Because the tears in the panel happened while it was being re-deployed on this flight. When the shuttle launched, there was no tear to be repaired, hence no need to carry tarps, space blankets, duct tape, or anything else intended to repair a panel.
I've been having that problem for about the last two weeks. And only in the evenings. The most recent time being last night. And only with Google search, not Gmail.
Next time it starts happening, instead of cussing and lowering myself enough to use Yahoo!, I'll pick up the phone and bitch at Comcast.
Has anyone actually done a real study on this and actually determined that vinyl is better than CDs?
This reminds me of a number of years ago when the magazine "Popular Electronics" was still around and was considered a serious authority and not another junk rag. When large diameter and other "special" speaker wire started appearing and all the self-proclaimed audio experts announced that the "special" wires "sounded better", PE did a study and found that at that time, the "special" speaker wires performed no better than 18-gauge lamp cord.
This also reminds me of the age-old tubes versus solid state argument, and I don't think that one has ever been looked at objectively either.
Just like I have a few Amish friends who will be happy to tell you that a horse out performs a car...
Greenpeace is to the environment and public safety as Pat Robertson is to Christianity.
I love animals and believe we need to clean up the earth and all that, but every time I hear about Greenpeace and one of their stunts, I want to go kill a baby seal and wear its fur. Just like every time PETA does some of their bullshit I go eat lunch at KFC.
Now *this* is the way to celebrate the 10 year anniversary of Slashdot. Not only is this posting worded to stir up a story where there is none, its a dupe!
Maybe they can sell a collection of dupes and over-hyped stories on eBay...
If the shuttle costs $2 billion, and a Soyuz is only $25 million, we could send up 80 Soyuz launches for that same $2 billion.
And if we expand it to cover that there have been 5 shuttles built, that becomes 400 Soyuz flights.
To put that in to perspective, there has only been 119 shuttle launches thus far, and 2 of those $2 billion dollar shuttles came back in little pieces parts. Plus, it doesn't even figure in launch expenses, just the price of the shuttles themselves. Hard to believe that way back when the shuttles were designed, they were expected to each be launched 100 times.
At those rates, it doesn't matter that a Soyuz isn't reusable.
The problem is going to be that Joe Consumer wants to have his cake and eat it too...he wants his device unlocked, and also wants it subsidized by the carrier. Sure, there might be unlocked devices available that aren't tied to a specific carrier. But they will come at a premium price, something that the average American who expects a $5 top of the line cellphone will not pay.
I'm not trolling either (nor do I think you were), but "They" didn't put Kerry against Bush...the American people did (although I have to admit that the choices all around in the last round of primaries rather sucked...the best choice in both parties would have been "none of the above").
the court order to turn over the names infringes on the privacy rights of Patriots fans
Too effing bad. Every sports related season ticket by any team in any sport always has rules attached. And if one of those rules is season ticket holders can't resell their tickets, then the franchise has every right to find out who is reselling and cut them off. If you don't like their rules, then don't buy their tickets. That's your only option.
Its easy to get up in arms about this decision, and start poo-pooing how its going to lead to less competition. But here's the reality of the matter.
In 2008 there will be an election in the US for President. A good chunk of Congress will also be up for grabs. And unless something really radical happens between now and then, in all likelihood the next President is going to be a Democrat, and the Democrats will hold a majority in both houses of Congress. This is what happens when a Republican President falls to a 24 percent approval rating in the polls (and Congress is doing only slightly better).
Democrats are generally pro-consumer and love regulating things (Republicans, on the other hand, are generally pro-business, and like to deregulate). The first time one of the big telecoms tries to openly block competition, the Dems will be on it like hair on a gorilla. And even the telecoms are smart enough to know that.
I have to agree. The one shortcoming that I still see in Linux is that unless you're willing to dick around with the internals, "out of the box" fonts look like crap.
Yep. As a business owner, that's their right to operate their business as they so desire (so long as they receive no direct public funding). And its my right to never do business or spend my money at such a place. Its already perfectly legal for a business to put up a sign that says "Green eyes only" and enforce it. Ignoring the presence of a federal law, how is that any different from "Whites only"?
And I assure that there are places in the US where businesses would put up a "Blacks only" sign or "Muslims only" sign if they could also get away with it. Bigotry comes in all colors and customs. It ain't just us white boys.
I'd like to see it happen just to tell whiners to shut up. While I will agree that it may be in the store's best interest to be welcoming to possible customers with disabilities, no individual, organization, or governmental unit that does not have a financial risk in the business should be able to order it to do a damned thing. The only people who should have impact on how a business operates is the owners and the employees. Period. No exceptions other than a business that receives direct public funding (and thats not really an exception because then the public does indeed have a financial interest). If a consumer doesn't like how the business operates, they have one solution...vote with their dollars and shop somewhere else. And I feel the same way whether the business in question is internet, brick and mortar, or both.
