perhaps sales taxes are a bad thing because the money's taxed twice..once as income tax, second when it's spent. it's double dipping. add the fact that taxes on things are used punitively to manipulate behavior, it's no wonder people are sick of it. it's about time officials took their own advice and leaned up by prioritizing what the citizens think is most important.
12 trillion in debt? really? this is ok with you? the fact is if they'd quit squandering money on pet projects for lobbies and their own agendas, there'd be plenty left for your precious public education system, police, fire etc.
you also make the distinction between state and federal. I'm not sure it matters so much because the two parties are so entrenched that a vote for a local party member is a vote for the party's federal machine in washington.
a. or they have thought about the consequences of such changes, and being obvious blatant negatives, don't take much time doing so. b. or they've been surrounded by soap boxers trying to justify messing with what works without a sound reason for doing so. c. or they're just tuning out repetition.
not at all. those switches were simple to operate, far simpler than even a speak'n'spell, but damned inconvenient.. just like this pathological pursuit of simplicity we're seeing now with unity et al.
I must question whether you're doing anything interesting with your computer besides browsing and playing media.. because that's all unity is good for.
with aero enabled the blitting is faster, but I wouldn't say it responds faster than xp. it's a bit slower..and I"m comparing both with all animations disabled.
offensive? almost everything is offensive to at least one person somewhere.. you aren't suggesting censorship are you? grow a hide, coward. I'm glad some people here aren't weak willed cultists. the guy was a business man sure but there are plenty of those. he was also a grade A asshole to a lot of the people who actually built the products his company sold. that coupled with his design > usefulness mentality are what get him bad raps on tech oriented sites. perhaps it is you who isn't tech oriented.
1. engineers designed apple products too. 2. 'human connection' = emotional special pleading
his design over function mentality may appeal to people who want single use baubles, but they are derivative baubles at best. he was not this insane innovator these types of customers say he was.
of course.. he's not comparing the sales of individual vendors. he's comparing the sales of two differentiated products.. one is a computer running windows (or other), and the other, OSX, sitting in a shiny white case.
there was a time when the average user (not geek) could handle a windows 95 esque desktop without a problem.. this further dumbing down into desktop-lite/tablet non-functionality is not helping anyone, geek or not. it just makes everyone more dependent on the nascent multivendor closed garden takover of the internet.
yes because racist name calling is just so horrible compared to other kinds, that supposedly more mature people can't help throwing adolescent fits over it.
or maybe people call themselves those labels because they're tired of having to conform with some kind of popular standard where they must be 100% gregarious and happy-go-lucky 24/7. after all, anyone who doesn't want to be around people absolutely all the time must be dangerous.
I purposely look for native apps on whatever OS I'm using. they're a lot faster, use a lot less ram and have fewer pointless dependencies to manage. even on modern machines the difference is noticeable.
as far as memory management and pointer misuse goes, a badly written app will consume mass quantities of ram and/or crash regardless of what it's coded in. the only thing that changes is what the error box says before losing all my data.
For example the roman catholic church teaches evolution in its science classes. This church has stated that there is no conflict with faith and the scientific findings regarding evolution. I believe other major denominations have similar views.
a recent development largely due to politics and a desire to keep the church relevant as possible while still holding on to a false sense of historical consistency with existing dogma.
Regarding going with the evidence, a Bishop at Oxford helped establish the framework of the western tradition of the scientific method: observe, hypothesize, predict, and test.
a scientist can be religious as long as his studies don't conflict with his beliefs. the second they do and he lets his faith override his results, he has failed.
it's not that 'science fans' don't want to hear new ideas. they just want some proof backing them beyond snake oil smoke and mirrors. they're also tired of the pseudoscience preached at them. it's the religious who don't want to hear anything contradicting their faith. the strength of feeling the religious have about their belief does not make their position stronger.
first paragraph = argumentum ad populum fallacy. incorrect positions can and should be dismissed regardless of how many people think they're correct.
third paragraph = the words 'compelling' and 'influential' imply emotional overtones. appeals to emotion prove nothing.. how 'moved' someone is does not make a position more correct. refusing to refute a non-falsifiable position is perfectly reasonable. it is the job of the believer to bring proof of his position and not the job of the doubter to debunk it.
fourth paragraph = true. science doesn't need elitism or contempt.. any feelings a scientist may have or not have are irrelevant. he is either correct or not. a poor scientist would allow his feelings to affect his results. however, it's not science's job to provide compelling positions. it's supposed to show the truth.
the point being that scientists may not have every fact in the universe, but they have derived some of them, and based on them, offered theories as to origins. these theories changes as more facts are discovered. religious people do the opposite. they have prefab assumptions with cherry picked facts to support them. they ignore conflicting information.
Slashdot Mirror
perhaps sales taxes are a bad thing because the money's taxed twice..once as income tax, second when it's spent. it's double dipping. add the fact that taxes on things are used punitively to manipulate behavior, it's no wonder people are sick of it. it's about time officials took their own advice and leaned up by prioritizing what the citizens think is most important.
