Boy, you people are clumsy with your data...almost all of the complaints I'm getting are of this kind. I don't know about you, but it's been a good few years since I 'accidentally' erased, or lost a file. You people need to be more careful what you rm, rf or carelessly drop.
But if you're that paranoid (and after losing a whole RAID array in one go, I don't blame you), you're going to be pretty hardcore and nuanced about your backup strategies.
But, for fairly pedestrian usage, not to mention cost and ease of maintenance (Dead HD? just slap in another one), RAID can't be beat.
I'm also running under the assumption that you have a PCs plus RAID storage setup, so if the RAID goes to shit like yours did, there's a set of data still on the PCs, right?
Bottom line, online storage is not a viable option IMO. Not for cost, not for reliability, and certainly not for privacy.
That's really all there is to it..SLJ has, ever since the Pulp Fiction days, been Hollywood's go-to guy for the "intense" factor. It's the same thing with Christopher Walken. Not all of his characters are necessarily bad ass, but CW just brings along that extra frisson, whether you need it or not, same as Sam.
I'm not so sure. Back in '77, Star Wars didn't have a lot of competition. Nowadays, what with Comic book adaptations galore, dozens of big-spectacle summer movies each year, and, last but not least, Pixar and its many imitators, there's a lot of competition for attention spans. I do think the prequels will be quite a defining point for this generation, but I don't think they'll hold quite the same place as episodes 4-6 did for us.
Amen to that. Episode I might have produced howls of pain from the older generation, but that Halloween, I swear to god every kid was dressed as either Darth Maul, Obi-Wan or Padme.
While this generation of young 'uns might not take Star Wars as close to their hearts as we did, Lucas is obviously doing something right.
Meh, I gave up on it towards the end of Season 1. Too damn talky and slow. Considering the vehicles and weapons at their disposal, this could have been a lot more fun. Not to mention that apart from the character of Sarge, there wasn't a whole lot of differentiation betwen the other characters aside from their armor colours.
Then again, I find Strongbad pretty boring too, so maybe there's something wrong with me.
Nope, that was my first (and probably last) attempt at posting AC. Looking back on it now, I'm wondering what it was about my posts that made me think I should do it that way. Memo to self: no more posting whilst exhausted!
Actually, the only thing it would do is satsify my curiosity. I'm 30 and pretty set in my ways, so no major life changes (or medication for that matter) would be involved were I to be diagnosed. The 'label' thing would also not be an issue as I wouldn't exactly advertise it beyond my immediate family, and I definitely wouldn't worry about it, but thanks for the concern.
Actually, I found the interview to be curious enough to compel me to look at the wiki entry (never knew anything about Asperger's other than "autism" until today). Long story short, I'm wondering if I should get myself checked out, as quite a few things were made much clearer.
Couldn't care less if he was Hitler's lover. I just like the fact that he backs up his assertions with a ton of sources. Left or right, you do that, you get my respect.
Also, I need a little more than they 'were roommates at Harvard'. I've had plenty of roommates, and I didn't get along with all of them.
I quoted the man, all you have done thus far is spew foul language.
Yeah, and you know why? Because I'm sick and tired of dipshits like you that can't be bothered to actually look for information. I mean, fuck, it's 2005. Can't you do a Google search?
I welcome your fact-based reply.
Facts coming right up, sah! (link is here, scroll down a bit.) And remember, before you bitch about the article length, you asked for it.
Where does spin come from? Inventing the Internet
CHAPTER I--GORE IGNORED: The press corps' twenty-month War against Gore began on March 11, 1999. Two days earlier, Gore had given an interview to Wolf Blitzer for a special, weeknight broadcast of CNN's Late Edition. Gore was the sitting vice president of the United States, and the leading contender for the Democratic presidential nomination. As such, the taped session was previewed and promoted by the network. It was Gore's "first on-camera interview since filing as a candidate," one CNN promo said.
A year of impeachment had come to an end; Gore's informal campaigning was about to begin. And a spin campaign from the Washington press corps would follow in extremely short order. This campaign would be built on a nasty charge--the charge that Candidate Gore was a liar. The theme would dominate campaign coverage for the entire twenty months of the race.
In the Late Edition interview, Blitzer asked Gore to explain what set him apart from Bill Bradley, his opponent for the Dem nomination. Somewhat clumsily, Gore offered a list of career accomplishments. One part of his answer drew more attention than any remark by any candidate in the entire 2000 campaign.
