And what was the goal of his coup? To institute a fascist government. Hitler was always fascistic, but fascism didn't begin--outside his head--until he had power in government. AFAIK, to say a practice is fascistic (reminescent of or the product of fascism) is entirely different than saying something (other than a person) is fascist.
Because most people use Windows and it's therefore targeted to that platform.
Seriously though, why does every new IM worm end up on/.? There's nothing remotely new about this, people have used far more clever names to package worms than "Santa" in the past, and the worm itself possesses absolutely no new features of interest.
But then if you think about it, is the ratio of bad blogs to good blogs any worse than the ratio of bad to good books or magazines or tv shows or newspapers?
Um...yes. If you take a random sample of blogs and a random sample of newspapers, magazines, or books, you're going to find worse grammar, spelling, and argumentation in the blog sample, no question. The "good blogs" you may or may not read are a tiny minority of the millions out there, most of which are written by people who have never been taught to write properly. With newspapers and magazines, there is in most cases some minimal quality control- a multi-person effort, with copy-editors, editors, fact-checkers, etc. ensures that most of them, overall, do not regularly print utter bullshit. While this hierarchical model doesn't always work as promised, there's little evidence that the democratic ideal of every blog reader being a fact-checker actually works much at all in reality. Frequently bloggers will be utterly unresponsive to substantive corrections, or delay making corrections until the last minute. And most of the loyal readers of some blogs honestly don't care whether what they are reading is the truth, so long as it confirms their initial beliefs.
Or, if her statements were untrue, they could just do a point-by-point refutation, and release it through all the usual public relations avenues. A lot cheaper, both in terms of money and PR.
Because the Clinton or Kennedy Administrations never ever did anything unprovoked or invasionary.
Clinton did do "invasionary" things, just on a much smaller scale. Kennedy indeed escalated the war in Vietnam, which probably also met the definition of invasive. But neither he nor Clinton repeatedly lied to justify their own war/invasion.
As for Iraq not posing a threat to the United States, thats not what Clinton, Gore and the majority of the United States House and Senate thought from 1990 to 2002.
And you'll notice that they didn't declare a second Gulf War during that time; further, that virtual disarmament was confirmed during this period and that it became inceasingly clear as time progressed that there were no weapons.
What he meant was that he couldn't imagine many scenarios where such a weapon could be accurate. If you're going to fire at someone, with the requirement that the person has to be relatively isolated from other people/metal, and you're looking for something non-lethal, why not just use a from of taser?
As opposed to being able to click the line tool and immediately draw a line. If you're used to using keyboard-button/mouse combinations, I can see how the Gimp interface would come naturally to you. But for beginning users or those more used to the point-and-click design of Photoshop and Paint Shop, the choices made by Gimp's UI designers seem absurd. Especially when all they'd have to do to remedy this is put the line as another option for the preexisting "shape tool".
In your case the "mess" was the result of downloading and installing spyware (unless you haven't updated anything forever, you were probably prompted beforehand). I think the article in question refers to unprotected boxes sitting around with no user intervention getting infected automatically.
Seems pretty obvious- The impact of a technology is entirely dependent on how that technology is used. Just as you would expect a child to learn a lot from TV if they spent their time watching it on the educational channels, the same goes for the internet, where there's about as much or even more time-wasting junk to choose from. If a kid is spending all their time watching Flash animations, IMing, and playing Doom 3, it's pretty ridiculous to expect any kind of gain from the technology.
Two less ingredients than the standard two-ingredient recipe? If you can magick things out of thin air like that, I'd urge you to use this power for achieving world peace instead of a 5-minute high.
But does Microsoft have a monopoly (in the area of operating systems, at least)? One can easily choose alternative OSs, as many have increasingly been doing. And as far as I know, the user agreement for a given piece of M$ software does not promise prompt updates to security risks.
I'm sorry people, but they WILL notice an increased load time, both when opening it and loading pages. Firefox beats IE in most areas, but this isn't one of them.
Re:Seriously... Why would you use this?
on
GIMP 2.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
In terms of ease of use- it being multi-window is ridiculous. And not being able to make a line without first making a path, etc. So long as Photoshop is free* (on IRC) I won't be using it.
Plus, Firefox does have the problems of fairly new software. IE is a piece of shit, sure, but I can leave as many IE browser windows as I want open overnight without coming back to find it taking up all my spare memory. Because most video plugins had many more years of development for IE than for Firefox, sometimes it crashes with Quicktime/Winmedia, etc. But despite memory handling problems, poor compatibility with inline video(or vice versa) and slower response time, it's definitely my favorite- Adblock eliminates the need for an ad-filtering proxy, the Web Developer toolbar is awesome, etc.
The problem with stem cell research is that it has been so politicized, partly by the people who object to "'Republican's bad' crap" as you call it. A rehabilitative technique such as this, which is very feasible and makes use of already-available source content and can potentially help a great deal of people needs to be researched; that is the whole purpose of science. The problem is when people step in and inject politics into such an issue. If you don't like stem cell research, let's see some studies showing that it's not going to be useful and the research is a waste of money, or some indication that it would require an abandonment of medical/scientific ethics (besides the assertion that a tiny cell has a soul, which you can think if you wish but this has no place in science). And the "adult or embryonic" difference- most people who aren't fans of paralysis just don't care.
