I agree with you, but here's the problem with that: There are constantly, always, every time, factors out of the control of the ISP as far as speed goes. It's generally the user's computer, but sometimes it's an upstream provider; sometimes it's random faulty equipment in the user's network.
What I'm saying is it's not like water or electricity, where you can just slap a meter on the modem and call it a day. You could query the modem from the ISP's network and see if it'll pull down all the rated bandwidth, but then you're taking your ISP's word that you're ACTUALLY getting 3mbps, or 12mbps, or whichever. How can you -tell-?
Y'know, you're right. I'm so glad that during the last eight years, Congress has been an effective counterbalance against the excesses of the executive branch. Thank God, else we'd have someone in who could get away with actually considering the Unitary Theory of the Executive as a an -actual- functional philosophy.
Yes, checks and balances are alive and well in this government, and I'm glad you reminded me. I feel much better now.
Being both male and diagnosed with ADD, I can tell you that there are parts of childhood that most kids experience that are completely normal. It's tough to get small boys to sit down and do stuff. They're more inclined to run around and beat each other with sticks. This is natural, and should be encouraged.:D
However, when you sit down and intend to focus and can't, over and over, and it becomes a problem...well, that's a problem, and there can be times when the cause is biochemical, and is best addressed pharmaceutically. That said, ADD is no excuse for lousy parenting. It's one of those cases when everyone is right.
"Great idea, now try to do the math on all of the floating bodies and the effect of the gravity from neighboring quasars and other space phenomena."
NASA is good at these kinds of things. Or at least, they will be at the end of the THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF YEARS it'll take to get to anything like a quasar.
No, I'm not necessarily saying any of the above, but the original poster suggested firearms, and I just intended to remind him that it probably wasn't an option, legally, in Chicago.
See, here's the thing about that. If this was a printed encyclopedia, you'd have a point. This is, however, Wikipedia, and number and scope of articles that it is possible to contain are essentially limitless. Notability ought to be a moot point, and while everyone on the internet is not authorized to write about -themselves-, it's quite possible that someone else could find them interesting enough to write about, and find the sources to do so.
The question is not "what defines notability"? The question ought to be "Who gives a damn about notability"? If you'd asked the editors of Britannica whether Star Trek was notable enough to get in their publication, or maybe Buffy the Vampire Slayer, they would have laughed you out of their office. These things are okay in Wikipedia. Why? Because thousands of useless, seemingly 'trivial' articles on wikipedia does not harm anything else in any way whatsoever. One man's trivia is another man's pure gold. My God, man, look at the Star Wars entries. That universe is documented down to the completely forgettable subplots of the most crufty books on the market. But it's still there.
Point is, a 'never-delete' policy (with exceptions for obvious goatse trolls and the like) beats the pants off of a "is it notable?" policy. The default right now is dis-inclusion, rather than inclusion. And it's a lousy idea.
Re:Warning: Gmail IMAP support is ASCII only!!!
on
Free IMAP On Gmail
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
Heh, that was the first thing I thought of when I read this: "I am Jack's complete lack of surprise."
Which, of course, made me go here.
Except that TFA has a PICTURE of Mr. Gates opening the jar and shaking the mosquitoes out.
Picture > anecdote.
So, uh, what happens if someone else logs into their google account, then?
Clearwire does this, too.
Wow, man. Just... wow.
phoooooo.
I agree with you, but here's the problem with that: There are constantly, always, every time, factors out of the control of the ISP as far as speed goes. It's generally the user's computer, but sometimes it's an upstream provider; sometimes it's random faulty equipment in the user's network.
What I'm saying is it's not like water or electricity, where you can just slap a meter on the modem and call it a day. You could query the modem from the ISP's network and see if it'll pull down all the rated bandwidth, but then you're taking your ISP's word that you're ACTUALLY getting 3mbps, or 12mbps, or whichever. How can you -tell-?
This post is not informative; it's wrong. Quit modding it as such.
What's frice?
Because we're a motley bunch of geeks, and we like this kind of news. I, for one, was rather excited to know alpha4 came out.
Y'know, you're right. I'm so glad that during the last eight years, Congress has been an effective counterbalance against the excesses of the executive branch. Thank God, else we'd have someone in who could get away with actually considering the Unitary Theory of the Executive as a an -actual- functional philosophy.
Yes, checks and balances are alive and well in this government, and I'm glad you reminded me. I feel much better now.
Being both male and diagnosed with ADD, I can tell you that there are parts of childhood that most kids experience that are completely normal. It's tough to get small boys to sit down and do stuff. They're more inclined to run around and beat each other with sticks. This is natural, and should be encouraged. :D
However, when you sit down and intend to focus and can't, over and over, and it becomes a problem...well, that's a problem, and there can be times when the cause is biochemical, and is best addressed pharmaceutically. That said, ADD is no excuse for lousy parenting. It's one of those cases when everyone is right.
You, sir, are my hero.
It's cause they -aren't- methamphetamine, and "amphetamine derivative" seems to be needless fearmongering.
Seriously. Also, Dude, 'Chinama' is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian-American, please.
bah, you're right. I wish I could donate my "insightful" point.
maybe, but why in the world are you hanging around Jita or Amarr? Of all the places in the vast universe, ... ???
ISK: International Standard Kredit. Gold.
"Great idea, now try to do the math on all of the floating bodies and the effect of the gravity from neighboring quasars and other space phenomena."
NASA is good at these kinds of things. Or at least, they will be at the end of the THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF YEARS it'll take to get to anything like a quasar.
and suddenly, I am enlightened.
thank you.
Also, it's the government. The government can't sue for libel, but, effectively, they are. It's fucked up.
What the hell is a 'partion'?
No, I'm not necessarily saying any of the above, but the original poster suggested firearms, and I just intended to remind him that it probably wasn't an option, legally, in Chicago.
This is Chicago. They don't believe in guns, on the same scale that DC and NYC don't.
See, here's the thing about that. If this was a printed encyclopedia, you'd have a point. This is, however, Wikipedia, and number and scope of articles that it is possible to contain are essentially limitless. Notability ought to be a moot point, and while everyone on the internet is not authorized to write about -themselves-, it's quite possible that someone else could find them interesting enough to write about, and find the sources to do so.
The question is not "what defines notability"? The question ought to be "Who gives a damn about notability"? If you'd asked the editors of Britannica whether Star Trek was notable enough to get in their publication, or maybe Buffy the Vampire Slayer, they would have laughed you out of their office. These things are okay in Wikipedia. Why? Because thousands of useless, seemingly 'trivial' articles on wikipedia does not harm anything else in any way whatsoever. One man's trivia is another man's pure gold. My God, man, look at the Star Wars entries. That universe is documented down to the completely forgettable subplots of the most crufty books on the market. But it's still there.
Point is, a 'never-delete' policy (with exceptions for obvious goatse trolls and the like) beats the pants off of a "is it notable?" policy. The default right now is dis-inclusion, rather than inclusion. And it's a lousy idea.
Any time. :)