No it's not! I'm a jealous linux geek who wants all those snazzy improvements, darnit! If Apple's working on it for free then I jolly well better benefit from it! WHERE IS MY FREE STUFF?!?
Oh dear...I think I've just identified myself with thousands of freeloading geeks...
A windshield might be more realistic, and safer to boot!
Depends - my windscreens crash a lot when I boot windows on them, but they usually run fine under linux - Proof that Linux has a better windowing environment.
But jokes aside, didn't they actually have a Windsheet? Strikes me as being rather practical, actually - it's removable, replaceable, washable, cheap, and is guaranteed not to shatter! It's just harder to see through. Maybe they should have tried a towel...
They probably could've purchased any arcade racing game for cheaper...
Yeah, maybe, but that's not the point. I (and a lot of other poeple) happen to think it's a lot more fun to build stuff yourself, even if it is a little more expensive/labor intensive in the long run. Computers, lamps, whatever. Things in general. Not only do you (usually) get something useful in the end, but you can learn a lot in the process as well. And it's a good excercise in creativity, problem solving, yada yada etc. (Ok, so some of us do actuall have more fun building things than actually using them....)
More important, however, is that by building something like this you can make it do what you want it to. If you would rather just buy a premade solution, go ahead - it's fine with me. However, I would to bet that these guys will get a lot more mileage out of their creation than the average person would if they just forked over the cash for the exact same thing, prebuilt.
And besides, I would venture to guess that this thing has the potential to be more realistic than an arcade game. And it's impressive. Drat, now I'm feeling inferior.
That's just because they're not being honest. They all actually believe God did it. There's simply no other reason to adopt such a hackneyed theory to the extent that you feel you have to prevent eveloution from being taught in schools.
I disagree. I believe that the term ID is used to differentiate between an "Intelligent Designer" (which some might call God) and God, as in the one who created the world, Adam and Eve, led the Isrealites out of Egypt, etc. I realize that not all people think of it this way, but that separation makes more sense. You will find plenty of people who believe in a God but not the Biblical account of him.
With evolution, it is easy to show how species diverge. With actual animals.
Trivial, yes - so I presume you can provide me an example of a species diverging? So far as I know, we haven't actually seen one species change into another, merely a species adapting to it's environment.
It becomes very easy to understand once you know the evolution of "Intelligent Design".
Pray, enlighten us mortals, then. (Or do I need to find a mountain top first?)
And there isn't anything that is scientifically demonstratable to it [ID].
Assuming that science is the formulation of ideas based on what we see, based on this definition, I think it is interesting to note that Darwin formed a theory based on what he saw in the Galapagos Islands. Darwin himself, however, said that evolution could not explain the complexity of some things (I think the human eye may have been one example - it's been a while) and left room for ID.
It seems to me that a lot of people have a tendency to try to back up what they believe by finding data, and not so much finding conclusions based on the data.
"At last year's WWDC, Jobs promised to have 3GHz systems available within a year. The PowerPC 970 architecture is a complicated chip, explained Jobs, and the semiconductor industry "hit the wall" when it transitioned to a 90 nanometer manufacturing process, he said. "IBM has done very well relative to the rest of the industry, but less than we'd hoped..."
http://www.macworld.com/news/2004/06/28/liveupdate /
It raises a point, yes, but doesn't provide too many details. How many Democrats were on the Commission? Did all of them get cut?
Disregarding that, it doesn't seem too unreasonable to want the people representing the United States Government actually represent the positions of the Government at an international conference. One might also note that "It's (not entirely) about the standards, stupid!" The world in general is full of politics, even when it comes to technical standards and nationwide/international adoption of them.
So now that I have that done with (and even more karma down the drain), back to bashing Government with our tinfoil hats on full power.
For all of the liberal documentation of corruption, lies and deception, the republicans are far, far, FAR better at media manipulation than the liberals are.
I knew it! So this is why there are so many people in the media trumpeting the accomplishments and good qualities of President Bush. And this is also why almost all we ever hear about Iraq are the casualties and why it was a bad idea. Does anyone know how many schools have been reopened? Why do I hear about every single American soldier who dies or is wounded and nothing about hardly anything else? (Barring, of course, the election and some bits aobut the new Iraqi Government since then.) I'm just not buying that Republicans/Conservatives are better at manipulating the media. Sorry. (And the coverage on Iraq happens to be a bit of a pet peave...)
And until the liberals fix that oversight and work the "spin" a bit better, they're not going to be back in office.
