I use GSPlayer for my Dell Axim. It supported URL playing so I could listen to shoutcast servers through the wireless. It has the option to turn off the display so it saves batter and you don't have to worry about accidently activating anything while it's in your pocket. It also comes with the source code.
This was the first I found with all these features. Also, you can map the buttons of the PDA to actions for the program. So even with the screen off, as long as the prog is active, I can easily pause, play, change songs or change volume with the mapped buttons.
Oh, and for others in the Slashdot crowd, it also supports OGG.
How is this insightful? Let's go from one extreme to the other..
When a kid falls off a bike when he's learning, do you say, the design of the bike is poor? Should all bikes have training wheels to accomadate the guy? If a person consistently gets in car accidents, is it because of poor user interface and car design by the manufacturer?
It is definitely the job of the programmer and design team (or person) to make the software easy to use. But the fact remains, the computer is a powerful device. regardless of whether the person using it knows it or not. People should not be afraid of their computer, but be aware of its potential, good and bad.
Whether you're from a rich country or household or a third world nation, the computer allows you to create and learn. Software, art, music, etc. As others have noted, it's general applicability has allowed people to use computers for various tasks. But the same flexibility and power allows you to shoot yourself in the foot, or harm others. People can't ignore that. People SHOULDN'T be ignorant of that.
A car is not only a transportation device, it can kill. You have to be careful with it. Computers don't cause the physical damage that car accidents can, but they can be used to infiltrate networks, fraud, steal identities, etc. There has to be a balance of how much to hide from the normal user and how much to make sure they are aware of. The fact that computers are powerful and can both be helpful and destructive is not something the user should be ignorant of.
Being in control of such a powerful device, you should be somewhat aware of how others can gain access or control over your computer, as well as how to generally use it. That takes user responsibility. There needs to be great strides on BOTH the user AND the developer.
I agree with most of what you say, and this may be somewhat off topic, but how can someone comment that communism is idealistic (saying it would never work) without saying the same for capitalism? You get "natural" monopolies in free markets and even unnatural ones. You get just as many problems with one as with the other, but they're of different types in each system. Both views are too idealistic and naive.
I still can't believe you think that Microsoft isn't capitalistic because they want to destroy all competition!
"The difference between capitalism and communism is that with capitalism, man exploits man, whereas with communism it's the other way around." - Anonymous
In line with what I responded to a post above, that your understanding of "fun" is restrictive.
There is a world of "fun" that you don't know about nor understand and are not willing to see if you enjoy that have nothing to do with destruction or causing annoyance to others. That helping people can, in itself, generate a good feeling in and about yourself (though you have to be careful who you help, cuz sometimes those people can pester you more). As a bonus, it can feel good to be appreciated and those people may reward you later. If you have skills with computers or desire to learn more, than there are many ways to expand that knowledge and fulfill curiosities without harming others.
People are differently so I can't know what will click for you. Hell, I don't much like reading, even less when it is out loud, but I started volunteering reading to little kids (and having them read to me) and I like it. As a bonus, I'm the only male volunteer (all college students):D
Who know what you will find for yourself, but there are so many things that to follow a path that's not only illegal, but not one you can sustain a life doing doesn't make much sense. Especially when there are so many good options on what you can do, and you'll learn and enjoy things you couldn't have imagined.
SOME kids destroy things. I had friends that did and friends that didn't (I fell into the latter group).
I think one of the issues is what you and the grandparent is touching on. What is promoted as "fun". Why the hell do I need to go to, much less be accepted at, a party to have fun? Just having a couple of guys over and playing ball or video games worked for me as a kid. I understand the reasoning for beer companies (and others) constant advertising in associating their products with fun, but why the heck is what they advertise the main ways people think of as 'fun'? Can't hiking or cycling (whether alone or in a group) be fun? How about reading a book, playing music, building stuff (legos, woodshop, metal, electrical,...) or just plain hanging out and talking about whatever and cracking some jokes?
I know so many people enjoy many various things, but it seems the masses and "society" constantly sell this notion to kids that drinking, smoking and sex is bad for your age but that's where the fun is at. While smoking is slowly losing favor in most of the country, the "culture" in the US (granted, a huge generalization) still can't think beyond the drinking and sex as selling points for fun and entertainment. Like school can't be fun or learning, in and of itself can't be enjoyable. It's like people had negative associations with some experiences and can't grasp that "fun" can be different for various people, but more importantly, teens can learn to like new things that have nothing to do with drinking, sex or destruction.
