Actually I think somebody famous* established long time ago that sex, as strange as some of its involved rituals may seem to many at times, are a better alternative to war.
I propose that instead anything coming from or going to a.gov extension has the eBit** set.
with my 18" LCD for my parents at some 450 dollars. Not much more than an equivalent CRT a few years back.
the desktop market has tons of UXGA and WUXGA (1920x1200) screens. I can think of three or four off the top of my head.
I think the thing is that the demand isn't so high - because not everybody wants the huge space and people with bad eyes (read "anybody remotely aged") would rather sit at 1280x1024.
I think "getting a laptop with UXGA for under 1000 is a giant lie, though. find one and I will buy it. I don't think it's possible without refurb or otherwise.
Not necessarily on topic within the story, but definitely relavent in this thread.
I think if more news are like this, with pictures, people might start to half-assedly guess what a war is really like - death and misery.
Anyway - I have been kind of thinking (and hoping) that maybe the war will go off so badly until the US will put a "non-aggressive" clause in the constitution like Germany or Japan. I mean, what do you have to lose from it? just because you have the biggest gun doesn't mean you should wave it around and use it. - and you can still use your troops duing UN approved stuff - I think the only military excursions that US undertook since the UN has been UN approved actions.
(subject change, to something slightly on topic) My heart sinks when I see articles like this on CNN because I know they don't really care about stuff like this. Remember that CNN is in the same league as RIAA and MPAA - they are called content providers, who is willing to do everything they can so that they can be sure you are paying more than your fair share.
Maybe I am just being pessimistic, though - somebody please prove me wrong.
Flash and it's "million rewrite" really has me pained. It is soooo restricted to storage, but nothing else. Especially considering that NOR flash is the only dense one, they are not even that good compared to, say, CD (well, smaller, but the dense ones have slow read speed - random read speed, anyhow).
I am seriously hoping for the time when MRAM (try RAMTRON, which I think is one of the only manufactures of it) ramps up in density; DRAM speed, unlimited rewrite, AND stores after power off to boot.
I was going to ask for the same thing... Like I said - I don't like Saddam just as much as the next guy.
but anyway - I noticed that you said you don't care if some people make a few bucks for this...
However consider - yes the US is paying through the nose (in bad economic times, no less) to finance this war Bush wanted - this is TAX MONEY. When the oil rolls in, it goes into Bush's own pocket; when the military needs re-supplying, the money goes into Perle's pocket; when it comes to rebuilding, money goes into Qualcomm's pocket.
While you may have no quarrals about this, that's not saying other's don't. I am all for giving my due to save the Iraqi people, but I do not support all these few guys getting rich under the pretence that it was for the greater good. In the case of Qualcomm, Iraq would be better off with GSM because that's what everybody around there uses. In the case of the port contract awarded to US company - it would be better to have Iraqis run it themselves.
In the US side (compared to the British side) of this war, there is a strong conflict of interest (if "saving the Iraqi people" was part of the interest from the beginning - which I seriously doubt). If you don't do it for the right reasons, fuckups are inevitable and it will only mean bigger messes to clean up later.
Think of this: Teachers who teach because they love to teach and love children vs. Teachers who teach because "hey it's a job and pension is pretty good," which ones do you think will do a better job at bringing up kids? Before you say "but as long as the kid get a diploma," which ones are capable of bringing back a "bad kid"? Iraq situation is more tricky than anything else US has gone against in the past, about as bad as a bad kid will get, in our analogy.
That's what I mean by "going for the wrong reasons." I have no doubt that you love the Iraqi people and wants to see them free, but the whole point of this war from the beginning wasn't for the noble purpose that you had in mind.
Bush didn't go from a humanitarian angle because he can't. There are many other places in worse shape than Iraq that he doesn't do jack about, or care to do jack about, because he has nothing to gain from it. Pitching the "save the people" line is only to use the humanitarian hearts of the US people to fuel a war that has completely different intentions.
Indeed, if I was convinced that the purpose of the war was (remotely) humanitarian, I would agree with it and give it support because it at least have a chance at making things better. But as it stands now, I doubt Iraqi people will be more free or live a better life; on the contrary would simply have suffered through one more war, with negledgable (if any) improvement to their livelihoods.
I will not deny that I may have my own set of biases. I am finite. However, to deny that you know all truth is simply not being truthful to yourself.
I won't argue about "hating everone." While I do not, proving would be about as fruitful as a retirement fund based on Enron, so you think whatever you want.