The end result could be mandated accessibility for for all Web sites reachable by visually impaired users in California.
Or it could begin a wave of website owners deciding "this shit isn't worth it", and they either turn off their site entirely or at least block known California IP ranges.
I'll go buy this one, simply because I want the theatrical release on DVD. I'll watch the new cut, but I doubt I'm going to like it. Making Deckard a replicant simply places too many holes in the story to work around. Plus it ruins the "moral basis" for the story.
And finally, here's the really hard point to work around, at least in my mind. And that's the fact that Harrison Ford has stated in a number of interviews that when the movie was being made, Ridley Scott assured him that Deckard was in fact human.
I think Ridley's changing his mind now simply to milk that ol' cow even more.
The title for the lead-in on this story shouldn't have been "New Apps Enable Social Network Snubbing". It should have been "Here's Some Idiots Who Need To Get A Life".
If you don't like Facebook or Myspace, etc, don't use them. Its that simple.
Nah, won't change a thing. The "it was faked" whack-jobs will just swear up and down that the American government bought off the Japanese to doctor the photos, the American government doctored the photos themselves, or that the Japanese lunar mission itself is fake.
IANAL, but I have served on several juries, both criminal and civil.
Its obvious from reading some of the jackass comments on here that most of you have a) never served on a jury, and b) have no concept of what a jury does.
Contrary to what a bunch of people here seem to think, a jury does NOT have the option of totally ignoring the law. A jury has only two choices...does the evidence support the plaintiff/prosecution (civil trial/criminal trial) by a preponderance of the evidence/beyond a reasonable doubt (again, civil trial/criminal trial), or does it not. It all boils down to those two choices, and only those two choices. A ruling of "she might have broken a law but the law sucks so we find in her favor/innocent" (again, civil/criminal) is not allowable in most states, and I'd be surprised if its allowable in any.
In the eyes of this jury, not only was she at fault, she blatantly lied to the jury (in their opinion). So not only did they agree with the prosecution that by a preponderance of the evidence she did violate copyright law, they whacked her for thinking they were stupid.
Had I been on this jury and been presented with the same evidence that we've seen in the press, I'd have voted for the plaintiffs also. I'm not sure I would have gone so high on the fine, but I for damned sure would not have let her off at the bottom of the scale either.
Not only was she stupid to not settle beforehand, she's stupid for appealing. What her boneheaded lawyer should now be doing is trying to find out if the record companies would settle for a smaller amount that they have reasonable amount of being able to collect. And maybe now she'll make sure she acquires her music legally, and does not make it available for mass distribution to others...but I doubt she's that smart.
The US government fucks up almost everything it touches. Especially while being run by the current Court Jester. I want them to stay away from my computer, even if that means it comes out of the box with Windows on it and Balmer delivers it in person.
I also disagree with his argument that the cost of Windows makes up 35 percent of the cost of a PC. He must be another one of those glue sniffing idiots that thinks OEMs pay retail prices for Windows. Even on a bargain basement PC, unless its from a tiny mom-and-pop business like "Wang Foo's Corner Custom Computer Barn", the cost of Windows and Windows related software will not be more than 10 percent. And if Acer really is paying 52 percent in Europe, then they're fucking stupid because no one else is paying that.
You're trying to make a point by being sarcastic, but I've driven in several small towns where one can, and *will*, be ticketed for that one mile over. There are many small towns in America that base their entire budget on speeding ticket income.
And again, I would point out that what she was fined was a consequence of poor legal representation. An intelligent lawyer would have advised her to settle as soon as he saw the evidence against her.
Were I on that jury (and I've served on several juries, so I know what its like), and the prosecution presented me with that evidence (and yes, I did RTFA), I'd vote in favor of the plaintiff also. Slashdotters can split hairs on the technicalities all they want, but especially when you toss in that she changed out her hard drive two weeks after notification, yep, she did it.
The reason the fines were so high is because she had piss-poor legal representation. In fact, had she had intelligent representation, and assuming that representation knew what evidence was going to be presented (IP addresses, user names, etc etc), he should have advised her to settle.
If you can't pay the fine, don't do the crime.
And if you still insist on doing it, at least get an intelligent lawyer when you get caught.
While I admire your stance, there's just one tiny little flaw in it...
What company do you think made your original Thinkpad?
IBM never did their own laptop production, its always been in Asia, and most of it was by Lenovo. All IBM did was finally sold them the rights to the name "Thinkpad" to put with the hardware they had been making under contract for IBM all along.
Slashdot Mirror
Because the tears in the panel happened while it was being re-deployed on this flight. When the shuttle launched, there was no tear to be repaired, hence no need to carry tarps, space blankets, duct tape, or anything else intended to repair a panel.