And it's not a phase kids have to go through, nor should it be tolerated. Expect immaturity and guess what you'll find? People keep lowering the standards and expectations from kids and that just adds to the problem.
Re:Correlation between memory and intelligence?
on
The Memory Masters
·
· Score: 1
How do you define memory? Are the functions doing "recalling" memory as well? How do you separate certain neurons firings from others as memory? Is anything learned and captured in the firings memory? All the neurons that make up the brain is storing information in some form, but I wouldn't want to consider that all memory.
I guess I consider it like a program. I mean, the instructions themselves take up space but I don't want to consider that memory, versus other segments that are actually being accessed by the program. When you have self-modifiable code, obviously, that becomes tricky. But I was using the conventional definition of memory, so in that sense, intelligence (which is a much more ill-defined concept than memory) is defintely composed of more than memory.
Re:Correlation between memory and intelligence?
on
The Memory Masters
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
No one can deny the importance of memorization. But there are so many factors to intelligence. Face and voice recognition requires both memory but pattern recognition. Not only memory, but proper associations with other things you've memorized. Then you have utilization of that data and turn it into useful information and knowledge. You also have using knowledge to solve problems and new obstacles. There is a whole lot to intelligence and very little we understand of how we do what we do.
regardless of if they win or how much (little) money they get in return, this is great publicity and it also keeps in the public limelight somewhat the issue of spam and needing better legislation. I'd assume other ISPs would sue, but I wonder which ones are making money off of the spammers...
Your understanding of liberty and his statment is flawed. To walk down the street and bulldoze over anyone that gets in my way is part of liberty. It's freedom to do whatever the heck I want. Laws restrict liberty but are necessary. What liberties people think are essential is the crux of the matter. Some people in France may favor the ban of certain clothing thinking it's not essential and the restriction of liberty is for the benefit of society. Others may disagree and think the liberty to wear what you want in essential. I'm not trying to defend the ill-conceived Patriot Act, but saying I'm tired of the quote. People say it without realizing there's so much more to the issues at hand and misunderstand the worth of the quote.
How much about privacy is in the Bill of Rights? How much implied? What degrees of privacy is essential? Those are the questions. Some people don't care about privacy to the same degree as others. Some aren't as educated about historical patterns about governments abusing powers. Some think the risks are worth it. There are issues to be discussed. More than just the damn quote ad infinitum.
"Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin
I'm so damn tired of this quote. What is essential liberty? Isn't that the crux of the matter? What you feel is essential may not be for another? Not only that, but that enough people fall into that category that they are the majority and help pass laws that you disagree with?
I'm not talking about the wisdom of the PATRIOT Act (I oppose it as well), but to continually tout this quote is beyond just tiring. It's just parroting something which sometimes becomes a slogan but lost may be perspective or reasoning.
And the part about not deserving liberty nor safety is just overboard in my opinion. Hell, I question the worth of most people and think they probably don't deserve to live since many are so selfish and willingly ignorant, but to say that disagreement on this one issue alone would warrant saying they don't deserve neither liberty nor safety is just ridiculous.
The quote has wisdom in it and it's important to learn from it. But this rallying cry is over used and has long since lost its insightfulness and is now redundant. I could've modded you differently, but I think discussion (and actual discussion versus just one liners) is what more needed.
Most people can't tell the difference between a quality MP3 and a CD; because they aren't listening that closely.
It wouldn't be too hard to study this, hook someone up to headphones, blindfold them, and play them identical excerpts from a CD and then MP3 and make them guess which was which; or just say which was "better quality."
The most important part of this test would be to make sure the conditions are similar to normal listening standards. Meaning that the people shouldn't know they're listening to judge quality. Who cares if I you can tell the difference between the two when looking for it if you can't while listening to music while programming, working out, reading, etc. So that's another dimension beyond just a blind source test.
Are my finger nail clippings or hair a human? They are "human finger nail clippings" and "human hair". I think you are the one that is playing the name game. Of course there is a point at which a human embryo becomes a human. Before that it is a bunch of cells like the cells that make up my finger nail clippings or my nose.