And I will not yell "lies all lies," because I have no way of proving or disproving your news sources. I take them into consideration.
However, you have not answered any of my observations that all the people in high positions stand to benefit from this war.
Besides Bush and Perle, here is another one http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story /0,36 04,924421,00.html
See, I have no problem with overthrowing Saddam, fight for freedom, and all that. In fact, I firmly believe that Britian is in there for the right reasons (or I have not found contrary evidence otherwise). However, convincing me that US is doing this war as The Right Thing (tm) you need more than just stuff about how bad Saddam is. That was not my argument anyway - I wholeheartedly agree with you that Saddam is not a good man and the world can do without him - but what part of this whole thing makes you think that the US is going in there, really to save the people? Too much evidence points to the contrary.
At the same time - you are assuming by going in we can fix the problem. You can give ancedote of Japan all you want, but Japan does not have the problem of internal tension (kurds), or powerful neighbors aiming at taking it over (Turkey, Iran).
Some problems just can't be solved optimally with the military - this is one of them. As much as I'd like to see Saddam go, this is nor the method, nor the time (US economy? hello?). That added to the fact that it seems to me US is going for all the (or, mostly) wrong reasons, makes me very uncomfortable about this war.
As other posts will tell, `91 desert storm killed about as many civilians as during the 10 year saddam was at the helm - most of them due to destroyed hospitals and the like, and was consequentially children. saving civilians is bullshit. War does not save people, war kills people.
I love how everybody takes Japan as an example, but forget that Germany is about as much socialist as capitalist, if not more so toward the socialism side. Heck, half of europe is like that! Democracy and communism / socialism are not incongruent terms. confusing them does not bring credibility to arguments based on "installing a 'better' government."
This is not planning - this is drooling over the piece of fat meat that is iraq and deciding how to pump it for oil/money. If "rid of evil" is what the government is after, then Africa (dictators galore) / Saudi (terrorists galore) / N.Korea (proven nuclear program that he has threatened to USE?) would be on the top of the list.
The war should not have been started because it's for the wrong reasons. To me, anyway, the real reasons are beginning to manefest themselves more and more. You may think I am biased, but that goes both ways.
Another example is Richard Perle and what he stands to gain from this war. I mean, it just seem that most decision making people that's really adament about this war has a lot to get out of it - Bush his oil, Perle his military supplies, and here we have Qualcomm wanting a piece. I don't think this is coincidence.
There's already that sort of aid on the way, and Bush wants another 8 billion or so to be spent on that in the first 6 months. That's not counting other private group charities. They have to look at all these different issues as part of rebuilding. It's like saying we shouldn't bother fighting the common cold until we've got cancer taken care of.
Imagine if you have a surgeon doing surgery on you. During the operation, he is discussing excitedly with the nurse how he is going to take some crazy vacation from the money he's gonna get from the operation.
Now, would you say that he is concentrating on saving your life, or that's just a means to help himself, and he doesn't really care about you as long as there are no mal-practice suits?
In fact, if he actually recommended this operation to you while you were "on the fence," would you not start to doubt if this operation was really meant to benefit YOU?
grow up man... if they really was doing this for the people, they should not have the energy to worry about such trivial things. And yes, Qualcomm's stock prices is trivial compared to the human lives lost there.
Some printers have replacement nozzles (I know for sure some Cannon had this) - and the catridges (mind you, a plastic housing, a sponge inside, and ink) still costed like 15 bux a pop.
Besides, peizo heads don't clog nearly as much as the old "boiler" type.
Lastly, with a printer priced at under 100 dollars most of time (cheap ones as little as 50, better ones at only 200 or so), who really cares about "printing quality over life"? They are really throwaway items, and I don't like it...
Well, First of all I don't think the world is ruled by free trade. Why? because of trade embargos that countries with an army can force onto other places. (Cuba, for example, gets the royal shaft treatment from the US)
Anyway, Japan is in a tricky position. While they don't have to "ask permission" to arm, it would be a diplomatic nightmare if they did without some kind of consultation with UN or having US back them up or whatever.
Imagine if Japan one day announced that they are just going to start building ICBMs. There would be an 185% chance that china will bomb it pre-emptively, not to mention N.K (if still there) doing the same. Korea and China does NOT want to see Japan arm.
But then, like I said - depending on somebody else for your own protection is not a easy thing to swallow. A few weeks ago when N.K fired some missiles into the Japan sea, televised debate ran wild about arming.