Yes! Spin is the only way to win at fair, unbalanced reporting. Maybe people should just tell the damn truth for once and concentrate more on what is than what they think it means for mankind and the universe in general. That's why I listen to Talk shows. I don't like it when my news curves, please give me facts and not your opinion. I have a brain, I could probably make a much better decision without the spin than I can after trying to sort through it all.
...Bush has done things a helluva lot worse than Clinton ever did...
Ok, so I wasn't really paying attention to politics when Clinton was in office, but what did he do, anyway?
Seriously, these are the same folks who were willing to commit an act of treason to get back at someone who dared speak the truth concerning the blatent lies the President used to lead us into this mess in Iraq. Why should anything these people do surprise us anymore?
Well, first off, because I don't understand what you mean when you talk about an act of treason, above. What exactly was this act of treason? I fail to see how the investigation of Joseph Wilson (and his wife) and circumstances around that was treasonous activity in any way. I'm not a law guru, however, so I may be wrong, but in that column Novak seems mostly to be wondering why Democrats didn't dissent from the opinion of Republicans.
About those Blatent Lies of Bush(tm), what were those? No, we haven't found WMDs, but that was only a part of the resolution in the first place. Maybe I'm completely out of it, but I honestly can't think of much else...
Everyplace you look in Bush's record, you'll see a constant pattern of lies, deception, stupidity, selfishness and tribalism.
Again - may I request examples? From what I have seen of President Bush, he is pretty straight forward about what he thinks and is going to do. And so far he has shown that he is the sort to do what he says he will. I can't really comment on the selfishness as I had not noticed particularly. Perhaps you could enlighten me on those points as well.
In some respect I suppose all political parties tend to somewhat tribal (er, particularly liberals, from what I have observed), but one can hardly fault another for holding a view that others disagree with. This bit about bumping people (from corperations) off of a panel is a bit strange, though. I don't like the looks of it, really, but I'd also like to know more than the Times article provides in it's three paragraphs.
Bush Jr. has never, ever been about what's best for the United States or its people.
A matter of opinion, of course, the reasons for which I think you have already outlined. A majority of the people apparently don't agree or they wouldn't have re-elected him. Either that or the majority of the population is really stupid and obviously doesn't have a clue what is good for our country, as you seem to have.
Now, I'm not saying that I agree with everything Mr. Bush has done, because I don't. (The particular issue brought up by the original post particularly.) My main point is that your opinion voiced here is apparently just that. Yes, I realize that you are not required to have a reason for your opinion. However, I have questions and I want answers, preferably in the form of facts.
Please note small amounts of sarcasm used above, and why no, of course I don't need karma...
Re:there is no danger in using root!!
on
Linux Cookbook
·
· Score: 1
Hey, maybe that guy cooked his! I've heard that some roots are ok if you cook them but poisonous if you don't.
I'll second that. Live shows are awesome, but you're only there once. By buying the CD I can now play the music where and when I want it.
I also enjoy CDs for the sound quality - concerts are loud. Not that I particularly mind, but I enjoy the nuances of the sound one can pick up in a recording that aren't there in a concert. I usually go to concerts because 1) I've already heard some of their stuff and like it, and 2) as a musician I enjoy watching other musicians in a good band working together. I find concerts much more enjoyable if I'm already familiar with the music and can pay attention to how the guitarist plays something or seeing what gear people have.
The floppy drives were like this on many of the Macs for years and I cannot figure out why they stopped doing it lately
The ROM drives had these buttons. The floppy drives, to my knowledge, never did, and I have macs ranging from an 8500 back to 512K with a SCSI and RAM upgrade. I agree, though - haveing those buttons wouldn't really be a bad idea...
Actually, you probably want to amplify the signal before rectifying it - first, the few millivolts the antenna picks up won't be enough to turn on the diode, and second, the LED is a diode. Just amplify the AC signal, trust me, it's a lot easier. (I've just completed two weeks on diodes/transistor theory, FWIW.)
Doing it this way you might be able to get the circuit down to a couple transistors, necessary resistors for biasing, and a battery.
Now, the problem with doing things this way is that it will pick up any RF - I think the microchip is used to tune to 2.4GHz and only trigger on that frequency band. The chip and supporting components are probably a bit smaller size than what you'd get if you tried to construct a simple RLC bandpass filter with discreet components, too.
GEEKS: Yes, they are.
PATENTS: We're not!
POLITICIAN: They aren't.
GEEKS: Well, they will be soon, their very ill.