12 trillion in debt? really? this is ok with you? the fact is if they'd quit squandering money on pet projects for lobbies and their own agendas, there'd be plenty left for your precious public education system, police, fire etc.
you also make the distinction between state and federal. I'm not sure it matters so much because the two parties are so entrenched that a vote for a local party member is a vote for the party's federal machine in washington.
like fucking club sluts and/or the modern feminist marriage are things of significance. ..
a. or they have thought about the consequences of such changes, and being obvious blatant negatives, don't take much time doing so.
b. or they've been surrounded by soap boxers trying to justify messing with what works without a sound reason for doing so.
c. or they're just tuning out repetition.
not at all. those switches were simple to operate, far simpler than even a speak'n'spell, but damned inconvenient.. just like this pathological pursuit of simplicity we're seeing now with unity et al.
I must question whether you're doing anything interesting with your computer besides browsing and playing media.. because that's all unity is good for.
with aero enabled the blitting is faster, but I wouldn't say it responds faster than xp. it's a bit slower..and I"m comparing both with all animations disabled.
so go use a speak'n'spell.. the rest of us need flexibility.. the cost of using powerful tools is that they incur a setup time.
LEAVE...BRITNEY ALLOOAAANNUH!!!!!!
offensive? almost everything is offensive to at least one person somewhere.. you aren't suggesting censorship are you? grow a hide, coward. I'm glad some people here aren't weak willed cultists. the guy was a business man sure but there are plenty of those. he was also a grade A asshole to a lot of the people who actually built the products his company sold. that coupled with his design > usefulness mentality are what get him bad raps on tech oriented sites. perhaps it is you who isn't tech oriented.
1. engineers designed apple products too.
2. 'human connection' = emotional special pleading
his design over function mentality may appeal to people who want single use baubles, but they are derivative baubles at best. he was not this insane innovator these types of customers say he was.
of course.. he's not comparing the sales of individual vendors. he's comparing the sales of two differentiated products.. one is a computer running windows (or other), and the other, OSX, sitting in a shiny white case.
doom was ported to the mac a bit later.. it didn't help apple much.
steve jobs didn't create the personal computer industry. give me a break. however the design over functionality thing he had down pat.
doesn't X already provide a 2D blitter? doesn't gtk et al support this still?
there was a time when the average user (not geek) could handle a windows 95 esque desktop without a problem.. this further dumbing down into desktop-lite/tablet non-functionality is not helping anyone, geek or not. it just makes everyone more dependent on the nascent multivendor closed garden takover of the internet.
yes because racist name calling is just so horrible compared to other kinds, that supposedly more mature people can't help throwing adolescent fits over it.
or maybe people call themselves those labels because they're tired of having to conform with some kind of popular standard where they must be 100% gregarious and happy-go-lucky 24/7. after all, anyone who doesn't want to be around people absolutely all the time must be dangerous.
I purposely look for native apps on whatever OS I'm using. they're a lot faster, use a lot less ram and have fewer pointless dependencies to manage. even on modern machines the difference is noticeable.
as far as memory management and pointer misuse goes, a badly written app will consume mass quantities of ram and/or crash regardless of what it's coded in. the only thing that changes is what the error box says before losing all my data.
.NET runtime is lightweight? I wouldn't count windows, xbox, and wp7 as 'multiplatform.'
law does not define truth.
I don't mind if software grows in size, but these days it just seems to grow out of control while keeping roughly the same feature sets.
it's not whether it fits on a cd or not it's about size creep.
For example the roman catholic church teaches evolution in its science classes. This church has stated that there is no conflict with faith and the scientific findings regarding evolution. I believe other major denominations have similar views.
a recent development largely due to politics and a desire to keep the church relevant as possible while still holding on to a false sense of historical consistency with existing dogma.
Regarding going with the evidence, a Bishop at Oxford helped establish the framework of the western tradition of the scientific method: observe, hypothesize, predict, and test.
a scientist can be religious as long as his studies don't conflict with his beliefs. the second they do and he lets his faith override his results, he has failed.
it's not that 'science fans' don't want to hear new ideas. they just want some proof backing them beyond snake oil smoke and mirrors. they're also tired of the pseudoscience preached at them. it's the religious who don't want to hear anything contradicting their faith. the strength of feeling the religious have about their belief does not make their position stronger.
first paragraph = argumentum ad populum fallacy. incorrect positions can and should be dismissed regardless of how many people think they're correct.
third paragraph = the words 'compelling' and 'influential' imply emotional overtones. appeals to emotion prove nothing.. how 'moved' someone is does not make a position more correct. refusing to refute a non-falsifiable position is perfectly reasonable. it is the job of the believer to bring proof of his position and not the job of the doubter to debunk it.
fourth paragraph = true. science doesn't need elitism or contempt.. any feelings a scientist may have or not have are irrelevant. he is either correct or not. a poor scientist would allow his feelings to affect his results. however, it's not science's job to provide compelling positions. it's supposed to show the truth.
the point being that scientists may not have every fact in the universe, but they have derived some of them, and based on them, offered theories as to origins. these theories changes as more facts are discovered. religious people do the opposite. they have prefab assumptions with cherry picked facts to support them. they ignore conflicting information.