Now, of course Japan has half the population of US so the opinion is not always congruent, but do not for a minute think there is not a lot of people, and a lot of political influential ones, wanting to arm Japan.
So basically what I have gathered is that 1) they want to arm 2) they can't because of the aforementioned tricky situation (there is more to the story regarding to US, but getting long already)
I too personally think Japan shouldn't arm - because I am chinese, as well as from a "asia stability" point of view. but on the other hand, from a purely "what would benefit japan" point of view, arming is the way to go, if they can manage it somehow.
I am not the only one who realizes that it's cheaper to buy a new printer than a set of replacement catridges.
So, what do you think happens to the old printer? it gets tossed; and then it gets dumped in a landfill or china - neither is a very good option.
I don't see how does that *not* impact my life.
Besides, environmental issues aside, while cheap, printers DO COST MONEY TO MAKE, and throwing them away because the manufactures decides on a fucked-up business model only drives up the cost eventually.
I really don't like this model the inkjet people has taken on. I mean, I understand it with games consoles, but the analogy don't really compare. It's like if Xbox costed less than your typical came and always came with coupon for a free game of your choosing - or a car that's so cheap you will buy it for the tank of gas that the dealer gives you. It's not a good business model anywhere else, why would the printer people get all drunk over it?
I saw on Japanese morning news that they got a reporter (or a few, I guess) riding with US troops in humvees through the Iraq desert.
The interesting part is - it's a woman! (and quite a good looking one) In the show she was complaining how hot and stuffy the desert suit is, and talking about the gas masks. I mean not to stereotype, but she would (from the look) fit to be one of those fragile-looking japanese ladies that will probably become a housewife in a few years.
I can hardly imagine what would happen if they really hit on some serious fighting. More interestingly, considering that there always seem to be rape-incidents a couple times a year with US troops stationed in S.Korea and Japan, I do wonder if the Iraqies pose more danger to her instead of her travel companions... Well unless she likes it that way; but anyhow... I doubt those troopes have their minds set on fighting - or, would fight more valiently than any other squadron in the force...
China is one of the few places in the world that does not depend on the middle east for Oil. And that's saying a lot.
Almost everything (raw materials wise) in Japan is imported. If you think Japan did "just fine" after the war without natural resources, what do you think it would be if it actually HAD natural resources?
Japan's entire reason for going to WWII (besides the empiralistic ideals) was to get resources - the allies cut shipments (which, btw, Japan going to war was predicted and that's what was expected anyway - not necessarily Pearl Harbor, but that's just because military strategists had head up their asses)
Why do you think Japan was occupying Manchura during WWII, instead of, say, push forward toward the western US (After decimating the pacific fleet - okay, short the carriers - They would have nearly no resistance going for california with Hawaii as a staging point. But they CANT because logistically they can't push into the US without raw materials to build planes and ships.
And if you were Japan, would you prefer to depend on the US (as unstable as it is these days) for your safety, or get "approved" to watch your own ass? It's not like Japan can't have a fleet - they have the money and the technology (fuck 50% of the electricity in Japan is nuclear - so they can get a nuclear weapons program started and finished overnight if they wanted to).
Constitutionally pacifist, ok, but in reality just by the amount of national pride in their "advanced military stuff" in the gulf right now will give you the idea that they want to be part of the action.
Partically I do understand some of the reasons. If north korea do lob a few nukes this way, Japan would be royally screwed. (N.K can't go anywhere else - say they take over the south, what, they will go against CHINA? fat chance)
However, being chinese, born in Nanjing no less, I can fully appreciate the concern other asian countries have over japan NOT arming itself. When Japan is armed, it has perfectly the reason to go conquer other places, because honestly Japan (the geographical features) really kind of suck. No natural resounces, tons of natural disasters, and no land for living (most habitable land is used to grow rice).
So, yes Japan is itching to get in on some action (why you think they are SUPPORTIVE of the US?) as a thing to prove that they need more military or somesuch.
But anyway; at least for a while longer, while the huge US presence is here, they don't have to worry too much about protecting themselves (and consequentially don't need to / have no excuse to arm). It would not be fun if the US one day withdraw their forces for some reason. Serious "shit hits the fan" would happen in this corner of the world.
Btw, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still there. Nukes back then were not as powerful as today.
Final Fantasy: TSW probably should be considered the most under-appreciated of all time. sigh. It broke Square, that's for sure - and that sure is a shame.
The Japanese DVD though is available if you look hard enough.
I live in Japan so I don't have to look, let alone look hard... They usually jump at me and try to grab my wallet when I walk through video/game/etc stores.
