Am I the only one who doesn't get the point of RSS? It seems to be providing periodic updates in a concise format. Can't you do that by setting things up to send items by email every time there's a new item posted? Or even by UseNet to a moderated group? What does RSS do that's new?
It has a several-hundred-year-old history in commercial ledgers meaning "at", so is sometimes called the "commercial at", since it was almost never used anywhere else until recently. E.g. "55 bales @ $0.25 ea".
I thought it was a lot better too, and it was the main one I played. However, it's clearly in the same line of games, with many of the same broad mechanics.
I've been wanting to get a second monitor for home, but then I figure I'll find it even harder to drag my ass into the office and get work done, because I'll spend the whole time thinking goddamn it how do they expect me to get work done with one lousy monitor. So I'd either stay home all the time, or end up buying an extra monitor for work.
One of the reasons I love The Economist is that it's clear what their viewpoints are, but they still are willing to grant points to the "other side" when they have good points. In contrast, a lot of US biased news sources are merely partisan: they praise everything their side says and slam everything the other side says. To a Democrat, nothing Bush says can possibly be good, and the first thing they try to do is to figure out how to spin it negatively; same for the Republicans and how they view Kerry.
The Economist, meanwhile, is unapologetically for free trade, but has no problems with admitting problems free trade agreements have had, negative effects of free trade, and so on. They have a viewpoint on how to best solve problems, but they are willing to investigate flaws and difficulties that viewpoint presents, because that's, after all, the only way to actually fix them.
To take a concrete example, they actually favored the war in Iraq, and still think it was a good idea, but their coverage has also included quite a bit of criticism of it.
Crossfire, on the other hand, has a team sports mentality where the "right" must always defend what their side says and attack what the other side says, and the same for the "left". Bah.
The wire reports last week (sorry, no link at the moment) had an FBI spokesperson who said they were acting at the request of the Swiss and Italian governments, under the terms of a law-enforcement-cooperation treaty. Apparently the FBI was involved because Rackspace is a US company.
The only likely explanation for why those governments would be interested that has surfaced so far is that Indymedia posted some photographs that were taken of undercover police officers who were photographing demonstrators (the demonstrators photographed their photographers, as it were). Apparently this is illegal in Europe?
Bush didn't defend any of his actions, or give any of his reasons for his viewpoints. He just said what he did. I know what he did, because I read the news. I want to know what his reasons are, how he thinks it worked out, what he'd do differently if he had to do it over again, what he plans to do in the next four years, and so on.
The students here in Georgia, which has uniformly conservative people everywhere, tend to be pretty liberal. Meanwhile, the students I knew in California, which has liberals everywhere, tended to be pretty conservative (comparatively, anyway).
Also, I'd have to say until I got to college, I had no idea what my teachers thought of any politicians. It just didn't come up.
I won't hold anything a politician's supporters do against him/her, because lots of reasonable people have crazy supporters. But if the person themselves is behind dirty tricks, I'd definitely hold that against them. Whether it's decisive depends on the other issues involved, but in my mind it's prima facie evidence that the person is more of a politician and demagoguge than an honest representative, and so they'd have to really excel in other areas to overcome that handicap and win my vote.
In this case, I don't think I'd ever vote for someone who used fear-mongering about "terrorism". There are legitimate worries, but it's our leaders' job to put them in perspective and calmly work to resolve them, not to work people up into a hysteria and play on them for political gain.
If you really need to be contacted, you can still be contacted the old-fashioned, pre-cellphone way: leave information on where you'll be, and then the restaurant/theater/etc. can pass along a message. It worked 10 years ago, and it still works.
Trademarks are only for specific purposes. Unless they can argue that this site was using the trademark in a way that competes with the university (i.e. they started another university and used it as their logo), then I don't see how trademark law would apply. There is no likelihood of confusion between the two entities, as one is a university and one is some kid's website that is clearly not a university.
I read it from cover to cover, and think it's the best piece of writing Stephenson's done. However, I did not purchase it; instead, I used my local library. =]
Random stuff like CNN usually isn't blocked, but I'm guessing that you may have found it difficult to pull up the site of the Government of Tibet in Exile, for example. The Chinese-language Wikipedia has also been blocked on and off.
It's possible that banning porn is popular in China. But given that their leaders are not elected, it's hard to say. All we know is that the leadership wants to ban porn. There's no information that I can find on whether the society itself thinks that's a good idea. If it doesn't, it'll just drive things underground.
I began reading this review, as I don't use either KDE or GNOME, but am occasionally interested in seeing what they are up to (I use pekwm as a WM and no "desktop environment").
The very people this would be taxing are those least likely to benefit: people who don't have a television. Those who have a television---and therefore can watch the channels---are already paying the fee. So why extend it to people with no TVs?
My high school had internet access, and guess what? We never used it. Just about everything you're supposed to learn in high school can easily be done with books and offline computers.
Giving kids who can't afford home internet access a way to access it is fine, but I'd do it through public libraries. It's not necessary at school.
Washington, D.C. spends a huge amount of money per student (among the largest in the nation), and their schools still suck. Throwing money at the problem doesn't fix it.
Slashdot Mirror
Am I the only one who doesn't get the point of RSS? It seems to be providing periodic updates in a concise format. Can't you do that by setting things up to send items by email every time there's a new item posted? Or even by UseNet to a moderated group? What does RSS do that's new?
It has a several-hundred-year-old history in commercial ledgers meaning "at", so is sometimes called the "commercial at", since it was almost never used anywhere else until recently. E.g. "55 bales @ $0.25 ea".