But that's exactly the point- blogs are supposed to "play second fiddle". Very few actually strive for the type of recognition that mainstream media outlets strive for. Blogs are supposed to be links and analysis, with original coverage being an aside. I find it hilarious how threatened the media seems to feel, releasing a constant stream of anti-blog articles while blogs are merely a convenient way of finding information, not intended to replace the mainstream media at all, but to interpret it critically and present one's own interpretation to the world. When blogs start generating their own information that's more than relatively brief analysis, that's when they are designated "news" or "alternative news" or "opinion" sites.
Slashdot Mirror
And what was the goal of his coup? To institute a fascist government. Hitler was always fascistic, but fascism didn't begin--outside his head--until he had power in government. AFAIK, to say a practice is fascistic (reminescent of or the product of fascism) is entirely different than saying something (other than a person) is fascist.
You go to the Alternative Community School, no?
Because most people use Windows and it's therefore targeted to that platform. Seriously though, why does every new IM worm end up on /.? There's nothing remotely new about this, people have used far more clever names to package worms than "Santa" in the past, and the worm itself possesses absolutely no new features of interest.
Thus "argumentation", "not printing utter bullshit", etc...
Or, if her statements were untrue, they could just do a point-by-point refutation, and release it through all the usual public relations avenues. A lot cheaper, both in terms of money and PR.
When are they going to get around to full virus support? (I'm sticking with Windows 'til then.)
What he meant was that he couldn't imagine many scenarios where such a weapon could be accurate. If you're going to fire at someone, with the requirement that the person has to be relatively isolated from other people/metal, and you're looking for something non-lethal, why not just use a from of taser?
Shut up. It'll look totally awesome and that's what counts.
As opposed to being able to click the line tool and immediately draw a line. If you're used to using keyboard-button/mouse combinations, I can see how the Gimp interface would come naturally to you. But for beginning users or those more used to the point-and-click design of Photoshop and Paint Shop, the choices made by Gimp's UI designers seem absurd. Especially when all they'd have to do to remedy this is put the line as another option for the preexisting "shape tool".
Well, "it" doesn't do a great job of knowing, in my personal experience at least...
Windows? You have to pay for that?
You're not one to download torrents of complete TV series, I take it (not that I'd be involved in anything like that).
In your case the "mess" was the result of downloading and installing spyware (unless you haven't updated anything forever, you were probably prompted beforehand). I think the article in question refers to unprotected boxes sitting around with no user intervention getting infected automatically.
Seems pretty obvious- The impact of a technology is entirely dependent on how that technology is used. Just as you would expect a child to learn a lot from TV if they spent their time watching it on the educational channels, the same goes for the internet, where there's about as much or even more time-wasting junk to choose from. If a kid is spending all their time watching Flash animations, IMing, and playing Doom 3, it's pretty ridiculous to expect any kind of gain from the technology.
It's news to me that I love CBS. I thought it was the same bullshit as any major network.
Two less ingredients than the standard two-ingredient recipe? If you can magick things out of thin air like that, I'd urge you to use this power for achieving world peace instead of a 5-minute high.
But does Microsoft have a monopoly (in the area of operating systems, at least)? One can easily choose alternative OSs, as many have increasingly been doing. And as far as I know, the user agreement for a given piece of M$ software does not promise prompt updates to security risks.
Hitler identified active foreign agents as well, so what exactly is your point?
I'm sorry people, but they WILL notice an increased load time, both when opening it and loading pages. Firefox beats IE in most areas, but this isn't one of them.
In terms of ease of use- it being multi-window is ridiculous. And not being able to make a line without first making a path, etc. So long as Photoshop is free* (on IRC) I won't be using it.
Plus, Firefox does have the problems of fairly new software. IE is a piece of shit, sure, but I can leave as many IE browser windows as I want open overnight without coming back to find it taking up all my spare memory. Because most video plugins had many more years of development for IE than for Firefox, sometimes it crashes with Quicktime/Winmedia, etc. But despite memory handling problems, poor compatibility with inline video(or vice versa) and slower response time, it's definitely my favorite- Adblock eliminates the need for an ad-filtering proxy, the Web Developer toolbar is awesome, etc.
The problem with stem cell research is that it has been so politicized, partly by the people who object to "'Republican's bad' crap" as you call it. A rehabilitative technique such as this, which is very feasible and makes use of already-available source content and can potentially help a great deal of people needs to be researched; that is the whole purpose of science. The problem is when people step in and inject politics into such an issue. If you don't like stem cell research, let's see some studies showing that it's not going to be useful and the research is a waste of money, or some indication that it would require an abandonment of medical/scientific ethics (besides the assertion that a tiny cell has a soul, which you can think if you wish but this has no place in science). And the "adult or embryonic" difference- most people who aren't fans of paralysis just don't care.
But that's exactly the point- blogs are supposed to "play second fiddle". Very few actually strive for the type of recognition that mainstream media outlets strive for. Blogs are supposed to be links and analysis, with original coverage being an aside. I find it hilarious how threatened the media seems to feel, releasing a constant stream of anti-blog articles while blogs are merely a convenient way of finding information, not intended to replace the mainstream media at all, but to interpret it critically and present one's own interpretation to the world. When blogs start generating their own information that's more than relatively brief analysis, that's when they are designated "news" or "alternative news" or "opinion" sites.