Because, people post this crap every time a slashdot story involving Israel comes up in order to get a response. Like many good trolls, it surounds a kernel of truth with lies. However, unlike other commonly posted crap, trolls like this are dangerous because uneducated dim-wits will read it, take it at face value, and then go complain to their representatives. Next thing you know, more people, on both sides, end up dead.
Inteligent people, who want to actually solve the problem, go out and get facts. They then use those facts when making an argument instead of quoting what they hear on TV. This way we can have a real discussion instead of a bunch of ignorant twits yelling at each other.
Paraphrased from palaeos (a little further down on that google query):
Time scale works like this (from larger to smaller):
Eon -> Era -> Period -> Epoch -> Age
The Permian was the last period of the Paleozoic Era(which ending with the mass extinction). This was followed by the Mesozoic Era (whose first period was the Triassic). While Dinosaurs first appeared in the Triassic they become dominant during the Jurassic. Dinosaurs first appeared in the Carnian age (227 to 221 million years ago, durring the late Triassic) but were "small and insignificant: bipedal bird-like carnivores, insectivores, and herbivores. "
One way to do it is to have a government database, that spammers don't have access to. Given a list of email addresses, the database app will tell you which you cannot mail too.
Before this change you could specify if you wanted them to email you. Now you can do control how (and if) Yahoo contacts you on specific issues. From their point of view they are probably hoping that people will leave one or two things on instead of turning it all off. I doubt it will work though
The problem is that electricity is what we call a "Natural Monopoly" - the monetary efficiency of making electricity goes up exponetially as you make more, and fixed costs are high.
To date we have not found a point at which the costs start increasing again (a key factor in having a free market). This causes the market pressure to favor one large company (the most efficient means of producing power). However once that happens, there is no pressure to be efficient or charge fair prices. Government regulations are intended to create that pressure.
In this case the government regulations not only failed to create that pressure but encouraged bad behavior (there are pretty complicated rules for "trading" power, what most people call "deregulation" of power was just a different, and equally bad form of government regulation).
In the Mississippi Delta (runs from Memphis to Vicksburg), the power company is a co-op. It's owned by the citizens. Power tends to be pretty reliable, but not very clean (due to old equipment that costs too much to replace).
Unless I'm mistaken, when you create a sourceforge account you must specify the license that the source is covered by. You'd have to be pretty stupic to not understand what that means.
Sigh, You didn't read the AC's history lesson. It's pretty good.....
Let me remind you of a few things:
Terrorism existed before the 67 war.
Between 47 and 67, when the territories were occupied by Egypt and Jordan, there were no terror attacks against the civilians of those countries.
Before the state of Israel came into existance in 47 there were acts of terror against Jews, many of whom had lived in the region longer for generations.
When Israel became a state, over a million Jews were driven out of the surrounding arab states by force. There were no acts of terrorism against these states and their civilians.
These states today (with the exception of Iraq for obvious reasons) still have laws banning Jews from becoming citizens and preventing them from working in many types of jobs.
In Israel all of the Arabs inside the borders resulting from the 47 were given the same legal rights as Jews.
Until 1998 the military occasionaly targeted firetrucks and ambulances because terrorists would highjack them and use them as get away cars. In 1998 the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that this violated Israeli Law (they might accidentally shoot the other occupants) and forced the military to stop.
Exept you never crisize Hamas, you only Critisize Israel. I don't think anyone here is going to equate the two. Purposefully critisizing one group over the other is racism, bigotry, and, in this case, a form of anti-semitism.
In your case, it's just a profound lack of knowledge about the facts, because, like most people, you've been brain washed into believing that if you heard it on TV, it must be true.
not with FALSE accusations of Jenin and Sabra and Shatila
> and techniques that technically aren't torture but are uncomfortable
Placing suspects in uncomfortable possitions is a form a torture. It is expressly illegal in Israel (although it is VERY legal in the US and I don't see you complaining).
> And when did Arafat torture his own people?
He has publicly threated to kill (technically "put bullets into the chest" of) anyone who tries to make peace with the Israeli's. His policies discriminate against women. Homosexuality is not tolerated at all. Furthermore, if you publicly speak out against him, you will be thrown in jail. Torture is legal and practiced by his security forces.
