You are a troll. A bad troll. I could pick apart all your lies, but I think I will tear apart just one sentence so the mods can wake up.
And we do not have the world's greatest broadband. Here in Houston, the country's 5th largest city, you can get 1M down, 250K up for the grand sum of $32/month.
Actually, as a Houstonite, I know that it is the U.S.A's fourth largest city. Plus your pricing is rediculus, because I personally get 3mb down for less than 50 bucks a month.
Kerry tried to make it one. But America acted like it didn't care. So the plan was not mentioned again (this talk of 30 year old wars definitely helps push away current issues). If nerds would make this a campaign issue, then we might get our better broadband. Say the military needs it: thats how we got our interstate highway system!
Why would it? What other technology can do what bluetooth can do? It doesn't really have a direct competitor. The market is just not as large as some people expected. It does not "replace wires." It removes (some) wires for people who are willing to pay extra. Most of the bluetooth products are top notch and top dollar, so they have a specific market. Adoption was limited at the start.
From site:
For Win32 users, it's much more work to get your computer set up to build Virtual AGC than it is in Linux, and the steps needed will be less familiar.
That made me feel good seeing as how this is the first week I've tried linux.
Too be honest, I don't think there will be "civilian models." Its not practical. Hell, our current system where everyone has a personal vehicle is not practical now (just look at the traffic in major cities). Not every Joe could have a flying car. Sorry to bust your bubble.
This might be just the thing to move America over to a mostly public transportation system though. We will need it eventually, considering how bad urban sprawl in in some areas.
Maybe if you believe what Michael Moore tells you.
Or maybe I read that when I check out international news. But who cares what the world thinks, right?
Yes, they are, and you're 100% wrong. It's really that simple. During the original war protests, you couldn't go a day without seeing full-on footage and media reports, day after day.
A http link would served you well there.
No, they are not. Polls taken have already proven that the actual journalists--not the janitors and beat writers (snicker)--report themselves as liberals who voted for Gore in 2000.
Who cares, the owners are conservative! Power goes down in an organization, not up!
Hollywood is the most liberal multi-billion dollar organization in existence. Your point crumbles into dust.
Hollywood and the Media Industry are not one and the same. Hollywood is a town full of morons. The Media Industry is a bunch of corporations run by conservatives on wall street.
ROFL. Right. Days before Cannes, Moore suddenly comes out accusing Disney of dropping him when Disney informed him that they wouldn't be distributing his film a whole year before, and it's just because "that's when people were listening." Why don't you just bend over and let Moore forcefeed you whatever he wants you to believe?
Moore never made this claim. It was obvious to me.
Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with either the left or right wing. Your brain operates on bizarre, unrelated tangents even I find difficult to relate to.
Maybe if you would read what I write instead of think about new accusations, then you would understand my meaning! Who says I am a representative of liberals or anyone else?
You call PBS non-partisan. I point out PBS is very partisan. Suddenly you shrug it off as "every organization has bias." LOL. I'm sure you don't say the same when baselessly criticizing Fox News, right?
Hey. Fox News is a biased organization too, like all the rest. And this is the first time I referred to it!
Like Kerry's wife did, then subsequently denied to a reporter and told him to "shove it" when confronted with her lie?
Who says she represents liberals either?
I bet you don't think it's sick when liberals tear apart Bush's service, or finance a multi-million dollar "documentary" to help pay for Moore's second mansion in upstate New York. No, I fully expect that you have a double standard when it comes to these things, because one side happens to align with your belief system. That, my friend, is called sheepish bias.
When have I said any of these things about Bush. I freaking voted for him in 2000. You make lots of generalizations. Bad ones.
A complete lie, as usual. Let's conveniently not mention Van O'Dell, shall we? Next time, do your homework instead of believing what MoveOn.org tells you to believe.
Again, hyperlinks are your friend!
Funny, seeing as how Kerry voted against armor and supplies for our troops and came out smearing his fellow veterans after the war. Not what I call supporting your troops.
There is a difference between support and blind obedience.
But most of the owners and CEOs are conservative.
No, they're not. A complete falsehood. From the brothers at Miramax to George Soros to all the celebrity millionaires in Hollywood. Hollywood is Liberal City, USA. Just look at all the baseless vitriol when Mel Gibson decided to (gasp!) make a movie about Jesus.
Who cares if actors and producers are mostly conservative? Especially when the CEO's in New York are all conservative. Wall Street is conservative alley!
No, I don't. In fact, they don't make a single difference at all other than annoying normal Americans.
And they seem to blind you to the truth.
Rupert Murdoch used to get accused of being a liberal when he ran a newspaper in Australia because he dared publ
As usual, the liberal mantra of "oppressed dissension" is a paranoid lie invented to make Bush look bad.
Don't need it. Bush looks bad enough to the world as it is.