I thought it was a lot better too, and it was the main one I played. However, it's clearly in the same line of games, with many of the same broad mechanics.
Falcon's Eye!
(yeah, it breaks the naming pattern, but it was by the same guys and largely the same game)
I've been wanting to get a second monitor for home, but then I figure I'll find it even harder to drag my ass into the office and get work done, because I'll spend the whole time thinking goddamn it how do they expect me to get work done with one lousy monitor. So I'd either stay home all the time, or end up buying an extra monitor for work.
One of the reasons I love The Economist is that it's clear what their viewpoints are, but they still are willing to grant points to the "other side" when they have good points. In contrast, a lot of US biased news sources are merely partisan: they praise everything their side says and slam everything the other side says. To a Democrat, nothing Bush says can possibly be good, and the first thing they try to do is to figure out how to spin it negatively; same for the Republicans and how they view Kerry.
The Economist, meanwhile, is unapologetically for free trade, but has no problems with admitting problems free trade agreements have had, negative effects of free trade, and so on. They have a viewpoint on how to best solve problems, but they are willing to investigate flaws and difficulties that viewpoint presents, because that's, after all, the only way to actually fix them.
To take a concrete example, they actually favored the war in Iraq, and still think it was a good idea, but their coverage has also included quite a bit of criticism of it.
Crossfire, on the other hand, has a team sports mentality where the "right" must always defend what their side says and attack what the other side says, and the same for the "left". Bah.
I do my best to make sure your claim is untrue.
I type text in this box so the lameness filter permits it to post, but in reality the first box was sufficient for my post's content.
I kept reading "The prisoner's dilemma is quite useful in normal life, or at least the drinking game that gives rise to the solution is."
The wire reports last week (sorry, no link at the moment) had an FBI spokesperson who said they were acting at the request of the Swiss and Italian governments, under the terms of a law-enforcement-cooperation treaty. Apparently the FBI was involved because Rackspace is a US company.
The only likely explanation for why those governments would be interested that has surfaced so far is that Indymedia posted some photographs that were taken of undercover police officers who were photographing demonstrators (the demonstrators photographed their photographers, as it were). Apparently this is illegal in Europe?
It's all very murky, in any case.
Bush didn't defend any of his actions, or give any of his reasons for his viewpoints. He just said what he did. I know what he did, because I read the news. I want to know what his reasons are, how he thinks it worked out, what he'd do differently if he had to do it over again, what he plans to do in the next four years, and so on.
The students here in Georgia, which has uniformly conservative people everywhere, tend to be pretty liberal. Meanwhile, the students I knew in California, which has liberals everywhere, tended to be pretty conservative (comparatively, anyway).
Also, I'd have to say until I got to college, I had no idea what my teachers thought of any politicians. It just didn't come up.
Nader's support is down below 1% nationally, which is comparable to Badnarik. Badnarik might even pull more in some states...
If it's longer than a paragraph nobody here reads it. So Kerry wins this round.
Despite being moderately conservative (at least in the libertarian sense), I'm not voting for Mr. Bush.
I won't hold anything a politician's supporters do against him/her, because lots of reasonable people have crazy supporters. But if the person themselves is behind dirty tricks, I'd definitely hold that against them. Whether it's decisive depends on the other issues involved, but in my mind it's prima facie evidence that the person is more of a politician and demagoguge than an honest representative, and so they'd have to really excel in other areas to overcome that handicap and win my vote.
In this case, I don't think I'd ever vote for someone who used fear-mongering about "terrorism". There are legitimate worries, but it's our leaders' job to put them in perspective and calmly work to resolve them, not to work people up into a hysteria and play on them for political gain.
If you really need to be contacted, you can still be contacted the old-fashioned, pre-cellphone way: leave information on where you'll be, and then the restaurant/theater/etc. can pass along a message. It worked 10 years ago, and it still works.
Trademarks are only for specific purposes. Unless they can argue that this site was using the trademark in a way that competes with the university (i.e. they started another university and used it as their logo), then I don't see how trademark law would apply. There is no likelihood of confusion between the two entities, as one is a university and one is some kid's website that is clearly not a university.
I read it from cover to cover, and think it's the best piece of writing Stephenson's done. However, I did not purchase it; instead, I used my local library. =]
But it's definitely his masterpiece, IMO.
Random stuff like CNN usually isn't blocked, but I'm guessing that you may have found it difficult to pull up the site of the Government of Tibet in Exile, for example. The Chinese-language Wikipedia has also been blocked on and off.
It's possible that banning porn is popular in China. But given that their leaders are not elected, it's hard to say. All we know is that the leadership wants to ban porn. There's no information that I can find on whether the society itself thinks that's a good idea. If it doesn't, it'll just drive things underground.
I began reading this review, as I don't use either KDE or GNOME, but am occasionally interested in seeing what they are up to (I use pekwm as a WM and no "desktop environment").
Click here to read about pekwm.
I thought perhaps there would be some insights as to what they were up to, or at least some screenshots, but I was disappointed.
Click here to read about screenshots.
So, on the whole, I must give this review a low score.
The very people this would be taxing are those least likely to benefit: people who don't have a television. Those who have a television---and therefore can watch the channels---are already paying the fee. So why extend it to people with no TVs?
My high school had internet access, and guess what? We never used it. Just about everything you're supposed to learn in high school can easily be done with books and offline computers.
Giving kids who can't afford home internet access a way to access it is fine, but I'd do it through public libraries. It's not necessary at school.
Washington, D.C. spends a huge amount of money per student (among the largest in the nation), and their schools still suck. Throwing money at the problem doesn't fix it.