> Sharon didn't follow the Road map, even though Mahmoud Abbas held up his end
Abbas tried to hold up his end but was stopped by Arafat. Sharon did follow the road map, President Bush has said as much.
> I don't think Israel is doing a better job than the US
The US has killed more innocent Iraqi's in this war then Israel has killed innocent Palistinians in the entire Intefada. Israel's military is governed by civil law and must answer to the Supreme Court (which has regularly ruled against the military and let known terrorists go due to what most people would call technicalities); terrorists have the same legal rights as any Israeli civilian. In the US, the military has a separte court system, and separate rights for "enemy combatants". Given that Israel is right next door to the Palistinians and must worry about it's civilians, while the US is a world away from Iraq and must only protect it's soldiers, I think Irael is doing a better job, but make of the facts what you will.
> can you call Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount anything but provocatory
No I can't. I was a heavy critic of his doing it. However his claim that if the Bahrak proposal had been accepted, Israeli's wouldn't be allowed at mutual holy sites was "validated" in the eyes of many Israeli voters and helped his party to win the election.
Fact is though, suicide bombings and the targeting of innocent Israeli civilians occured before the visit. To say that Sharon's visit caused the violence is to ignore modern history.
> Have you ever seen the plan that offered to give the Palestinians most of the land?
Yes I read the entirity of what was available to the public.
It was non-contigous land
It was also more then what had been pushed for at Oslo; every scholar on the situation was shocked that Israel had gone so far. Makeing the land continuous is imposible, as that would mean making Israel discontinuous, and giving up land that Jews have lived in for over 100 years. Each portion of the land WAS continous (i.e. the Gaza Strip was a continuous section, and the West Bank was a continuous section).
It also strategically kept key water sources in Israeli control.
At least try looking at this from both sides here, as that is the nature of compromise. Those water resources are needed by the Israeli's too. The agreement gave the Palistinians access to them. Furthermore the Palistinians have both Egypt and Jordan to help them in a crisis, Israel does not.
As a further note, both the West Bank and Gaza were abandoned to Israel by Jordan and Egypt because they didn't want to have to integrate the Palistinians into their countries. Israel has offered the Palistinians the land on the same terms it offered Egypt and Jordan (and which Egypt and Joran accepted); Arafat turned it down, and resorted to violence. President Clinton has publicly called Arafat a liar, and places the blame for the failure of the process completely on Arafat. Dennis Ross, the chief US negotiator, has said that Arafat was unwilling to accept ANY peace proposal.
Whether you want to believe it or not, Arafat is the barier to peace. He blocks the actions of his Prime Minster to reign in terrorist groups, and he threatens to kill Palistinian leaders who are trying to work for peace. Arafat does not care about the Palistinians, he cares about his own power.
Yes the Palistinian people deserve the right of self determination. Yes they deserve to live in freedom. Unfortunately for them, they are political pawns, and peace benefits only them and the Israeli people.
Since you care so much about helping the Palistinians, how come you only want to blame Israel? You arn't up in arms about the fact that there is a separate UN agency (UNRWA) to deal with the Palistinian "problem". For those who don't know: unlike the UNHCR, the UNRWA is not charged with providing a permanant solution to the situation or helping the refugees but simply maintaining and supporting the refugee camps. Infact under the watchful eye of the UNRWA, the number of refugees has gone from under a million to over four million. In the same 50 year time period the UNHCR has solved many other refugee problems, and never resorted to permanant refugee camps.
Of course, the implied purpose of the UNRWA is to prevent the ultimate resolution of the situation and instead allow it to fester indefinantly so that Arab dictators and Western politicians can use the Palistinians as political bargaining chips.
I want to see a resolution to this as much as anyone else, but at the same time I want the Palistinians to be able to enjoy freedom and practice self determination. With Arafat around that's not going to happen. In my book the next two steps are ending the UN descrimination, and having Arafat yield his power compleatly to a Prime Minister.
It means that SCO wants to depose them. It means they are going to get tape recorders and a bunch of lawyers and ask them dumb questions for hours on end.
This is supposed to be used to gather information relevent to the case during discovery but it's often used by sleazy lawyers to intimidate and punish people involved in a suit.
Your post got me thinking, does anyone know the average retention rate (after the free trial) of MMORPGs (of which this game could be considered one)? What about how long users stay subscribed?