PATENTS: We're getting better!
GEEKS: No, you're not -- you'll be stone dead in a moment.
POLITICIAN: Oh, I can't take them like that -- it's against regulations.
PATENTS: We don't want to go in the cart!
GEEKS: Oh, don't be such babies.
POLITICIAN: I can't take them...
PATENTS: We feel fine!
GEEKS: Oh, do us a favor...
POLITICIAN: I can't.
GEEKS: Well, can you hang around a couple of minutes? They won't be long.
Slashdot Mirror
No it's not! I'm a jealous linux geek who wants all those snazzy improvements, darnit! If Apple's working on it for free then I jolly well better benefit from it! WHERE IS MY FREE STUFF?!?
Oh dear...I think I've just identified myself with thousands of freeloading geeks...
Depends - my windscreens crash a lot when I boot windows on them, but they usually run fine under linux - Proof that Linux has a better windowing environment.
But jokes aside, didn't they actually have a Windsheet? Strikes me as being rather practical, actually - it's removable, replaceable, washable, cheap, and is guaranteed not to shatter! It's just harder to see through. Maybe they should have tried a towel...
JtM
Yeah, maybe, but that's not the point. I (and a lot of other poeple) happen to think it's a lot more fun to build stuff yourself, even if it is a little more expensive/labor intensive in the long run. Computers, lamps, whatever. Things in general. Not only do you (usually) get something useful in the end, but you can learn a lot in the process as well. And it's a good excercise in creativity, problem solving, yada yada etc. (Ok, so some of us do actuall have more fun building things than actually using them....)
More important, however, is that by building something like this you can make it do what you want it to. If you would rather just buy a premade solution, go ahead - it's fine with me. However, I would to bet that these guys will get a lot more mileage out of their creation than the average person would if they just forked over the cash for the exact same thing, prebuilt.
And besides, I would venture to guess that this thing has the potential to be more realistic than an arcade game. And it's impressive. Drat, now I'm feeling inferior.
Gentlemen, you may now start the jokes about crashing a car that doesn't even run.
Dude, why don't you just slide down the bannister? It's a heck of a lot faster, and more impressive, too.
Darned submit button.
I don't know how to convince your wife, but I'll trade you one for my parents Bondi Blue iMac that just lost it's analog board two weeks ago...
I disagree. I believe that the term ID is used to differentiate between an "Intelligent Designer" (which some might call God) and God, as in the one who created the world, Adam and Eve, led the Isrealites out of Egypt, etc. I realize that not all people think of it this way, but that separation makes more sense. You will find plenty of people who believe in a God but not the Biblical account of him.
Trivial, yes - so I presume you can provide me an example of a species diverging? So far as I know, we haven't actually seen one species change into another, merely a species adapting to it's environment.
It becomes very easy to understand once you know the evolution of "Intelligent Design".
Pray, enlighten us mortals, then. (Or do I need to find a mountain top first?)
And there isn't anything that is scientifically demonstratable to it [ID].
Assuming that science is the formulation of ideas based on what we see, based on this definition, I think it is interesting to note that Darwin formed a theory based on what he saw in the Galapagos Islands. Darwin himself, however, said that evolution could not explain the complexity of some things (I think the human eye may have been one example - it's been a while) and left room for ID.
It seems to me that a lot of people have a tendency to try to back up what they believe by finding data, and not so much finding conclusions based on the data.
Maybe I'm really out of it, but I though that they introduced that on the 2.5s last year...
http://www.macworld.com/news/2004/06/28/liveupdat
See also this explanation from this very thread.
Disregarding that, it doesn't seem too unreasonable to want the people representing the United States Government actually represent the positions of the Government at an international conference. One might also note that "It's (not entirely) about the standards, stupid!" The world in general is full of politics, even when it comes to technical standards and nationwide/international adoption of them.
So now that I have that done with (and even more karma down the drain), back to bashing Government with our tinfoil hats on full power.
I knew it! So this is why there are so many people in the media trumpeting the accomplishments and good qualities of President Bush. And this is also why almost all we ever hear about Iraq are the casualties and why it was a bad idea. Does anyone know how many schools have been reopened? Why do I hear about every single American soldier who dies or is wounded and nothing about hardly anything else? (Barring, of course, the election and some bits aobut the new Iraqi Government since then.) I'm just not buying that Republicans/Conservatives are better at manipulating the media. Sorry. (And the coverage on Iraq happens to be a bit of a pet peave...)
