SpryGuy said "...32K file name and path limits (instad of 255)..." (which to me implied a 32K limit of the total of both) and in reply to that post Viol8 came back talking about 32K file names, implying that it wasn't the total of both, at which point I asked a question to which your post may or may not be an answer, but I can't tell what you're trying to say.
... to no one. Apart from maybe malware writers who'll be able to put an entire virus in the filename. Whether they'll be able to hide it or even use it is another matter but I wouldn't put it past Windows to have a nice exploit available.
Is it 32K for the filename, or for the name with the path appended to the front?
I've seen cases where an 8.3 couldn't be copied because of the overall length of path+filename that would have resulted.
One that expresses my distrust of politicians and weasel words, and my suspicion that Ron Paul, like Ross Perot, in spite of being right about some things other politicians don't understand or wish to avoid understanding, is, when it's all said and done, dangeously nuts.
If you've been paying attention, you' d know the following:
- Ron Paul did not write those - Ron Paul has disavowed them - Ron Paul has admitted this as a mistake
It's a pretty lame excuse to the hold something against him, knowing the above 3 facts, unless you can say you've never screwed up. It's also pretty lame considering he's consistently talked about issues for the past 30 years, and says what he believes even when it's unpopular.
Oh, please, that newsletter was going out with his name on it and he couldn't be bothered to read it before it went to press?
I mean Sorenson probably really wrote "Profiles in Courage" but I'm certain JFK at least read it before it came out with his name on the cover.
I can't prove whether Bill Cosby really likes Jello pudding or not, but I'm pretty sure he at least tasted it at some point before doing the ads.
What issue can I use to divide them into two groups, such that one group is 'for' something and the other is 'against'?"
Next time you're at one of their townhall meetings, just ask one simple question -
vi or emacs?
In which case vote for the one who gives a non-answer answer that mentions the good and bad points of both rather than the ones who look at you like you just asked the question in Klingon.
Although I'm not at all a fan of the republicans, I think that if the democrats start loosing a lot of elections because of Nader and other 3rd party candidates, it's going to force them to change their position to attract the kind of people who vote for Nader.
Except that they'd interpret it as meaning they need to change their position to attract the kind of people who voted for the Republican who won when Nader diverted votes they would have otherwise gotten.
I'd like to vote for a Dem. But one of the other ones. Why don't they have a primary too?
God, maybe AmericanSelect? Of them I fear.
Technically, they are holding primaries.
That place in N.H. with like 9 residents? 6 voted in the Republican primary and 3 in the Democratic.
All 3 for Obama, so I don't know if there were any other names on their ballot or not.
What I'd like to see is for Democrats to write in Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary to send Obama a message that he doesn't have to be "Republican Lite".
The R's and the D's are truly just 2 arms of the same beast. They both survive only due to blaming the other camp for all of the problems in the world.
A few years ago a fellow Slashdotter (and I wish I could remember who so as to give them proper credit) summed it up most succinctly:
"The Republicans are the party of evil.
The Democrats are the party of stupid"
My addendum is that bi-partisan is when they get together to do something which is both.
*Republicans believe that nothing should hold back an individual or group from achieving success and happiness provided that it is done in a way that is not that harmful to society or others
I disagree. I don't think they give a shit what the effects on society are. However you can find to make money, go and do it, regardless of what harm it might do to others.
Yeah, this also makes it far more clear how the concepts of eternity or God being all knowing could make sense. If you could see time as we see things in three dimensions, then it becomes trivial to see the "future". A lot of the Bible makes far more sense if you assume that God isn't bound by time. (And really, I don't think it is much of an assumption to make.)
Well, if He exists outside of the universe, then it's no stretch to accept that He exists outside of time as well, since that whole spacetime thing means that time, like space, is a part of the universe, and they only exist because each other does, or something like that.
I just wonder if that doesn't mean that we're basically His 6th grade science project.
Let's say a giant bird had indigestion and threw up a planet-sized rock from it's gizzard! It then took a crap on the planet, making it ready for life. The bird took a seed from a neighboring planet and dropped it in its own dung and then flapped it's wings causing a tachyon inversion that sped up time 1,000,000,000-fold and caused the plant to evolve into the plants, creatures, and people we know today.
Wow! Anyone can play this game and this "theory" sounds just as likely!
You forgot to re-modulate the warp coils and reverse polarity on the thrusters.