I agree that 4% is probably statistical noise, but I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that 20% retention is bad unless I had numbers from other titles.
This is all acurate but again it has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
I have made two claims:
1: That based off of target audience for the commercial, the Apple claim of being the fastest in that market was plausible.
2: That if a G5 really was the fastest DP computer (as measured by synthetic benchmarks that focus solely on the power and speed of the CPU) this entire discussion was moot.
Aside: I have no doubt that a dual Opteron system would crush the G5 but it doesn't target the same market. An Athlon FX does, but I doubt that it would out perform the dual G5.
Conclusion: Since false advertising is a proponderance of evidence burden, and I don't feel there is enough evidence counter to apple's claim, I don't think it was false advertising.
> Clinton has stated on numerous occassions that the settlements are 'obstacles to peace'.
Yes, and then he got the Israeli's to agree to disband them, and give the palistinians most of the land and a capitol in East Jeruselum, etc. But Arafat walked away and turned to violence. Both Clinton and Prince Bandar (who was advising Arafat at the time) have blamed the resulting violence on Arafat.
I'm not saying the Saudi's are always credible but since they are almost always supportive of the Palistinians it's pretty telling when they blame Arafat.
On similar thread how can you claim Sharon is the nexus of the problem? There was terrorism before he was elected.
Sharon is personally responsible for all the deaths since. He has brought nothing but death, fear and instability to Israel.
Funny you feal that way, since both Bill Clinton and Prince Bandar (of Saudi Arabia) blamed Arafat. Infact Bandar claimed that Arafat had planned the uprising months in advance and just used Sharon as an excuse. Excuse me for trusting my former President and a Saudi Prince over Arafat.
Under the law, luxury car is >= $40,000 in the US. You get more tax on it.
While correct, this has nothing to do with what I said:
The fact that an Acura RSX is equivilant to a Civic with different body panels and a leather interior, does not mean that all cars built on the Civic platform are "near-lux" cars.
FYI, a Civic ranges in price from $13000 to $19000 and a RSX ranges from $20000 to $25000.
Now back to the discussion; contrary to your belief, the target market segment of a product is determined by it's seller. A single product can target multiple markets. In the case of this ad, the target market is clearly home users.
you don't see dual processor machines advertised for home use, because...
That is true for x86 vendors, but you do see dual processor machines from Apple advertised for home use. The fact that the product is not a good fit for it's target audience has nothing to do with who that audience is.
with Apple they handle a completely different market segment than Dell or HP does
What is different? Apple and Dell both target home computer users. Are you saying there is a way to determine which home users will by Apple and which will by Dell? I don't think there is. When Joe P. User is looking to buy his machine, unless he is brand loyal, he's going to look at them both equally and compare them on their marginal value to him. Furthermore if you were right, and Apple has its own separate market, then they have done nothing wrong by claiming that this computer is the fastest THEY make (and hence in the market).
by your arguement Apple must have a seperate website for you to go to if you want to buy the G5 "Workstation"
I said nothing of the sort. I said that if you went to store.apple.com it would offer you a G5 reguardless of whether you were a home customer (which is assumed by default) or a Bussiness customer. Dell will not offer you a Xeon system if you tell it you are a home customer, and the company you listed doesn't sell to home customers.
However, what might make this entire semantic argument moot is this: the G5 out-performs Xeon's on standardized synthetic benchmarks designed to measure the computing power of the chip(s) without other factors, once again Apple's claim is plausible. (It is also plausible that for realistic workloads it could out perform a Xeon system, but such workloads take other factors into account as well).
Wrapping it up, I think the Apple ad does not classify as false or missleading advertising. The claim (from the ad) was that the G5 was the "fastest, most powerful" computer generally available to the general public (home users). I have yet to see a proponderence of evidence to the contrary. As that is the requisite for false and missleading advertising, this ad does not classify.
Maybe I'm wrong but the computer to which I assume you are refering (the Genie Pro2 ) doesn't look targeted at the same market.
I would email them to be sure but they don't have contact information for a home user. Leading me to believe that this company targets bigger customers (who would certianly have need for such machines in some cases) only.