I've been having that problem for about the last two weeks. And only in the evenings. The most recent time being last night. And only with Google search, not Gmail.
Next time it starts happening, instead of cussing and lowering myself enough to use Yahoo!, I'll pick up the phone and bitch at Comcast.
Has anyone actually done a real study on this and actually determined that vinyl is better than CDs?
This reminds me of a number of years ago when the magazine "Popular Electronics" was still around and was considered a serious authority and not another junk rag. When large diameter and other "special" speaker wire started appearing and all the self-proclaimed audio experts announced that the "special" wires "sounded better", PE did a study and found that at that time, the "special" speaker wires performed no better than 18-gauge lamp cord.
This also reminds me of the age-old tubes versus solid state argument, and I don't think that one has ever been looked at objectively either.
Just like I have a few Amish friends who will be happy to tell you that a horse out performs a car...
And musicians who do so are paying for the use of those samples. Those who don't get sued, and then end up paying even more for those samples.
Greenpeace is to the environment and public safety as Pat Robertson is to Christianity.
I love animals and believe we need to clean up the earth and all that, but every time I hear about Greenpeace and one of their stunts, I want to go kill a baby seal and wear its fur. Just like every time PETA does some of their bullshit I go eat lunch at KFC.
Now *this* is the way to celebrate the 10 year anniversary of Slashdot. Not only is this posting worded to stir up a story where there is none, its a dupe!
Maybe they can sell a collection of dupes and over-hyped stories on eBay...
Just off the top of my head...
If the shuttle costs $2 billion, and a Soyuz is only $25 million, we could send up 80 Soyuz launches for that same $2 billion.
And if we expand it to cover that there have been 5 shuttles built, that becomes 400 Soyuz flights.
To put that in to perspective, there has only been 119 shuttle launches thus far, and 2 of those $2 billion dollar shuttles came back in little pieces parts. Plus, it doesn't even figure in launch expenses, just the price of the shuttles themselves. Hard to believe that way back when the shuttles were designed, they were expected to each be launched 100 times.
At those rates, it doesn't matter that a Soyuz isn't reusable.
The problem is going to be that Joe Consumer wants to have his cake and eat it too...he wants his device unlocked, and also wants it subsidized by the carrier. Sure, there might be unlocked devices available that aren't tied to a specific carrier. But they will come at a premium price, something that the average American who expects a $5 top of the line cellphone will not pay.
I'm not trolling either (nor do I think you were), but "They" didn't put Kerry against Bush...the American people did (although I have to admit that the choices all around in the last round of primaries rather sucked...the best choice in both parties would have been "none of the above").
the court order to turn over the names infringes on the privacy rights of Patriots fans
Too effing bad. Every sports related season ticket by any team in any sport always has rules attached. And if one of those rules is season ticket holders can't resell their tickets, then the franchise has every right to find out who is reselling and cut them off. If you don't like their rules, then don't buy their tickets. That's your only option.
Its easy to get up in arms about this decision, and start poo-pooing how its going to lead to less competition. But here's the reality of the matter.
In 2008 there will be an election in the US for President. A good chunk of Congress will also be up for grabs. And unless something really radical happens between now and then, in all likelihood the next President is going to be a Democrat, and the Democrats will hold a majority in both houses of Congress. This is what happens when a Republican President falls to a 24 percent approval rating in the polls (and Congress is doing only slightly better).
Democrats are generally pro-consumer and love regulating things (Republicans, on the other hand, are generally pro-business, and like to deregulate). The first time one of the big telecoms tries to openly block competition, the Dems will be on it like hair on a gorilla. And even the telecoms are smart enough to know that.
I have to agree. The one shortcoming that I still see in Linux is that unless you're willing to dick around with the internals, "out of the box" fonts look like crap.
I saw the term "bore waves", and suddenly I had a vision of a story about a George Bush press conference...
Yep. As a business owner, that's their right to operate their business as they so desire (so long as they receive no direct public funding). And its my right to never do business or spend my money at such a place. Its already perfectly legal for a business to put up a sign that says "Green eyes only" and enforce it. Ignoring the presence of a federal law, how is that any different from "Whites only"?
And I assure that there are places in the US where businesses would put up a "Blacks only" sign or "Muslims only" sign if they could also get away with it. Bigotry comes in all colors and customs. It ain't just us white boys.
I'd like to see it happen just to tell whiners to shut up. While I will agree that it may be in the store's best interest to be welcoming to possible customers with disabilities, no individual, organization, or governmental unit that does not have a financial risk in the business should be able to order it to do a damned thing. The only people who should have impact on how a business operates is the owners and the employees. Period. No exceptions other than a business that receives direct public funding (and thats not really an exception because then the public does indeed have a financial interest). If a consumer doesn't like how the business operates, they have one solution...vote with their dollars and shop somewhere else. And I feel the same way whether the business in question is internet, brick and mortar, or both.