It is very wrong to say the earth is flat. There are many, many ways of demonstrating its wrongness and assuming the earth is flat will lead you to wildly incorrect conclusions for many problems.
Even that isn't that wrong. The earth being flat is actually a very good model for the overwhelming majority of human day-to-day activities. I can't think of a single instance where my personal actions have been directed by anything but a flat earth model.
That's of course not to say that I don't depend on satellites, have flown in aircraft that used great circle navigation etc. etc. but on a personal level, I can't think of a single instance where my actions would have been different given the flat earth model and another one.
When they built the arch in St. Louis back in the '60s, they started from the two bases and built up to meet in the middle. The bases were far enough apart and the height great enough that they had to allow for the curvature of the earth. In other words, a plumb line over one base was not parallel to one over the other.
So, if you were an engineer on a project of that scale, you might need to consider the "not quite flat" Earth model.
Slashdot Mirror
Strange, my pen is capable of producing DNA. However,I haven't yet acquired the dexterity to make autographs with it yet.
Not even by writing in the snow?
Didn't they tell us TV had to go from analog to digital to free up contiguous blocks of spectrum for first responders?
Are they actually getting that spectrum, or is it all going to cell phone companies and such?
So, we're both left equally confused?
Well, at least that puts both of us in good company. : - )
SpryGuy said "...32K file name and path limits (instad of 255)..." (which to me implied a 32K limit of the total of both) and in reply to that post Viol8 came back talking about 32K file names, implying that it wasn't the total of both, at which point I asked a question to which your post may or may not be an answer, but I can't tell what you're trying to say.
... to no one. Apart from maybe malware writers who'll be able to put an entire virus in the filename. Whether they'll be able to hide it or even use it is another matter but I wouldn't put it past Windows to have a nice exploit available.
Is it 32K for the filename, or for the name with the path appended to the front?
I've seen cases where an 8.3 couldn't be copied because of the overall length of path+filename that would have resulted.
I don't worry about the government's unmanned drones flying over my house.
I worry about the "been known to make immediate unscheduled uncontrolled hard landings" V-22 Ospreys I so often see overhead.
Stop insulting the Tea Party. They're on the same side as the rest of the 99%, and you need them.
Although they may be part of the 99%, they're on the side of the 1%.
They just don't realize it.
One that expresses my distrust of politicians and weasel words, and my suspicion that Ron Paul, like Ross Perot, in spite of being right about some things other politicians don't understand or wish to avoid understanding, is, when it's all said and done, dangeously nuts.
This is the problem with democracy you get to vote but don't get to vote on what gets voted on (if that makes any sense) it's the illusion of control.
I only come across comments like yours when I don't have mod points, or when I do, but have already commented.
Which is why your score isn't higher.
Although you needed a comma after the word "democracy", and another after the closing parenthesis before the contraction "it's".
If you've been paying attention, you' d know the following:
- Ron Paul did not write those
- Ron Paul has disavowed them
- Ron Paul has admitted this as a mistake
It's a pretty lame excuse to the hold something against him, knowing the above 3 facts, unless you can say you've never screwed up. It's also pretty lame considering he's consistently talked about issues for the past 30 years, and says what he believes even when it's unpopular.
Oh, please, that newsletter was going out with his name on it and he couldn't be bothered to read it before it went to press?
I mean Sorenson probably really wrote "Profiles in Courage" but I'm certain JFK at least read it before it came out with his name on the cover.
I can't prove whether Bill Cosby really likes Jello pudding or not, but I'm pretty sure he at least tasted it at some point before doing the ads.
(New Coke is the exception that proves the rule)
Ron Paul is completely against invading Iran and has been very clear about it.
And I do appreciate that, but how is he on shelling and bombing them from a distance?
What issue can I use to divide them into two groups, such that one group is 'for' something and the other is 'against'?"
Next time you're at one of their townhall meetings, just ask one simple question -
vi or emacs?
In which case vote for the one who gives a non-answer answer that mentions the good and bad points of both rather than the ones who look at you like you just asked the question in Klingon.
Although I'm not at all a fan of the republicans, I think that if the democrats start loosing a lot of elections because of Nader and other 3rd party candidates, it's going to force them to change their position to attract the kind of people who vote for Nader.
Except that they'd interpret it as meaning they need to change their position to attract the kind of people who voted for the Republican who won when Nader diverted votes they would have otherwise gotten.