Embryo is a stage of development, like saying "baby" or "child". The relationship of "hair is to human" versus "embryo is to human" is completely different. Your nails and hair are PART of a human. The embryo IS the human.
Second, not all cells are the same. Even though they have the same instruction set and possible capabilities, there are things activating them to do certain things at different times. Meaning, though similar, they are not the same. A lump of cells will not regenerate the rest of the body or my body will not regenerate the rest of my limb if separated. The "bunch of cells" (embryo) will continue to develop into a bigger human.
Tell me - *exactly* when does a "human embryo" become a "human"?
I'm so tired of this. It/he/she is a human embryo. It's human. The egg and sperm are separate and are needed to make human. At conception, it's human.
People want to quell their concerns of their own morality about killing humans so want to stop calling "it" human. Quit this name game. Admit conflicts within your moral systems and attempt to understand and resolve them. If you don't have conflicts, fine. But quit trying to twist things to fit your perspective.
There are instances in which many people consider killing a human okay. Most notable is when your (or possibly someone else's) life is at stake. Some also accept killing in war (it may go hand in hand with the previous, but not necessarily). Some accept it for capital punishment. Some believe killing a human (when not "born" yet) is okay because infringing on the right of the mother is worse than the loss of the human.
Some have phrased this issue, "When is the baby's right to life greater than the woman's right to control her own body?". Some people, having a tendency to accept the "right to life" notion, want to stop calling "it" a human to make themself feel at ease or whatever. But accept that at conception we have a human.
The issue is not whether it's a human or not, but the worth of the human. This human is a bunch of cells (as we all are), but some believe it's ONLY potential, while we are greater than the sum of our cells and parts. One poster suggested we're greater when we have brain activity. Hell, a lot of animals have brain activity, so it must mean this mixture of being human AND brain activity.
If you're stuck on the "human's right to life" issue, realize you're judging the worth of a human. Some say the worth is greater when we can live outside the womb. Some say, we're only greater when we can live outside the womb unaided by technical equipment aid. One poster said when the person can live in a forest by themselves.
I've met several people and I question their worth at all. They may have basic image and sound recognition capabilities, but I can't seem to see much thinking in them at all. The may be more than a block of cells, but to me, no more so than any other animal, and sometimes more disappointing because they have potential which other animals do not have, but seem to never attain any of it. Obviously, this is all subjective in how we see a human's worth. I like to give others the benefit of the doubt so support right to life, until they show they don't deserve it, so I support capital punishment.
But despite what many protest, the sanctity of the "right" to life is only preserved by the government and agreement among us. It can just as easily be not acknowledged by us in certain circumstances (as described above).
This issue (abortion) should not be about when the human is a human. But what liberty the government preserves to a woman versus the human that is still inside her. Drop the name game about when does a "human embryo" become a "human"?
But I can't agree with you more. I don't give christmas gifts, birthday gifts or whatever. If I see something in the store that reminds me of someone and think they'd like it, and I can afford it, I'll get it for them. I hate the attitudes of people of expecting something, and thankfully, my family is understanding of my philosophy. If it's about giving, why hold it to a particular day (here's your christmas gift, I got it weeks ago but you can't enjoy it until a certain day). How idiotic is that? Then, it becomes more about making yourself feel better about giving than the actual giving.
And as others have said, dont get me "geek" stuff unless you know I want it. I always appreciate the thought, effort put into gifts and the caring by the other person, but if I had wanted to buy an mp3 player or whatever, I would've. Maybe I want the Rio instead of an iPod. Maybe I care more about the RPM than HD size. Even if you get expert advice from other "geeks", their values and tastes can (and tend to) differ.
The best thing about a relationship, imo, is the intimacy. Spend valentines day together playing games that you both like or watch some movies that you guys like or whatnot. Plan the day together and lose yourself in each other's company and love.
Re:It's like Netscape v. Microsoft in that...
on
Google v. Microsoft
·
· Score: 1
Noteably, this includes web searches, which is really just a problem in graph theory.
Well, there is also proper information extraction and information retreival. For some searches is question and and answering. If someone isn't sure what exactly they're looking for or browsing, you always have user interface and relevance feedback issues. Not to mention the engineering of the infrastructure, indexing all data and more. And you have to deal with people trying to manipulate their data through shortcuts instead of actually wanting to earn it. So there is a whole lot more than just graph theory.