This is the most laughable claim in your list. Protesters were "barely heard?" Are you freaking kidding me? Every channel on TV aired protester opinions, all the newspapers--even a feature film "documentary" that made $100 million. There are endless liberal smear books on the market right now. You're completely lying, and you know it.
The protesters aren't heard on the News. They are seen. That is a big difference. Few media outlets explained the protester's reasoning. The same thing happens during IFM/World Bank riots. Its about marginalizing the issues.
Most of the media is liberal, according to all the polls.
I bet so. If you count every employee, then of course news stations are liberal. The janitors are liberal. The beat writers are mostly liberal. Where it matters, though, the media organizations are very conservative. The marketing department (which sits on the editorial boards of some News Organizations )is conservative. And most importantly, most of the major media companies have conservative CEO's and owners. Disney, News Corp., Warner. All have conservative leadership. Sure there are some random Teds, but most of the liberal tycoons (especially Ted) have been marginalized the past couple years.
Yeah, it was dropped LAST YEAR. Moore was told about it way back in 2003. Gee, he brought it up right before Cannes as some sort of conspiracy, I wonder why?
Um, because that is when his movie started getting major media publicity. You know, when the most people are listening.
What the FUCK does this have to do with the left OR the right wing? It was done out of sensitivity for 2,000 people being lost in New York. It's not a right-wing conspiracy to wipe out the twin towers in an episode of Friends. Jesus H. Christ.
Do we erase freeways because tens of thousands of people die on them every year? No. Highway death is a gritty fact of life. So was 9/11. Dealing with something is one thing, erasing it is a whole different story.
"Honest and non-partisan way" = liberal or anti-American. PBS is well-known as a liberal station. You just demonstrated your bias, lol.
Every organization has some sort of bias. What should he have named? I like the BBC for the same function personally.
She didn't. Another complete lie. This is why liberals are frowned upon by the majority of the folks. It's not about issues anymore, it's about personal vitriol toward people you actually HATE because you disagree with them.
Oh, and that's a lot freaking better than conservatives calling dissenters unpatriotic? I think its sick that conservatives are tearing apart Kerry's service anyway.
I quote from the article she wrote:We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.
_
_
Funny, since Comedy Central ran ads for Fahrenheit 9/11 an average of EVERY FIVE COMMERCIALS. John Stewart and Stephen Colbare are--you guessed it--self-proclaimed Democrats.
As a matter of fact, before every taping (as well as in interviews), Stewart always expresses his surprise that people view the Daily Show as a non-biased source of news analysis. It is not.
For instance, did you know the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth, the 527 group of Vietnam vets who supposedly served with Kerry, and who has claimed he was a liar regarding his war record, were not even mentioned in the NY Times until just a couple days ago when they ran a story about how the Bush-Cheney campaign could be breaking the law by illegally supporting this group? Although unfounded, the NY Times had no problem picking up on it to bash Bush, but when it came to reporting what the book said about Kerry.... silence....
I don't want to use Wikipedia as a source for one of my essays. I wouldn't want to use Britannica either.
Wikipedia is best used just for information. Like when I have a history class that I avoided for a few weeks, but I need to still need to ace come test time. Sure, not all of the articles I read to study will be accurate, but if enough are I get an A anyway.
It's not about the professionals. Its about the little guy having easy access to the information. Its about those that don't need to write essays learning about there world. Its about creating a learning structure based on knowledge instead of discipline.
Nintendo has pretty much ignored the adult market on the GBA, and if they do the same with the DS it may prove a costly mistake.
If by costly mistake you mean remain a market leader while bringing in a fat profit. If adults want handheld games, they should blow the dust off their PDAs.
Its a no brainer. I've had it and it's been wonderful. Just make sure you go to an accredited doctor, not some cheap clinic that has coupons in the paper. The only people that complain about the surgery did it at some cheap-o place.
Don't worry about reading computer monitor's either. I've had it for 3 years now, and I never get tired of screens.
Just note: even though Lasik will get rid of the blur-world, one day you will probably need readers. But for Myopia, it works great.
Look. Its simple. It's not that the PC's themselves are cheaper (they are, you can get more bang for your buck with a PC), but for the younger crowd, the software for the PC is free.
You want photoshop? On a PC it takes three hours, decent broadband, and kazaa. On a Mac, that will be $1000 dollars.
You want any app? Warez groups cater to PC audiences. Its plan and simple.
If you have a PC, you can turn it into a full production box with a hit on your morals and ten or so hours of downloading.
If you have a Mac, you going to have to pay for that. This fact doesn't irk professionals who use Macs, cause they were going to pay anyway. But college kids and younger barely had enough money to put the computer together, let alone spend money on software.