Hero becasue though people heard about it, come on guys it's so much better than Crotch Tiger Horny Dragon
Grave of the Fireflies because I know some US people don't like it because it shows them another side of war that they don't want to consider.
I also remember a clip from a movie that everybody pretty much called "fuck fu" (adult stuff but with wire-fu) back in the days from the stileproject. I think it's underappreciated because it was really really funny. Anybody knows the real link / name?
what you wrote on your site really can only work if the propel server knows what "version" of the amazon page sits on your computer - and your computer has to have a big enough cache that holds all the random pages you visit.
SO
assuming all users on the propel network gives pretty good coverage of the whole net, propel has to literally cache the whole net.
However, since sites like amazon sends "customized" pages to customers, propel has to cache different versions of the amazon page for different customers! That's like caching the internet, only you do it a few thousand times and keep track of which version goes to who.
I know storage is cheap; but damn; that's pretty rough.
Re:are you making this up?
on
Robots!
·
· Score: 1
I am not sure why you think I am a "twit," but anyway.
few things:
I already explained why I think "hayai hodo ii" and "WHILE entering" is grammatically inconsistent about five times in other posts. I won't do it again here.
"Please" and "excuse me" has limited meanings based on their original ones. "sumimasen" can mean "thank you," "sorry," "excuse me," "good bye," amongst others. I don't think any english counterparts matches the omnipotence of "sumimasen."
There are words in english, like "set," which have hundreds (237 I think) of definitions, though. however even in such an extreme case, most of these extra meanings are obscure, and the rest can be differentiated by grammatical context. A lot of times Japanese does not have such a luxury (see below).
Japanese to me also have more homophones than english. "shimeru," for example, can be any of five words between "occupy," "close," "strangle," "fasten," and "moisten." I assume that jbrowse relies on the page's author to have picked the correct kanji in order to work correctly - but in parsing speech (or, say, the page author left it in kana-form), when you don't have that kanji cue and must to it based on context, can be a nightmare (or, again, so I assume). English, on the other hand - the most severe set of homophones is probably "to, two, and too," which has completely different grammatical properties (unlike the japanese example which are all verbs), and therefore not as bad - again, just my thoughts.
kanji is relavent because even if I don't know the WORD, but know and correctly guess both kanji i hear or read (assuming it's a two-character word), I can contruct the meaning very accurately. This is a feature other languages don't possess - so I stand by the claim that knowing 20,000 words or 20,000 kanji is very much different.
unrelated subject - what is jbrowse's licensing terms (can't find on the website)? any chance it's OSS and can be ("can be" meaning legally allowed to be) ported to other browsers?
Re:are you making this up?
on
Robots!
·
· Score: 1
Well, my point was that japanese grammar has serious inconsistencies (same thing can mean widly different stuff in different places) that makes parsing it VERY difficult.
anyhow - to sound both modest and authoratative is hard, no? =)
you just can't logically think that such a "chinese room" is possible, because language is so contexual, and information can (and must) be passed and retained. something not possible with a book.
It's easy to thought-experiment "all possible I/O," but that's simply not possible, and you know it.
Let's say the person outside of the room continues to ask "how many sentences have I spoken to to you?" repeatedly; with other conversation stuff inter-mixed.
Logically speaking, the proper answer would be "0, 1, 2, 3, 4,..." However you cannot map one phrase to multiple answers, if it was just an "if asked this, give back that" kind of book.
In real world, the answer is probably "what the heck is wrong with you" after about the third time the question is repeated.
However, let's assume that the book has instructions where it will say stuff like "if you have heard this many sentences by now, answer this." This has a few problems:
1) if it's a "simple" if-then, you would need an infinite number of listings;
2) if it's a if-then that requires the person to calculate the number, you can no longer ignore the person in the room's intelligence;
3) if the book achieves the correct answer in some other ways, then you can no longer say that the book is simple, because in reality the book UNDERSTANDS chinese, but in a complex way (similar to your brain)
I havn't even gotten to the point where a new word is coined outside of the room and fed into it ("the definition of the word "__" is such and such" followed by "what is the definition of the word ___?)
Slashdot Mirror
Actually I think somebody famous* established long time ago that sex, as strange as some of its involved rituals may seem to many at times, are a better alternative to war.
.gov extension has the eBit** set.
I propose that instead anything coming from or going to a
*note: Larry Flint. Watch the movie.