The end result could be mandated accessibility for for all Web sites reachable by visually impaired users in California.
Or it could begin a wave of website owners deciding "this shit isn't worth it", and they either turn off their site entirely or at least block known California IP ranges.
I'll go buy this one, simply because I want the theatrical release on DVD. I'll watch the new cut, but I doubt I'm going to like it. Making Deckard a replicant simply places too many holes in the story to work around. Plus it ruins the "moral basis" for the story.
And finally, here's the really hard point to work around, at least in my mind. And that's the fact that Harrison Ford has stated in a number of interviews that when the movie was being made, Ridley Scott assured him that Deckard was in fact human.
I think Ridley's changing his mind now simply to milk that ol' cow even more.
The title for the lead-in on this story shouldn't have been "New Apps Enable Social Network Snubbing". It should have been "Here's Some Idiots Who Need To Get A Life".
If you don't like Facebook or Myspace, etc, don't use them. Its that simple.
Nah, won't change a thing. The "it was faked" whack-jobs will just swear up and down that the American government bought off the Japanese to doctor the photos, the American government doctored the photos themselves, or that the Japanese lunar mission itself is fake.
IANAL, but I have served on several juries, both criminal and civil.
Its obvious from reading some of the jackass comments on here that most of you have a) never served on a jury, and b) have no concept of what a jury does.
Contrary to what a bunch of people here seem to think, a jury does NOT have the option of totally ignoring the law. A jury has only two choices...does the evidence support the plaintiff/prosecution (civil trial/criminal trial) by a preponderance of the evidence/beyond a reasonable doubt (again, civil trial/criminal trial), or does it not. It all boils down to those two choices, and only those two choices. A ruling of "she might have broken a law but the law sucks so we find in her favor/innocent" (again, civil/criminal) is not allowable in most states, and I'd be surprised if its allowable in any.
In the eyes of this jury, not only was she at fault, she blatantly lied to the jury (in their opinion). So not only did they agree with the prosecution that by a preponderance of the evidence she did violate copyright law, they whacked her for thinking they were stupid.
Had I been on this jury and been presented with the same evidence that we've seen in the press, I'd have voted for the plaintiffs also. I'm not sure I would have gone so high on the fine, but I for damned sure would not have let her off at the bottom of the scale either.
Not only was she stupid to not settle beforehand, she's stupid for appealing. What her boneheaded lawyer should now be doing is trying to find out if the record companies would settle for a smaller amount that they have reasonable amount of being able to collect. And maybe now she'll make sure she acquires her music legally, and does not make it available for mass distribution to others...but I doubt she's that smart.
I have one reason he left out...
The US government fucks up almost everything it touches. Especially while being run by the current Court Jester. I want them to stay away from my computer, even if that means it comes out of the box with Windows on it and Balmer delivers it in person.
I also disagree with his argument that the cost of Windows makes up 35 percent of the cost of a PC. He must be another one of those glue sniffing idiots that thinks OEMs pay retail prices for Windows. Even on a bargain basement PC, unless its from a tiny mom-and-pop business like "Wang Foo's Corner Custom Computer Barn", the cost of Windows and Windows related software will not be more than 10 percent. And if Acer really is paying 52 percent in Europe, then they're fucking stupid because no one else is paying that.
You're trying to make a point by being sarcastic, but I've driven in several small towns where one can, and *will*, be ticketed for that one mile over. There are many small towns in America that base their entire budget on speeding ticket income.
And again, I would point out that what she was fined was a consequence of poor legal representation. An intelligent lawyer would have advised her to settle as soon as he saw the evidence against her.
Were I on that jury (and I've served on several juries, so I know what its like), and the prosecution presented me with that evidence (and yes, I did RTFA), I'd vote in favor of the plaintiff also. Slashdotters can split hairs on the technicalities all they want, but especially when you toss in that she changed out her hard drive two weeks after notification, yep, she did it.
The reason the fines were so high is because she had piss-poor legal representation. In fact, had she had intelligent representation, and assuming that representation knew what evidence was going to be presented (IP addresses, user names, etc etc), he should have advised her to settle.
If you can't pay the fine, don't do the crime.
And if you still insist on doing it, at least get an intelligent lawyer when you get caught.
I bet Shatner is pissed over this one.
While I admire your stance, there's just one tiny little flaw in it...
What company do you think made your original Thinkpad?
IBM never did their own laptop production, its always been in Asia, and most of it was by Lenovo. All IBM did was finally sold them the rights to the name "Thinkpad" to put with the hardware they had been making under contract for IBM all along.