You could put Linux on a Mac and enjoy free software, but that isn't special. Linux runs on almost anything, why buy a more expensive machine when for non-professional purposes, a PC will do.
Slashdot Mirror
And we do not have the world's greatest broadband. Here in Houston, the country's 5th largest city, you can get 1M down, 250K up for the grand sum of $32/month.
Actually, as a Houstonite, I know that it is the U.S.A's fourth largest city. Plus your pricing is rediculus, because I personally get 3mb down for less than 50 bucks a month.
Kerry tried to make it one. But America acted like it didn't care. So the plan was not mentioned again (this talk of 30 year old wars definitely helps push away current issues). If nerds would make this a campaign issue, then we might get our better broadband. Say the military needs it: thats how we got our interstate highway system!
Why would it? What other technology can do what bluetooth can do? It doesn't really have a direct competitor. The market is just not as large as some people expected. It does not "replace wires." It removes (some) wires for people who are willing to pay extra. Most of the bluetooth products are top notch and top dollar, so they have a specific market. Adoption was limited at the start.
Shut up!
**Hits bong
Give /.ers some credit!
.
.
.
Now take it back!
please mod up. Grax is not a troll (I'm a democrat).
That made me feel good seeing as how this is the first week I've tried linux.
This might be just the thing to move America over to a mostly public transportation system though. We will need it eventually, considering how bad urban sprawl in in some areas.
Or maybe I read that when I check out international news. But who cares what the world thinks, right?
Yes, they are, and you're 100% wrong. It's really that simple. During the original war protests, you couldn't go a day without seeing full-on footage and media reports, day after day.
A http link would served you well there.
No, they are not. Polls taken have already proven that the actual journalists--not the janitors and beat writers (snicker)--report themselves as liberals who voted for Gore in 2000.
Who cares, the owners are conservative! Power goes down in an organization, not up!
Hollywood is the most liberal multi-billion dollar organization in existence. Your point crumbles into dust.
Hollywood and the Media Industry are not one and the same. Hollywood is a town full of morons. The Media Industry is a bunch of corporations run by conservatives on wall street.
ROFL. Right. Days before Cannes, Moore suddenly comes out accusing Disney of dropping him when Disney informed him that they wouldn't be distributing his film a whole year before, and it's just because "that's when people were listening." Why don't you just bend over and let Moore forcefeed you whatever he wants you to believe?
Moore never made this claim. It was obvious to me.
Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with either the left or right wing. Your brain operates on bizarre, unrelated tangents even I find difficult to relate to.
Maybe if you would read what I write instead of think about new accusations, then you would understand my meaning! Who says I am a representative of liberals or anyone else?
You call PBS non-partisan. I point out PBS is very partisan. Suddenly you shrug it off as "every organization has bias." LOL. I'm sure you don't say the same when baselessly criticizing Fox News, right?
Hey. Fox News is a biased organization too, like all the rest. And this is the first time I referred to it!
Like Kerry's wife did, then subsequently denied to a reporter and told him to "shove it" when confronted with her lie?
Who says she represents liberals either?
I bet you don't think it's sick when liberals tear apart Bush's service, or finance a multi-million dollar "documentary" to help pay for Moore's second mansion in upstate New York. No, I fully expect that you have a double standard when it comes to these things, because one side happens to align with your belief system. That, my friend, is called sheepish bias.
When have I said any of these things about Bush. I freaking voted for him in 2000. You make lots of generalizations. Bad ones.
A complete lie, as usual. Let's conveniently not mention Van O'Dell, shall we? Next time, do your homework instead of believing what MoveOn.org tells you to believe.
Again, hyperlinks are your friend!
Funny, seeing as how Kerry voted against armor and supplies for our troops and came out smearing his fellow veterans after the war. Not what I call supporting your troops.
There is a difference between support and blind obedience.
But most of the owners and CEOs are conservative.
No, they're not. A complete falsehood. From the brothers at Miramax to George Soros to all the celebrity millionaires in Hollywood. Hollywood is Liberal City, USA. Just look at all the baseless vitriol when Mel Gibson decided to (gasp!) make a movie about Jesus.
Who cares if actors and producers are mostly conservative? Especially when the CEO's in New York are all conservative. Wall Street is conservative alley!
No, I don't. In fact, they don't make a single difference at all other than annoying normal Americans.
And they seem to blind you to the truth.
Rupert Murdoch used to get accused of being a liberal when he ran a newspaper in Australia because he dared publ
Don't need it. Bush looks bad enough to the world as it is.
This is the most laughable claim in your list. Protesters were "barely heard?" Are you freaking kidding me? Every channel on TV aired protester opinions, all the newspapers--even a feature film "documentary" that made $100 million. There are endless liberal smear books on the market right now. You're completely lying, and you know it.