**I hereforth trademark this name.
with my 18" LCD for my parents at some 450 dollars. Not much more than an equivalent CRT a few years back.
the desktop market has tons of UXGA and WUXGA (1920x1200) screens. I can think of three or four off the top of my head.
I think the thing is that the demand isn't so high - because not everybody wants the huge space and people with bad eyes (read "anybody remotely aged") would rather sit at 1280x1024.
I think "getting a laptop with UXGA for under 1000 is a giant lie, though. find one and I will buy it. I don't think it's possible without refurb or otherwise.
I think if more news are like this, with pictures, people might start to half-assedly guess what a war is really like - death and misery.
Anyway - I have been kind of thinking (and hoping) that maybe the war will go off so badly until the US will put a "non-aggressive" clause in the constitution like Germany or Japan. I mean, what do you have to lose from it? just because you have the biggest gun doesn't mean you should wave it around and use it. - and you can still use your troops duing UN approved stuff - I think the only military excursions that US undertook since the UN has been UN approved actions.
(subject change, to something slightly on topic) My heart sinks when I see articles like this on CNN because I know they don't really care about stuff like this. Remember that CNN is in the same league as RIAA and MPAA - they are called content providers, who is willing to do everything they can so that they can be sure you are paying more than your fair share.
Maybe I am just being pessimistic, though - somebody please prove me wrong.
Flash and it's "million rewrite" really has me pained. It is soooo restricted to storage, but nothing else. Especially considering that NOR flash is the only dense one, they are not even that good compared to, say, CD (well, smaller, but the dense ones have slow read speed - random read speed, anyhow).
I am seriously hoping for the time when MRAM (try RAMTRON, which I think is one of the only manufactures of it) ramps up in density; DRAM speed, unlimited rewrite, AND stores after power off to boot.
I was going to ask for the same thing... Like I said - I don't like Saddam just as much as the next guy.
but anyway - I noticed that you said you don't care if some people make a few bucks for this...
However consider - yes the US is paying through the nose (in bad economic times, no less) to finance this war Bush wanted - this is TAX MONEY. When the oil rolls in, it goes into Bush's own pocket; when the military needs re-supplying, the money goes into Perle's pocket; when it comes to rebuilding, money goes into Qualcomm's pocket.
While you may have no quarrals about this, that's not saying other's don't. I am all for giving my due to save the Iraqi people, but I do not support all these few guys getting rich under the pretence that it was for the greater good. In the case of Qualcomm, Iraq would be better off with GSM because that's what everybody around there uses. In the case of the port contract awarded to US company - it would be better to have Iraqis run it themselves.
In the US side (compared to the British side) of this war, there is a strong conflict of interest (if "saving the Iraqi people" was part of the interest from the beginning - which I seriously doubt). If you don't do it for the right reasons, fuckups are inevitable and it will only mean bigger messes to clean up later.
Think of this: Teachers who teach because they love to teach and love children vs. Teachers who teach because "hey it's a job and pension is pretty good," which ones do you think will do a better job at bringing up kids? Before you say "but as long as the kid get a diploma," which ones are capable of bringing back a "bad kid"? Iraq situation is more tricky than anything else US has gone against in the past, about as bad as a bad kid will get, in our analogy.
That's what I mean by "going for the wrong reasons." I have no doubt that you love the Iraqi people and wants to see them free, but the whole point of this war from the beginning wasn't for the noble purpose that you had in mind.
Bush didn't go from a humanitarian angle because he can't. There are many other places in worse shape than Iraq that he doesn't do jack about, or care to do jack about, because he has nothing to gain from it. Pitching the "save the people" line is only to use the humanitarian hearts of the US people to fuel a war that has completely different intentions.
Indeed, if I was convinced that the purpose of the war was (remotely) humanitarian, I would agree with it and give it support because it at least have a chance at making things better. But as it stands now, I doubt Iraqi people will be more free or live a better life; on the contrary would simply have suffered through one more war, with negledgable (if any) improvement to their livelihoods.
I will not deny that I may have my own set of biases. I am finite. However, to deny that you know all truth is simply not being truthful to yourself.
y /0,36 04,924421,00.html
I won't argue about "hating everone." While I do not, proving would be about as fruitful as a retirement fund based on Enron, so you think whatever you want.
And I will not yell "lies all lies," because I have no way of proving or disproving your news sources. I take them into consideration.
However, you have not answered any of my observations that all the people in high positions stand to benefit from this war.
