with this problem, or if it's just one more way film will have to change.
Irony isn't part of the curriculum, Franz.
Ask any economist and they'll tell you that wars are not only not inevitable, but there is no rational explanation for them at all, if by "rational" you mean "economically rational." There is a serious problem in economics called "the war puzzle" or "the war problem" that tries to figure out why the hell people ever go to war, because it is never economically rational for either side to do so, regardless of outcome.
Why would you ask an economist? They generally don't factor in the self-interest of a small elite or the way perfectly reasonable small conflicts aggregate into war under political nudges.
Ask someone who was inside the development and waging of Total War: Smedley Butler, a celebrated Marine and General. He wrote "War is a Racket" back in the '30's.
It's pretty obvious that war is highly profitable to a very few, and that the very many are highly susceptible to jingoism, nationalism, and political maneuvering. If fear concentrates power, and crisis provides economic opportunities, then war will appeal to strategists who think they'll win and can convince others of it too. Civilization brings out the worst in the mega-troupe, it's a mixed blessing for hominids fresh off the savannah.
Yah, those were pretty loud! Had to stuff one in a padded cabinet, otherwise what was the point of $500 speakers?
The newer top end machines are still only quiet when not under heavy load. It's the imacs and the mini that are mostly quiet. Anything with 8 cores and a giant render is going to need some serious cooling.
A lot of people, for example, don't care about FireWire 800, 802.11n, or ExpressCard, or dual-layer DVD-RW, and a machine lacking these can easily be cheaper.
Or, for that matter, quiet. Geeks comparing printed specs are deaf, unless they've actually bothered to cost out quiet computing.
While desktop Macs aren't silent, they're generally very quiet, and it carries tangible value.
I couldn't build a silent small-form hackintosh with IPS monitor for video editing for the same price I got a refurb iMac 24", it would have been about $150 (+ shipping) more just in parts from ncix, plus lots of labour and a dozen different warranties to worry about.
What Ferrari has is a lot of hype going for it. It is one of the ultimate "conspicuous consumption" vehicles. That hype gets conflated with various actual physical characteristics.
That's great -- you are such a nerd! It's obvious that the Ferrari offers something very tangible to a single male: statistically verifiable privileged access to fine-looking females.
The "Toyota" in this case is not infact a quality Japanese car but a piece of crap from Detroit and the "Ferrari" is not something that costs 15x more, it is something that costs perhaps 2x more and will last at a minimum 3 times longer.
The comparison I make for my customers is between a toyota and a lada, since I'm likely the one who'll be doing the servicing, and I'd rather not. The apple customers just come back way less, and though any TCO observation I have is small-scale and anecdotal, for many of my point-and-click customers, a Mac is a better value over 5 years (especially if you consider resale value). To be fair, I have done quite a few xp to ubuntu/opensuse conversions for people as well, and refuse to do malware cleanups any more, which around here cost them about $125.
Many cars at 10 years old are better and more desirable than an new vehicle that Detroit makes.
My 14-year-old Ford Escort wagon is so good mainly because it was designed by mazda.
How is a mac mini different from what you want?
I'll bite:
It's a laptop without a screen, not a mid-range desktop.
It's a specialized small-form factor "silent" computer, even smaller than a shuttle, with the premium to match.
It has no way to add better graphics capability.
It has a very expensive and limited hard drive upgrade path.
It's a fantastic piece of engineering and design, I've deployed plenty of them as very reliable, quiet, and energy-efficient admin workstations and SOHO servers, but it's no good for my desktop.
The Mac Pro for people like me is overkill. A $1200 single-processor headless mac with a couple of expansion slots and room for an extra 3.5" HD in a quiet mid-size tower would be perfect.
Seriously, your social life is impoverished! The 'all women are whores' thing is really tired.
She is exactly the kind of woman that has sex with men for goods, services, and money.
man, you don't know many women with a sense of humour, do you?