The protesters aren't heard on the News. They are seen. That is a big difference. Few media outlets explained the protester's reasoning. The same thing happens during IFM/World Bank riots. Its about marginalizing the issues.
Most of the media is liberal, according to all the polls.
I bet so. If you count every employee, then of course news stations are liberal. The janitors are liberal. The beat writers are mostly liberal. Where it matters, though, the media organizations are very conservative. The marketing department (which sits on the editorial boards of some News Organizations )is conservative. And most importantly, most of the major media companies have conservative CEO's and owners. Disney, News Corp., Warner. All have conservative leadership. Sure there are some random Teds, but most of the liberal tycoons (especially Ted) have been marginalized the past couple years.
Yeah, it was dropped LAST YEAR. Moore was told about it way back in 2003. Gee, he brought it up right before Cannes as some sort of conspiracy, I wonder why?
Um, because that is when his movie started getting major media publicity. You know, when the most people are listening.
What the FUCK does this have to do with the left OR the right wing? It was done out of sensitivity for 2,000 people being lost in New York. It's not a right-wing conspiracy to wipe out the twin towers in an episode of Friends. Jesus H. Christ.
Do we erase freeways because tens of thousands of people die on them every year? No. Highway death is a gritty fact of life. So was 9/11. Dealing with something is one thing, erasing it is a whole different story.
"Honest and non-partisan way" = liberal or anti-American. PBS is well-known as a liberal station. You just demonstrated your bias, lol.
Every organization has some sort of bias. What should he have named? I like the BBC for the same function personally.
She didn't. Another complete lie. This is why liberals are frowned upon by the majority of the folks. It's not about issues anymore, it's about personal vitriol toward people you actually HATE because you disagree with them.
Oh, and that's a lot freaking better than conservatives calling dissenters unpatriotic? I think its sick that conservatives are tearing apart Kerry's service anyway.
The only living man to actually see Kerry's actions has come out against the Swiftboat Group.
With conservatives is all "support your troops," unless one of them runs for president as a Democrat of course!
Yet another complete lie. Care to cite a single quote or example?
Sure
I quote from the article she wrote:We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.
_
_
Funny, since Comedy Central ran ads for Fahrenheit 9/11 an average of EVERY FIVE COMMERCIALS. John Stewart and Stephen Colbare are--you guessed it--self-proclaimed Democrats.
As a matter of fact, before every taping (as well as in interviews), Stewart always expresses his surprise that people view the Daily Show as a non-biased source of news analysis. It is not.
The NYT was right to ignore those Swiftboat Liers. "There were three swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam... three officers and 15 crew members," said Mr Rood. "Only two of those officers remain to talk about what happened... One is John Kerry... who won a Silver Star for what happened... I am the other."
The Swiftboat guys are still sore a Kerry for starting an Anti-Vietnam War group. They are not a credible source.
Either that, or the butt ugly colors will give you god-like mod points.
.
Why? He would be a good witness. He observed everything going on!
Damn you made me just miss a DOS-Based OS again!
12:07 pm Mayor bans use of Segways on a Polo field.
Drat, foiled again.
Segway golf would be a more acceptable option.
I once got a 1x cd-rom to work without a caddy.
I don't want to use Wikipedia as a source for one of my essays. I wouldn't want to use Britannica either.
Wikipedia is best used just for information. Like when I have a history class that I avoided for a few weeks, but I need to still need to ace come test time. Sure, not all of the articles I read to study will be accurate, but if enough are I get an A anyway.
It's not about the professionals. Its about the little guy having easy access to the information. Its about those that don't need to write essays learning about there world. Its about creating a learning structure based on knowledge instead of discipline.
If by costly mistake you mean remain a market leader while bringing in a fat profit. If adults want handheld games, they should blow the dust off their PDAs.
Don't worry about reading computer monitor's either. I've had it for 3 years now, and I never get tired of screens.
Just note: even though Lasik will get rid of the blur-world, one day you will probably need readers. But for Myopia, it works great.
You want photoshop? On a PC it takes three hours, decent broadband, and kazaa. On a Mac, that will be $1000 dollars.
You want any app? Warez groups cater to PC audiences. Its plan and simple.
If you have a PC, you can turn it into a full production box with a hit on your morals and ten or so hours of downloading.
If you have a Mac, you going to have to pay for that. This fact doesn't irk professionals who use Macs, cause they were going to pay anyway. But college kids and younger barely had enough money to put the computer together, let alone spend money on software.
You could put Linux on a Mac and enjoy free software, but that isn't special. Linux runs on almost anything, why buy a more expensive machine when for non-professional purposes, a PC will do.
That is the real cost difference.
In Soviet Russia, Verisign slams you!
The Great Wall of China is the boss of the game.
How about the feeling of taking your wholly bitch to Comp. USA afterwards.
When they ask what happened say "Isn't that how you fix computers?"