Besides Bush and Perle, here is another one
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/stor
See, I have no problem with overthrowing Saddam, fight for freedom, and all that. In fact, I firmly believe that Britian is in there for the right reasons (or I have not found contrary evidence otherwise). However, convincing me that US is doing this war as The Right Thing (tm) you need more than just stuff about how bad Saddam is. That was not my argument anyway - I wholeheartedly agree with you that Saddam is not a good man and the world can do without him - but what part of this whole thing makes you think that the US is going in there, really to save the people? Too much evidence points to the contrary.
At the same time - you are assuming by going in we can fix the problem. You can give ancedote of Japan all you want, but Japan does not have the problem of internal tension (kurds), or powerful neighbors aiming at taking it over (Turkey, Iran).
Some problems just can't be solved optimally with the military - this is one of them. As much as I'd like to see Saddam go, this is nor the method, nor the time (US economy? hello?). That added to the fact that it seems to me US is going for all the (or, mostly) wrong reasons, makes me very uncomfortable about this war.
saving from saddam's evil?
As other posts will tell, `91 desert storm killed about as many civilians as during the 10 year saddam was at the helm - most of them due to destroyed hospitals and the like, and was consequentially children. saving civilians is bullshit. War does not save people, war kills people.
I love how everybody takes Japan as an example, but forget that Germany is about as much socialist as capitalist, if not more so toward the socialism side. Heck, half of europe is like that! Democracy and communism / socialism are not incongruent terms. confusing them does not bring credibility to arguments based on "installing a 'better' government."
This is not planning - this is drooling over the piece of fat meat that is iraq and deciding how to pump it for oil/money. If "rid of evil" is what the government is after, then Africa (dictators galore) / Saudi (terrorists galore) / N.Korea (proven nuclear program that he has threatened to USE?) would be on the top of the list.
The war should not have been started because it's for the wrong reasons. To me, anyway, the real reasons are beginning to manefest themselves more and more. You may think I am biased, but that goes both ways.
Another example is Richard Perle and what he stands to gain from this war. I mean, it just seem that most decision making people that's really adament about this war has a lot to get out of it - Bush his oil, Perle his military supplies, and here we have Qualcomm wanting a piece. I don't think this is coincidence.
One day I will boot up WinPalidumb and a ghostly image of Whoppie Goldberg will lure me to this place of pure happiness.
Of course, being cool as I am I will realize that it's all fake and as harsh as real life^H^Hnux is, that's where we belong...
And I will bring back William Shatner; possibly saving (enter)price(line)?
*ducks*
Imagine if you have a surgeon doing surgery on you. During the operation, he is discussing excitedly with the nurse how he is going to take some crazy vacation from the money he's gonna get from the operation.
Now, would you say that he is concentrating on saving your life, or that's just a means to help himself, and he doesn't really care about you as long as there are no mal-practice suits?
In fact, if he actually recommended this operation to you while you were "on the fence," would you not start to doubt if this operation was really meant to benefit YOU?
grow up man... if they really was doing this for the people, they should not have the energy to worry about such trivial things. And yes, Qualcomm's stock prices is trivial compared to the human lives lost there.
I really hope this lays to rest any argument about the US going there to "save the civilians from Saddam's evil."
Come on people, war hasn't even finished, and all they can think about is US cellphone company's benefits? what about FOOD, WATER, MEDICINE?
sheesh...
yeah but I don't think that's true...
Some printers have replacement nozzles (I know for sure some Cannon had this) - and the catridges (mind you, a plastic housing, a sponge inside, and ink) still costed like 15 bux a pop.
Besides, peizo heads don't clog nearly as much as the old "boiler" type.
Lastly, with a printer priced at under 100 dollars most of time (cheap ones as little as 50, better ones at only 200 or so), who really cares about "printing quality over life"? They are really throwaway items, and I don't like it...
Well, First of all I don't think the world is ruled by free trade. Why? because of trade embargos that countries with an army can force onto other places. (Cuba, for example, gets the royal shaft treatment from the US)
Anyway, Japan is in a tricky position. While they don't have to "ask permission" to arm, it would be a diplomatic nightmare if they did without some kind of consultation with UN or having US back them up or whatever.
Imagine if Japan one day announced that they are just going to start building ICBMs. There would be an 185% chance that china will bomb it pre-emptively, not to mention N.K (if still there) doing the same. Korea and China does NOT want to see Japan arm.
But then, like I said - depending on somebody else for your own protection is not a easy thing to swallow. A few weeks ago when N.K fired some missiles into the Japan sea, televised debate ran wild about arming.