This is ground-breaking technology and it's really cool to see it work to say lives. But I wonder what unintended consequences may occur from planting weeds around. This is very ignorant of me, but what effects could they have if they spread too fast or whatever since some areas where there are landmines are actually agricultural. I guess this technology could be used on other types of plants too, right?
Dell also ships with Red Hat Enterprise Linux. But I don't know if it's installed though, but comes with the CD and you can purchase a one year or 3 year subscription. I don't know if people familiar with linux would want it to be installed versus having control over what to put on the system. This is for their Precision line. When they have a linux system pre-installed for the home user, that'll be something big. Until then, this a small step in the positive direction until Linux is ready for the home desktop user.
Let's see... Mr. Gates has donated billions to charities, AIDs research, etc. How much has Linus donated?
how much has Gates' earned by circumventing laws and price gouging governments and nations around the world? Hence a lot of people!
How much has Linus taken from the same people?
A tax rebate is when the government decides to give back money from you it shouldn't have taken. Here, Bill Gates through immoral and illegal actions has garnered billions and is "generous" to give back. Forgive Linus for not going through that route but instead helping create and organize the production of Linux, a product that'll continually give back to the public.
Consider that for each person that is using Linux but wouldn't have heard about FreeBSD or some other free system and would instead of had to pay for Microsoft. How much money is that? How about governments and organizations that are now saving from the microsoft tax?
I'm in no way saying he should be knighted. But his donation of time has resulted in quite impressive results. It's just not a fair comparison to say he hasn't donated large sums of money when you consider how Bill got his money.
ESPN has never been the best site for mozilla users. I like much of their content, but visit yahoo! sports and others now. ESPN motion doesn't work for me in Mozilla Firebird. And I don't like that Yahoo! Launch doesn't work under Firebird either. And unicast uses WMP, but I wonder if that's the only thing it'll play under. I guess we won't be bothered by the ads then...
Well, I'm sure there will be many posts on the negatives. But I'll look at the bright side. With a full 30 second clip, it allows for more creative ads. And hopefully we'll see more funny ones. I mean, people download some ads online. So here's to hoping for better ads.
Slashdot Mirror
I use GSPlayer for my Dell Axim. It supported URL playing so I could listen to shoutcast servers through the wireless. It has the option to turn off the display so it saves batter and you don't have to worry about accidently activating anything while it's in your pocket. It also comes with the source code.
This was the first I found with all these features. Also, you can map the buttons of the PDA to actions for the program. So even with the screen off, as long as the prog is active, I can easily pause, play, change songs or change volume with the mapped buttons.
Oh, and for others in the Slashdot crowd, it also supports OGG.
GreenSoftware GS Player
How is this insightful? Let's go from one extreme to the other..
When a kid falls off a bike when he's learning, do you say, the design of the bike is poor? Should all bikes have training wheels to accomadate the guy? If a person consistently gets in car accidents, is it because of poor user interface and car design by the manufacturer?
It is definitely the job of the programmer and design team (or person) to make the software easy to use. But the fact remains, the computer is a powerful device. regardless of whether the person using it knows it or not. People should not be afraid of their computer, but be aware of its potential, good and bad.
Whether you're from a rich country or household or a third world nation, the computer allows you to create and learn. Software, art, music, etc. As others have noted, it's general applicability has allowed people to use computers for various tasks. But the same flexibility and power allows you to shoot yourself in the foot, or harm others. People can't ignore that. People SHOULDN'T be ignorant of that.
A car is not only a transportation device, it can kill. You have to be careful with it. Computers don't cause the physical damage that car accidents can, but they can be used to infiltrate networks, fraud, steal identities, etc. There has to be a balance of how much to hide from the normal user and how much to make sure they are aware of. The fact that computers are powerful and can both be helpful and destructive is not something the user should be ignorant of.
Being in control of such a powerful device, you should be somewhat aware of how others can gain access or control over your computer, as well as how to generally use it. That takes user responsibility. There needs to be great strides on BOTH the user AND the developer.
I agree with most of what you say, and this may be somewhat off topic, but how can someone comment that communism is idealistic (saying it would never work) without saying the same for capitalism? You get "natural" monopolies in free markets and even unnatural ones. You get just as many problems with one as with the other, but they're of different types in each system. Both views are too idealistic and naive.