And until the liberals fix that oversight and work the "spin" a bit better, they're not going to be back in office.
Yes! Spin is the only way to win at fair, unbalanced reporting. Maybe people should just tell the damn truth for once and concentrate more on what is than what they think it means for mankind and the universe in general. That's why I listen to Talk shows. I don't like it when my news curves, please give me facts and not your opinion. I have a brain, I could probably make a much better decision without the spin than I can after trying to sort through it all.
Ok, so I wasn't really paying attention to politics when Clinton was in office, but what did he do, anyway?
Well, first off, because I don't understand what you mean when you talk about an act of treason, above. What exactly was this act of treason? I fail to see how the investigation of Joseph Wilson (and his wife) and circumstances around that was treasonous activity in any way. I'm not a law guru, however, so I may be wrong, but in that column Novak seems mostly to be wondering why Democrats didn't dissent from the opinion of Republicans.
About those Blatent Lies of Bush(tm), what were those? No, we haven't found WMDs, but that was only a part of the resolution in the first place. Maybe I'm completely out of it, but I honestly can't think of much else...
Everyplace you look in Bush's record, you'll see a constant pattern of lies, deception, stupidity, selfishness and tribalism.
Again - may I request examples? From what I have seen of President Bush, he is pretty straight forward about what he thinks and is going to do. And so far he has shown that he is the sort to do what he says he will. I can't really comment on the selfishness as I had not noticed particularly. Perhaps you could enlighten me on those points as well.
In some respect I suppose all political parties tend to somewhat tribal (er, particularly liberals, from what I have observed), but one can hardly fault another for holding a view that others disagree with. This bit about bumping people (from corperations) off of a panel is a bit strange, though. I don't like the looks of it, really, but I'd also like to know more than the Times article provides in it's three paragraphs.
Bush Jr. has never, ever been about what's best for the United States or its people.
A matter of opinion, of course, the reasons for which I think you have already outlined. A majority of the people apparently don't agree or they wouldn't have re-elected him. Either that or the majority of the population is really stupid and obviously doesn't have a clue what is good for our country, as you seem to have.
Now, I'm not saying that I agree with everything Mr. Bush has done, because I don't. (The particular issue brought up by the original post particularly.) My main point is that your opinion voiced here is apparently just that. Yes, I realize that you are not required to have a reason for your opinion. However, I have questions and I want answers, preferably in the form of facts.
Please note small amounts of sarcasm used above, and why no, of course I don't need karma...
JtM
JtM
I also enjoy CDs for the sound quality - concerts are loud. Not that I particularly mind, but I enjoy the nuances of the sound one can pick up in a recording that aren't there in a concert. I usually go to concerts because 1) I've already heard some of their stuff and like it, and 2) as a musician I enjoy watching other musicians in a good band working together. I find concerts much more enjoyable if I'm already familiar with the music and can pay attention to how the guitarist plays something or seeing what gear people have.
But hey, that's just my $0.02.
Actually, "Please See ID" is just about as good as "John Doe". That is to say, very unique.
The ROM drives had these buttons. The floppy drives, to my knowledge, never did, and I have macs ranging from an 8500 back to 512K with a SCSI and RAM upgrade. I agree, though - haveing those buttons wouldn't really be a bad idea...
Better yet, imagine doing all of them at the same time and watching the activation server go down in flames.
You don't happen to be the creator of the original Hamster Dance, do you?
JtM
JtM
Doing it this way you might be able to get the circuit down to a couple transistors, necessary resistors for biasing, and a battery.
Now, the problem with doing things this way is that it will pick up any RF - I think the microchip is used to tune to 2.4GHz and only trigger on that frequency band. The chip and supporting components are probably a bit smaller size than what you'd get if you tried to construct a simple RLC bandpass filter with discreet components, too.
GEEKS: Yes, they are.
PATENTS: We're not!
POLITICIAN: They aren't.
GEEKS: Well, they will be soon, their very ill.
PATENTS: We're getting better!
GEEKS: No, you're not -- you'll be stone dead in a moment.
POLITICIAN: Oh, I can't take them like that -- it's against regulations.
PATENTS: We don't want to go in the cart!
GEEKS: Oh, don't be such babies.
POLITICIAN: I can't take them...
PATENTS: We feel fine!
GEEKS: Oh, do us a favor...
POLITICIAN: I can't.
GEEKS: Well, can you hang around a couple of minutes? They won't be long.
Because, as all true aficionados of pig latin will concure, that message really should be "isthay isway away ecretsay essagemay".