Now, of course Japan has half the population of US so the opinion is not always congruent, but do not for a minute think there is not a lot of people, and a lot of political influential ones, wanting to arm Japan.
So basically what I have gathered is that
1) they want to arm
2) they can't because of the aforementioned tricky situation (there is more to the story regarding to US, but getting long already)
I too personally think Japan shouldn't arm - because I am chinese, as well as from a "asia stability" point of view. but on the other hand, from a purely "what would benefit japan" point of view, arming is the way to go, if they can manage it somehow.
I am not the only one who realizes that it's cheaper to buy a new printer than a set of replacement catridges.
So, what do you think happens to the old printer? it gets tossed; and then it gets dumped in a landfill or china - neither is a very good option.
I don't see how does that *not* impact my life.
Besides, environmental issues aside, while cheap, printers DO COST MONEY TO MAKE, and throwing them away because the manufactures decides on a fucked-up business model only drives up the cost eventually.
I really don't like this model the inkjet people has taken on. I mean, I understand it with games consoles, but the analogy don't really compare. It's like if Xbox costed less than your typical came and always came with coupon for a free game of your choosing - or a car that's so cheap you will buy it for the tank of gas that the dealer gives you. It's not a good business model anywhere else, why would the printer people get all drunk over it?
They are not kidding.
I saw on Japanese morning news that they got a reporter (or a few, I guess) riding with US troops in humvees through the Iraq desert.
The interesting part is - it's a woman! (and quite a good looking one) In the show she was complaining how hot and stuffy the desert suit is, and talking about the gas masks. I mean not to stereotype, but she would (from the look) fit to be one of those fragile-looking japanese ladies that will probably become a housewife in a few years.
I can hardly imagine what would happen if they really hit on some serious fighting. More interestingly, considering that there always seem to be rape-incidents a couple times a year with US troops stationed in S.Korea and Japan, I do wonder if the Iraqies pose more danger to her instead of her travel companions... Well unless she likes it that way; but anyhow... I doubt those troopes have their minds set on fighting - or, would fight more valiently than any other squadron in the force...
on the contrary
China is one of the few places in the world that does not depend on the middle east for Oil. And that's saying a lot.
Almost everything (raw materials wise) in Japan is imported. If you think Japan did "just fine" after the war without natural resources, what do you think it would be if it actually HAD natural resources?
Japan's entire reason for going to WWII (besides the empiralistic ideals) was to get resources - the allies cut shipments (which, btw, Japan going to war was predicted and that's what was expected anyway - not necessarily Pearl Harbor, but that's just because military strategists had head up their asses)
Why do you think Japan was occupying Manchura during WWII, instead of, say, push forward toward the western US (After decimating the pacific fleet - okay, short the carriers - They would have nearly no resistance going for california with Hawaii as a staging point. But they CANT because logistically they can't push into the US without raw materials to build planes and ships.
And if you were Japan, would you prefer to depend on the US (as unstable as it is these days) for your safety, or get "approved" to watch your own ass? It's not like Japan can't have a fleet - they have the money and the technology (fuck 50% of the electricity in Japan is nuclear - so they can get a nuclear weapons program started and finished overnight if they wanted to).
Don't be naive, man.
I don't think you are right on this one buddy...
Constitutionally pacifist, ok, but in reality just by the amount of national pride in their "advanced military stuff" in the gulf right now will give you the idea that they want to be part of the action.
Partically I do understand some of the reasons. If north korea do lob a few nukes this way, Japan would be royally screwed. (N.K can't go anywhere else - say they take over the south, what, they will go against CHINA? fat chance)
However, being chinese, born in Nanjing no less, I can fully appreciate the concern other asian countries have over japan NOT arming itself. When Japan is armed, it has perfectly the reason to go conquer other places, because honestly Japan (the geographical features) really kind of suck. No natural resounces, tons of natural disasters, and no land for living (most habitable land is used to grow rice).
So, yes Japan is itching to get in on some action (why you think they are SUPPORTIVE of the US?) as a thing to prove that they need more military or somesuch.
But anyway; at least for a while longer, while the huge US presence is here, they don't have to worry too much about protecting themselves (and consequentially don't need to / have no excuse to arm). It would not be fun if the US one day withdraw their forces for some reason. Serious "shit hits the fan" would happen in this corner of the world.
Btw, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still there. Nukes back then were not as powerful as today.
Final Fantasy: TSW probably should be considered the most under-appreciated of all time. sigh. It broke Square, that's for sure - and that sure is a shame.