Let me pose this question: Does any company (other then Apple ) run ads for a dual processor personal computer in the UK, particularly one targeted at home users? I could be wrong here but my guess is that I'm not. To my knowledge Apple is the only company that markets (and sells) such a system. Furthermore both Intel and AMD claim that Xeons and MPs are for "workstations" or "professional systems" etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Inteligent people, who want to actually solve the problem, go out and get facts. They then use those facts when making an argument instead of quoting what they hear on TV. This way we can have a real discussion instead of a bunch of ignorant twits yelling at each other.
Time scale works like this (from larger to smaller): Eon -> Era -> Period -> Epoch -> Age
The Permian was the last period of the Paleozoic Era(which ending with the mass extinction). This was followed by the Mesozoic Era (whose first period was the Triassic). While Dinosaurs first appeared in the Triassic they become dominant during the Jurassic. Dinosaurs first appeared in the Carnian age (227 to 221 million years ago, durring the late Triassic) but were "small and insignificant: bipedal bird-like carnivores, insectivores, and herbivores. "
One way to do it is to have a government database, that spammers don't have access to. Given a list of email addresses, the database app will tell you which you cannot mail too.
From the lecture: "By Late Triassic (and maybe during the Middle Triassic), true dinosaurs finally appear"
No this was not the extinction that killed the dinosaurs. This occured earlier in time.
Before this change you could specify if you wanted them to email you. Now you can do control how (and if) Yahoo contacts you on specific issues. From their point of view they are probably hoping that people will leave one or two things on instead of turning it all off. I doubt it will work though
umm..hate to tell you, under the BSD license, SCO is allowed to do that.
To date we have not found a point at which the costs start increasing again (a key factor in having a free market). This causes the market pressure to favor one large company (the most efficient means of producing power). However once that happens, there is no pressure to be efficient or charge fair prices. Government regulations are intended to create that pressure.
In this case the government regulations not only failed to create that pressure but encouraged bad behavior (there are pretty complicated rules for "trading" power, what most people call "deregulation" of power was just a different, and equally bad form of government regulation).
In the Mississippi Delta (runs from Memphis to Vicksburg), the power company is a co-op. It's owned by the citizens. Power tends to be pretty reliable, but not very clean (due to old equipment that costs too much to replace).
Unless I'm mistaken, when you create a sourceforge account you must specify the license that the source is covered by. You'd have to be pretty stupic to not understand what that means.
Let me remind you of a few things:
Terrorism existed before the 67 war.
Between 47 and 67, when the territories were occupied by Egypt and Jordan, there were no terror attacks against the civilians of those countries.
Before the state of Israel came into existance in 47 there were acts of terror against Jews, many of whom had lived in the region longer for generations.
When Israel became a state, over a million Jews were driven out of the surrounding arab states by force. There were no acts of terrorism against these states and their civilians.
These states today (with the exception of Iraq for obvious reasons) still have laws banning Jews from becoming citizens and preventing them from working in many types of jobs.
In Israel all of the Arabs inside the borders resulting from the 47 were given the same legal rights as Jews.
Your numbers are way fudged.
Until 1998 the military occasionaly targeted firetrucks and ambulances because terrorists would highjack them and use them as get away cars. In 1998 the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that this violated Israeli Law (they might accidentally shoot the other occupants) and forced the military to stop.
Exept you never crisize Hamas, you only Critisize Israel. I don't think anyone here is going to equate the two. Purposefully critisizing one group over the other is racism, bigotry, and, in this case, a form of anti-semitism.
In your case, it's just a profound lack of knowledge about the facts, because, like most people, you've been brain washed into believing that if you heard it on TV, it must be true.
not with FALSE accusations of Jenin and Sabra and Shatila
> and techniques that technically aren't torture but are uncomfortable
Placing suspects in uncomfortable possitions is a form a torture. It is expressly illegal in Israel (although it is VERY legal in the US and I don't see you complaining).
> And when did Arafat torture his own people?
He has publicly threated to kill (technically "put bullets into the chest" of) anyone who tries to make peace with the Israeli's. His policies discriminate against women. Homosexuality is not tolerated at all. Furthermore, if you publicly speak out against him, you will be thrown in jail. Torture is legal and practiced by his security forces.
> Sharon didn't follow the Road map, even though Mahmoud Abbas held up his end
Abbas tried to hold up his end but was stopped by Arafat. Sharon did follow the road map, President Bush has said as much.