I still can't believe you think that Microsoft isn't capitalistic because they want to destroy all competition!
"The difference between capitalism and communism is that with capitalism,
man exploits man, whereas with communism it's the other way around." - Anonymous
In line with what I responded to a post above, that your understanding of "fun" is restrictive.
There is a world of "fun" that you don't know about nor understand and are not willing to see if you enjoy that have nothing to do with destruction or causing annoyance to others. That helping people can, in itself, generate a good feeling in and about yourself (though you have to be careful who you help, cuz sometimes those people can pester you more). As a bonus, it can feel good to be appreciated and those people may reward you later. If you have skills with computers or desire to learn more, than there are many ways to expand that knowledge and fulfill curiosities without harming others.
People are differently so I can't know what will click for you. Hell, I don't much like reading, even less when it is out loud, but I started volunteering reading to little kids (and having them read to me) and I like it. As a bonus, I'm the only male volunteer (all college students) :D
Who know what you will find for yourself, but there are so many things that to follow a path that's not only illegal, but not one you can sustain a life doing doesn't make much sense. Especially when there are so many good options on what you can do, and you'll learn and enjoy things you couldn't have imagined.
SOME kids destroy things. I had friends that did and friends that didn't (I fell into the latter group).
...) or just plain hanging out and talking about whatever and cracking some jokes?
I think one of the issues is what you and the grandparent is touching on. What is promoted as "fun". Why the hell do I need to go to, much less be accepted at, a party to have fun? Just having a couple of guys over and playing ball or video games worked for me as a kid. I understand the reasoning for beer companies (and others) constant advertising in associating their products with fun, but why the heck is what they advertise the main ways people think of as 'fun'? Can't hiking or cycling (whether alone or in a group) be fun? How about reading a book, playing music, building stuff (legos, woodshop, metal, electrical,
I know so many people enjoy many various things, but it seems the masses and "society" constantly sell this notion to kids that drinking, smoking and sex is bad for your age but that's where the fun is at. While smoking is slowly losing favor in most of the country, the "culture" in the US (granted, a huge generalization) still can't think beyond the drinking and sex as selling points for fun and entertainment. Like school can't be fun or learning, in and of itself can't be enjoyable. It's like people had negative associations with some experiences and can't grasp that "fun" can be different for various people, but more importantly, teens can learn to like new things that have nothing to do with drinking, sex or destruction.
And it's not a phase kids have to go through, nor should it be tolerated. Expect immaturity and guess what you'll find? People keep lowering the standards and expectations from kids and that just adds to the problem.
How do you define memory? Are the functions doing "recalling" memory as well? How do you separate certain neurons firings from others as memory? Is anything learned and captured in the firings memory? All the neurons that make up the brain is storing information in some form, but I wouldn't want to consider that all memory.
I guess I consider it like a program. I mean, the instructions themselves take up space but I don't want to consider that memory, versus other segments that are actually being accessed by the program. When you have self-modifiable code, obviously, that becomes tricky. But I was using the conventional definition of memory, so in that sense, intelligence (which is a much more ill-defined concept than memory) is defintely composed of more than memory.
No one can deny the importance of memorization. But there are so many factors to intelligence. Face and voice recognition requires both memory but pattern recognition. Not only memory, but proper associations with other things you've memorized. Then you have utilization of that data and turn it into useful information and knowledge. You also have using knowledge to solve problems and new obstacles. There is a whole lot to intelligence and very little we understand of how we do what we do.
regardless of if they win or how much (little) money they get in return, this is great publicity and it also keeps in the public limelight somewhat the issue of spam and needing better legislation. I'd assume other ISPs would sue, but I wonder which ones are making money off of the spammers...
Your understanding of liberty and his statment is flawed. To walk down the street and bulldoze over anyone that gets in my way is part of liberty. It's freedom to do whatever the heck I want. Laws restrict liberty but are necessary. What liberties people think are essential is the crux of the matter. Some people in France may favor the ban of certain clothing thinking it's not essential and the restriction of liberty is for the benefit of society. Others may disagree and think the liberty to wear what you want in essential. I'm not trying to defend the ill-conceived Patriot Act, but saying I'm tired of the quote. People say it without realizing there's so much more to the issues at hand and misunderstand the worth of the quote.