I'd like to vote for a Dem. But one of the other ones. Why don't they have a primary too?
God, maybe AmericanSelect? Of them I fear.
Technically, they are holding primaries.
That place in N.H. with like 9 residents? 6 voted in the Republican primary and 3 in the Democratic.
All 3 for Obama, so I don't know if there were any other names on their ballot or not.
What I'd like to see is for Democrats to write in Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary to send Obama a message that he doesn't have to be "Republican Lite".
Verizon sneaks in a new charge, they see who complains. If no one they leave it, if people do they remove or reduce it.
This process is repeated as often as possible.
Cellular complexity is the result
I really could have used having this appended to my original post* (the first one, as it happens) before I got hit with all the off-topic mods.
*http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2611690&cid=38639404
The R's and the D's are truly just 2 arms of the same beast. They both survive only due to blaming the other camp for all of the problems in the world.
A few years ago a fellow Slashdotter (and I wish I could remember who so as to give them proper credit) summed it up most succinctly:
"The Republicans are the party of evil.
The Democrats are the party of stupid"
My addendum is that bi-partisan is when they get together to do something which is both.
*Republicans believe that nothing should hold back an individual or group from achieving success and happiness provided that it is done in a way that is not that harmful to society or others
I disagree. I don't think they give a shit what the effects on society are. However you can find to make money, go and do it, regardless of what harm it might do to others.
Oh, so you've met the Koch brothers?
Yeah, this also makes it far more clear how the concepts of eternity or God being all knowing could make sense. If you could see time as we see things in three dimensions, then it becomes trivial to see the "future". A lot of the Bible makes far more sense if you assume that God isn't bound by time. (And really, I don't think it is much of an assumption to make.)
Well, if He exists outside of the universe, then it's no stretch to accept that He exists outside of time as well, since that whole spacetime thing means that time, like space, is a part of the universe, and they only exist because each other does, or something like that.
I just wonder if that doesn't mean that we're basically His 6th grade science project.
Let's say...
Let's say a giant bird had indigestion and threw up a planet-sized rock from it's gizzard! It then took a crap on the planet, making it ready for life. The bird took a seed from a neighboring planet and dropped it in its own dung and then flapped it's wings causing a tachyon inversion that sped up time 1,000,000,000-fold and caused the plant to evolve into the plants, creatures, and people we know today.
Wow! Anyone can play this game and this "theory" sounds just as likely!
You forgot to re-modulate the warp coils and reverse polarity on the thrusters.
Or maybe it was the other way around.
It is very wrong to say the earth is flat. There are many, many ways of demonstrating its wrongness and assuming the earth is flat will lead you to wildly incorrect conclusions for many problems.
Even that isn't that wrong. The earth being flat is actually a very good model for the overwhelming majority of human day-to-day activities. I can't think of a single instance where my personal actions have been directed by anything but a flat earth model.
That's of course not to say that I don't depend on satellites, have flown in aircraft that used great circle navigation etc. etc. but on a personal level, I can't think of a single instance where my actions would have been different given the flat earth model and another one.
When they built the arch in St. Louis back in the '60s, they started from the two bases and built up to meet in the middle. The bases were far enough apart and the height great enough that they had to allow for the curvature of the earth. In other words, a plumb line over one base was not parallel to one over the other.
So, if you were an engineer on a project of that scale, you might need to consider the "not quite flat" Earth model.
inb4 anyone mentions Creationism.
That's nothing... you were even nb4 anyone claimed "first post".
I didn't claim it because I'd already done that, back in '98 or '99, and gotten it out of my system.
'course that +1, Funny I was aiming for seems to be eluding me, and the humorous responses I'd anticipated are conspicuous by their absence as well.
Gave coldwetdog a nice springboard, though.
So this is not about cell phone networks?
...they'd know that data takes plural verbs, as it itself is the plural of datum.
I know that at the journal Nature, whether 'data' should treated as singular or plural is still a hot topic of debate.
http://www.gpuss.co.uk/english_usage/data_plural_singular.htm
If the singular form is data, what, pray tell, is the plural?
Will someone in the dismal future be saying "The datas are clear"?
...they'd know that data takes plural verbs, as it itself is the plural of datum.
The reason to put them in uniforms is to make it immediately apparent who is and who isn't a TSA employee.
I wouldn't give them "tin stars", but a photo ID on a lanyard seems like a good addition.