> I don't think Israel is doing a better job than the US
The US has killed more innocent Iraqi's in this war then Israel has killed innocent Palistinians in the entire Intefada. Israel's military is governed by civil law and must answer to the Supreme Court (which has regularly ruled against the military and let known terrorists go due to what most people would call technicalities); terrorists have the same legal rights as any Israeli civilian. In the US, the military has a separte court system, and separate rights for "enemy combatants". Given that Israel is right next door to the Palistinians and must worry about it's civilians, while the US is a world away from Iraq and must only protect it's soldiers, I think Irael is doing a better job, but make of the facts what you will.
No I can't. I was a heavy critic of his doing it. However his claim that if the Bahrak proposal had been accepted, Israeli's wouldn't be allowed at mutual holy sites was "validated" in the eyes of many Israeli voters and helped his party to win the election.
Fact is though, suicide bombings and the targeting of innocent Israeli civilians occured before the visit. To say that Sharon's visit caused the violence is to ignore modern history.
> Have you ever seen the plan that offered to give the Palestinians most of the land?
Yes I read the entirity of what was available to the public.
It was non-contigous land
It was also more then what had been pushed for at Oslo; every scholar on the situation was shocked that Israel had gone so far. Makeing the land continuous is imposible, as that would mean making Israel discontinuous, and giving up land that Jews have lived in for over 100 years. Each portion of the land WAS continous (i.e. the Gaza Strip was a continuous section, and the West Bank was a continuous section).
It also strategically kept key water sources in Israeli control.
At least try looking at this from both sides here, as that is the nature of compromise. Those water resources are needed by the Israeli's too. The agreement gave the Palistinians access to them. Furthermore the Palistinians have both Egypt and Jordan to help them in a crisis, Israel does not.
As a further note, both the West Bank and Gaza were abandoned to Israel by Jordan and Egypt because they didn't want to have to integrate the Palistinians into their countries. Israel has offered the Palistinians the land on the same terms it offered Egypt and Jordan (and which Egypt and Joran accepted); Arafat turned it down, and resorted to violence. President Clinton has publicly called Arafat a liar, and places the blame for the failure of the process completely on Arafat. Dennis Ross, the chief US negotiator, has said that Arafat was unwilling to accept ANY peace proposal.
Whether you want to believe it or not, Arafat is the barier to peace. He blocks the actions of his Prime Minster to reign in terrorist groups, and he threatens to kill Palistinian leaders who are trying to work for peace. Arafat does not care about the Palistinians, he cares about his own power.
Yes the Palistinian people deserve the right of self determination. Yes they deserve to live in freedom. Unfortunately for them, they are political pawns, and peace benefits only them and the Israeli people.
Since you care so much about helping the Palistinians, how come you only want to blame Israel? You arn't up in arms about the fact that there is a separate UN agency (UNRWA) to deal with the Palistinian "problem". For those who don't know: unlike the UNHCR, the UNRWA is not charged with providing a permanant solution to the situation or helping the refugees but simply maintaining and supporting the refugee camps. Infact under the watchful eye of the UNRWA, the number of refugees has gone from under a million to over four million. In the same 50 year time period the UNHCR has solved many other refugee problems, and never resorted to permanant refugee camps.
Of course, the implied purpose of the UNRWA is to prevent the ultimate resolution of the situation and instead allow it to fester indefinantly so that Arab dictators and Western politicians can use the Palistinians as political bargaining chips.
I want to see a resolution to this as much as anyone else, but at the same time I want the Palistinians to be able to enjoy freedom and practice self determination. With Arafat around that's not going to happen. In my book the next two steps are ending the UN descrimination, and having Arafat yield his power compleatly to a Prime Minister.
Linus because he has final say on what goes in
Stalman because he wrote the GPL and they want to invalidate it.
Stewart Cohen because he's Linus's current boss.
John Horsley because if Linus worked on Linux while at Transmeta as part of his job, they can be legally culpable.
That said my opinion is that this is not to get any useful information but to stall and intimidate.
Actually he could probably get away with it on the grounds that he wants to be as technically accurate as possible to avoid being accused of perjury.