How much about privacy is in the Bill of Rights? How much implied? What degrees of privacy is essential? Those are the questions. Some people don't care about privacy to the same degree as others. Some aren't as educated about historical patterns about governments abusing powers. Some think the risks are worth it. There are issues to be discussed. More than just the damn quote ad infinitum.
I'm so damn tired of this quote. What is essential liberty? Isn't that the crux of the matter? What you feel is essential may not be for another? Not only that, but that enough people fall into that category that they are the majority and help pass laws that you disagree with?
I'm not talking about the wisdom of the PATRIOT Act (I oppose it as well), but to continually tout this quote is beyond just tiring. It's just parroting something which sometimes becomes a slogan but lost may be perspective or reasoning.
And the part about not deserving liberty nor safety is just overboard in my opinion. Hell, I question the worth of most people and think they probably don't deserve to live since many are so selfish and willingly ignorant, but to say that disagreement on this one issue alone would warrant saying they don't deserve neither liberty nor safety is just ridiculous.
The quote has wisdom in it and it's important to learn from it. But this rallying cry is over used and has long since lost its insightfulness and is now redundant. I could've modded you differently, but I think discussion (and actual discussion versus just one liners) is what more needed.
Most people can't tell the difference between a quality MP3 and a CD; because they aren't listening that closely.
It wouldn't be too hard to study this, hook someone up to headphones, blindfold them, and play them identical excerpts from a CD and then MP3 and make them guess which was which; or just say which was "better quality."
The most important part of this test would be to make sure the conditions are similar to normal listening standards. Meaning that the people shouldn't know they're listening to judge quality. Who cares if I you can tell the difference between the two when looking for it if you can't while listening to music while programming, working out, reading, etc. So that's another dimension beyond just a blind source test.
Embryo is a stage of development, like saying "baby" or "child". The relationship of "hair is to human" versus "embryo is to human" is completely different. Your nails and hair are PART of a human. The embryo IS the human.
Second, not all cells are the same. Even though they have the same instruction set and possible capabilities, there are things activating them to do certain things at different times. Meaning, though similar, they are not the same. A lump of cells will not regenerate the rest of the body or my body will not regenerate the rest of my limb if separated. The "bunch of cells" (embryo) will continue to develop into a bigger human.
I'm so tired of this. It/he/she is a human embryo. It's human. The egg and sperm are separate and are needed to make human. At conception, it's human.
People want to quell their concerns of their own morality about killing humans so want to stop calling "it" human. Quit this name game. Admit conflicts within your moral systems and attempt to understand and resolve them. If you don't have conflicts, fine. But quit trying to twist things to fit your perspective.
There are instances in which many people consider killing a human okay. Most notable is when your (or possibly someone else's) life is at stake. Some also accept killing in war (it may go hand in hand with the previous, but not necessarily). Some accept it for capital punishment. Some believe killing a human (when not "born" yet) is okay because infringing on the right of the mother is worse than the loss of the human.
Some have phrased this issue, "When is the baby's right to life greater than the woman's right to control her own body?". Some people, having a tendency to accept the "right to life" notion, want to stop calling "it" a human to make themself feel at ease or whatever. But accept that at conception we have a human.
The issue is not whether it's a human or not, but the worth of the human. This human is a bunch of cells (as we all are), but some believe it's ONLY potential, while we are greater than the sum of our cells and parts. One poster suggested we're greater when we have brain activity. Hell, a lot of animals have brain activity, so it must mean this mixture of being human AND brain activity.
If you're stuck on the "human's right to life" issue, realize you're judging the worth of a human. Some say the worth is greater when we can live outside the womb. Some say, we're only greater when we can live outside the womb unaided by technical equipment aid. One poster said when the person can live in a forest by themselves.
I've met several people and I question their worth at all. They may have basic image and sound recognition capabilities, but I can't seem to see much thinking in them at all. The may be more than a block of cells, but to me, no more so than any other animal, and sometimes more disappointing because they have potential which other animals do not have, but seem to never attain any of it. Obviously, this is all subjective in how we see a human's worth. I like to give others the benefit of the doubt so support right to life, until they show they don't deserve it, so I support capital punishment.