I live in Japan so I don't have to look, let alone look hard... They usually jump at me and try to grab my wallet when I walk through video/game/etc stores.
Seems like out of now 450+ messages, ONE has been modded to score 3...
/. Good job y'all... We need to find more topics like this.
wow; moderators are probably busy putting in their viewpoints instead of modding up others'
This is the first time I see something like this happen on
Hero becasue though people heard about it, come on guys it's so much better than Crotch Tiger Horny Dragon
Grave of the Fireflies because I know some US people don't like it because it shows them another side of war that they don't want to consider.
I also remember a clip from a movie that everybody pretty much called "fuck fu" (adult stuff but with wire-fu) back in the days from the stileproject. I think it's underappreciated because it was really really funny. Anybody knows the real link / name?
what you wrote on your site really can only work if the propel server knows what "version" of the amazon page sits on your computer - and your computer has to have a big enough cache that holds all the random pages you visit.
SO
assuming all users on the propel network gives pretty good coverage of the whole net, propel has to literally cache the whole net.
However, since sites like amazon sends "customized" pages to customers, propel has to cache different versions of the amazon page for different customers! That's like caching the internet, only you do it a few thousand times and keep track of which version goes to who.
I know storage is cheap; but damn; that's pretty rough.
I am not sure why you think I am a "twit," but anyway.
few things:
I already explained why I think "hayai hodo ii" and "WHILE entering" is grammatically inconsistent about five times in other posts. I won't do it again here.
"Please" and "excuse me" has limited meanings based on their original ones. "sumimasen" can mean "thank you," "sorry," "excuse me," "good bye," amongst others. I don't think any english counterparts matches the omnipotence of "sumimasen."
There are words in english, like "set," which have hundreds (237 I think) of definitions, though. however even in such an extreme case, most of these extra meanings are obscure, and the rest can be differentiated by grammatical context. A lot of times Japanese does not have such a luxury (see below).
Japanese to me also have more homophones than english. "shimeru," for example, can be any of five words between "occupy," "close," "strangle," "fasten," and "moisten." I assume that jbrowse relies on the page's author to have picked the correct kanji in order to work correctly - but in parsing speech (or, say, the page author left it in kana-form), when you don't have that kanji cue and must to it based on context, can be a nightmare (or, again, so I assume). English, on the other hand - the most severe set of homophones is probably "to, two, and too," which has completely different grammatical properties (unlike the japanese example which are all verbs), and therefore not as bad - again, just my thoughts.
kanji is relavent because even if I don't know the WORD, but know and correctly guess both kanji i hear or read (assuming it's a two-character word), I can contruct the meaning very accurately. This is a feature other languages don't possess - so I stand by the claim that knowing 20,000 words or 20,000 kanji is very much different.
unrelated subject - what is jbrowse's licensing terms (can't find on the website)? any chance it's OSS and can be ("can be" meaning legally allowed to be) ported to other browsers?
Well, my point was that japanese grammar has serious inconsistencies (same thing can mean widly different stuff in different places) that makes parsing it VERY difficult.
anyhow - to sound both modest and authoratative is hard, no? =)
most ceiling lights in japan all comes with remote controls.
no joke
you just can't logically think that such a "chinese room" is possible, because language is so contexual, and information can (and must) be passed and retained. something not possible with a book.
..." However you cannot map one phrase to multiple answers, if it was just an "if asked this, give back that" kind of book.
It's easy to thought-experiment "all possible I/O," but that's simply not possible, and you know it.
Let's say the person outside of the room continues to ask "how many sentences have I spoken to to you?" repeatedly; with other conversation stuff inter-mixed.
Logically speaking, the proper answer would be "0, 1, 2, 3, 4,
In real world, the answer is probably "what the heck is wrong with you" after about the third time the question is repeated.
However, let's assume that the book has instructions where it will say stuff like "if you have heard this many sentences by now, answer this." This has a few problems:
1) if it's a "simple" if-then, you would need an infinite number of listings;
2) if it's a if-then that requires the person to calculate the number, you can no longer ignore the person in the room's intelligence;
3) if the book achieves the correct answer in some other ways, then you can no longer say that the book is simple, because in reality the book UNDERSTANDS chinese, but in a complex way (similar to your brain)
I havn't even gotten to the point where a new word is coined outside of the room and fed into it ("the definition of the word "__" is such and such" followed by "what is the definition of the word ___?)
so, Searle can take her argument and shove it.