This is supposed to be used to gather information relevent to the case during discovery but it's often used by sleazy lawyers to intimidate and punish people involved in a suit.
Oh, yeh, and IANAL.
I agree that 4% is probably statistical noise, but I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that 20% retention is bad unless I had numbers from other titles.
--bunch of benchmark mess--
This is all acurate but again it has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
I have made two claims:
1: That based off of target audience for the commercial, the Apple claim of being the fastest in that market was plausible.
2: That if a G5 really was the fastest DP computer (as measured by synthetic benchmarks that focus solely on the power and speed of the CPU) this entire discussion was moot.
Aside: I have no doubt that a dual Opteron system would crush the G5 but it doesn't target the same market. An Athlon FX does, but I doubt that it would out perform the dual G5.
Conclusion: Since false advertising is a proponderance of evidence burden, and I don't feel there is enough evidence counter to apple's claim, I don't think it was false advertising.
Yes, and then he got the Israeli's to agree to disband them, and give the palistinians most of the land and a capitol in East Jeruselum, etc. But Arafat walked away and turned to violence. Both Clinton and Prince Bandar (who was advising Arafat at the time) have blamed the resulting violence on Arafat.
I'm not saying the Saudi's are always credible but since they are almost always supportive of the Palistinians it's pretty telling when they blame Arafat.
On similar thread how can you claim Sharon is the nexus of the problem? There was terrorism before he was elected.
Funny you feal that way, since both Bill Clinton and Prince Bandar (of Saudi Arabia) blamed Arafat. Infact Bandar claimed that Arafat had planned the uprising months in advance and just used Sharon as an excuse. Excuse me for trusting my former President and a Saudi Prince over Arafat.
I really don't feel like repeating myself for the nth time.
While correct, this has nothing to do with what I said:
The fact that an Acura RSX is equivilant to a Civic with different body panels and a leather interior, does not mean that all cars built on the Civic platform are "near-lux" cars.
FYI, a Civic ranges in price from $13000 to $19000 and a RSX ranges from $20000 to $25000.
Now back to the discussion; contrary to your belief, the target market segment of a product is determined by it's seller. A single product can target multiple markets. In the case of this ad, the target market is clearly home users.
you don't see dual processor machines advertised for home use, because... That is true for x86 vendors, but you do see dual processor machines from Apple advertised for home use. The fact that the product is not a good fit for it's target audience has nothing to do with who that audience is.
with Apple they handle a completely different market segment than Dell or HP does
What is different? Apple and Dell both target home computer users. Are you saying there is a way to determine which home users will by Apple and which will by Dell? I don't think there is. When Joe P. User is looking to buy his machine, unless he is brand loyal, he's going to look at them both equally and compare them on their marginal value to him. Furthermore if you were right, and Apple has its own separate market, then they have done nothing wrong by claiming that this computer is the fastest THEY make (and hence in the market).
by your arguement Apple must have a seperate website for you to go to if you want to buy the G5 "Workstation"
I said nothing of the sort. I said that if you went to store.apple.com it would offer you a G5 reguardless of whether you were a home customer (which is assumed by default) or a Bussiness customer. Dell will not offer you a Xeon system if you tell it you are a home customer, and the company you listed doesn't sell to home customers.
However, what might make this entire semantic argument moot is this: the G5 out-performs Xeon's on standardized synthetic benchmarks designed to measure the computing power of the chip(s) without other factors, once again Apple's claim is plausible. (It is also plausible that for realistic workloads it could out perform a Xeon system, but such workloads take other factors into account as well).
Wrapping it up, I think the Apple ad does not classify as false or missleading advertising. The claim (from the ad) was that the G5 was the "fastest, most powerful" computer generally available to the general public (home users). I have yet to see a proponderence of evidence to the contrary. As that is the requisite for false and missleading advertising, this ad does not classify.
I would email them to be sure but they don't have contact information for a home user. Leading me to believe that this company targets bigger customers (who would certianly have need for such machines in some cases) only.
Let me pose this question: Does any company (other then Apple ) run ads for a dual processor personal computer in the UK, particularly one targeted at home users? I could be wrong here but my guess is that I'm not. To my knowledge Apple is the only company that markets (and sells) such a system. Furthermore both Intel and AMD claim that Xeons and MPs are for "workstations" or "professional systems" etc.