But despite what many protest, the sanctity of the "right" to life is only preserved by the government and agreement among us. It can just as easily be not acknowledged by us in certain circumstances (as described above).
This issue (abortion) should not be about when the human is a human. But what liberty the government preserves to a woman versus the human that is still inside her. Drop the name game about when does a "human embryo" become a "human"?
I wish I had mod points (time expired yesterday).
But I can't agree with you more. I don't give christmas gifts, birthday gifts or whatever. If I see something in the store that reminds me of someone and think they'd like it, and I can afford it, I'll get it for them. I hate the attitudes of people of expecting something, and thankfully, my family is understanding of my philosophy. If it's about giving, why hold it to a particular day (here's your christmas gift, I got it weeks ago but you can't enjoy it until a certain day). How idiotic is that? Then, it becomes more about making yourself feel better about giving than the actual giving.
And as others have said, dont get me "geek" stuff unless you know I want it. I always appreciate the thought, effort put into gifts and the caring by the other person, but if I had wanted to buy an mp3 player or whatever, I would've. Maybe I want the Rio instead of an iPod. Maybe I care more about the RPM than HD size. Even if you get expert advice from other "geeks", their values and tastes can (and tend to) differ.
The best thing about a relationship, imo, is the intimacy. Spend valentines day together playing games that you both like or watch some movies that you guys like or whatnot. Plan the day together and lose yourself in each other's company and love.
Well, there is also proper information extraction and information retreival. For some searches is question and and answering. If someone isn't sure what exactly they're looking for or browsing, you always have user interface and relevance feedback issues. Not to mention the engineering of the infrastructure, indexing all data and more. And you have to deal with people trying to manipulate their data through shortcuts instead of actually wanting to earn it. So there is a whole lot more than just graph theory.
This is ground-breaking technology and it's really cool to see it work to say lives. But I wonder what unintended consequences may occur from planting weeds around. This is very ignorant of me, but what effects could they have if they spread too fast or whatever since some areas where there are landmines are actually agricultural. I guess this technology could be used on other types of plants too, right?
detect the slashdotting that about to occur :)
Dell also ships with Red Hat Enterprise Linux. But I don't know if it's installed though, but comes with the CD and you can purchase a one year or 3 year subscription. I don't know if people familiar with linux would want it to be installed versus having control over what to put on the system. This is for their Precision line. When they have a linux system pre-installed for the home user, that'll be something big. Until then, this a small step in the positive direction until Linux is ready for the home desktop user.
how much has Gates' earned by circumventing laws and price gouging governments and nations around the world? Hence a lot of people!
How much has Linus taken from the same people?
A tax rebate is when the government decides to give back money from you it shouldn't have taken. Here, Bill Gates through immoral and illegal actions has garnered billions and is "generous" to give back. Forgive Linus for not going through that route but instead helping create and organize the production of Linux, a product that'll continually give back to the public.
Consider that for each person that is using Linux but wouldn't have heard about FreeBSD or some other free system and would instead of had to pay for Microsoft. How much money is that? How about governments and organizations that are now saving from the microsoft tax?
I'm in no way saying he should be knighted. But his donation of time has resulted in quite impressive results. It's just not a fair comparison to say he hasn't donated large sums of money when you consider how Bill got his money.
I know, that's not a problem for most slashdotters, but..
Do I look fat in this?
Did you like the meal I made?
.
.
.
I can see disaster and a lot of broken relationships.
Be bold and tell them who's screwing up. Chew out people for not getting things done.
:)
By the way, where do you work. I'm unemployed and I have a feeling there will be a job opening in your company after the dinner
and when you're house is on fire, at least you'll be warm!
:)
I live in Michigan. The low today was balmy 0 degrees farenheit.
Sometimes, we'll take the heat any way we can get it.
ESPN has never been the best site for mozilla users. I like much of their content, but visit yahoo! sports and others now. ESPN motion doesn't work for me in Mozilla Firebird. And I don't like that Yahoo! Launch doesn't work under Firebird either. And unicast uses WMP, but I wonder if that's the only thing it'll play under. I guess we won't be bothered by the ads then...
Well, I'm sure there will be many posts on the negatives. But I'll look at the bright side. With a full 30 second clip, it allows for more creative ads. And hopefully we'll see more funny ones. I mean, people download some ads online. So here's to hoping for better ads.