"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet," Gore said. "I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth, environmental protection, improvements in our educational system." On the whole, this was the kind of chest-thumping statement which candidates routinely make on the stump. But as anyone who followed this election will know, Gore's initial, sixteen-word comment was widely dissected for the next twenty months. Almost surely, Gore's brief remark about the Net was the most widely-discussed statement of Campaign 2000. The spinning of this one remark drove a nasty War Against Gore--a spin campaign which almost surely decided the 2000 race.
Gore's remark would be widely attacked. But surprise! At the time Gore made his statement, it received no attention whatever. Blitzer didn't ask Gore to explain his remark; he showed no surprise at what Gore had said. And in its on-air promotions for the taped interview, CNN showed no sign of thinking that Gore had "made news" with his comment. Meanwhile, major papers which covered Gore's interview completely ignored the comment. On March 10, for example, the Washington Post ran a full report about the Gore-Blitzer session. But the paper only discussed Gore's remarks on U.S. relations with China. On March 11, the Washington Times' Greg Pierce reviewed the interview in his "Inside Politics" column. But Pierce only mentioned what Gore had said about early campaign polling. Similarly, the AP's dispatches about Gore's interview completely ignored his Internet comment. And another major organ passed over Gore's statement. On March 10, the Hotline--the widely-read, on-line digest of the day's political news--ran extensive excerpts from the Late Edition Q-and-A's, but omitted the Internet remark altogether. In fact, in the first two days after Gore's appearance, no press entity remarked, in any way, on what Gore said about the Net. Gore's comment would be critiqued, attacked, burlesqued and spun over the course of the next twenty months. But it evoked no reaction from the press--none at all--at the time Gore made it. Repeat: No one in the press said even one word about Gore's st
Still, don't think I'll be using that. That's the thing with Firefox: It does a ton of shit that I'll never get to use whereas IE doesn't even do the shit I want it to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Boy, you people are clumsy with your data...almost all of the complaints I'm getting are of this kind. I don't know about you, but it's been a good few years since I 'accidentally' erased, or lost a file. You people need to be more careful what you rm, rf or carelessly drop.
Easy, it keeps the bugs away! *rimshot*
But if you're that paranoid (and after losing a whole RAID array in one go, I don't blame you), you're going to be pretty hardcore and nuanced about your backup strategies.
But, for fairly pedestrian usage, not to mention cost and ease of maintenance (Dead HD? just slap in another one), RAID can't be beat.
I'm also running under the assumption that you have a PCs plus RAID storage setup, so if the RAID goes to shit like yours did, there's a set of data still on the PCs, right?
Bottom line, online storage is not a viable option IMO. Not for cost, not for reliability, and certainly not for privacy.
A decent RAID setup is easy and fairly inexpensive these days.
That's really all there is to it..SLJ has, ever since the Pulp Fiction days, been Hollywood's go-to guy for the "intense" factor. It's the same thing with Christopher Walken. Not all of his characters are necessarily bad ass, but CW just brings along that extra frisson, whether you need it or not, same as Sam.
Having said that, a Bungie-created Halo RTS? Droooooooooool.
Sorry, I missed the bit where we're all under the assumption that Halo 3 might not be happening.
Try purple.
Hell yeah! I knew Macs were badass, but Mace Windu badass? Awesome!
"Do I look like a bitch?"
"N-no."
"Then why are you treating me like Windows 95?"
ROFL!
Now that's a button I'd like to see!
Are you kidding? Then again, not everybody gets Cayce Pollard-like symptoms everytime they see the IE logo like I do, I suppose.
I'm not so sure. Back in '77, Star Wars didn't have a lot of competition. Nowadays, what with Comic book adaptations galore, dozens of big-spectacle summer movies each year, and, last but not least, Pixar and its many imitators, there's a lot of competition for attention spans. I do think the prequels will be quite a defining point for this generation, but I don't think they'll hold quite the same place as episodes 4-6 did for us.
While this generation of young 'uns might not take Star Wars as close to their hearts as we did, Lucas is obviously doing something right.
Well, it's obviously cost-effective enough to run on at least two channels I get: Cartoon network and TBS.
Agreed. I always thought Sisko was a nice synthesis of Kirk's take no shit attitude and Picard's thoughtfulness.
Then again, I find Strongbad pretty boring too, so maybe there's something wrong with me.
Nope, that was my first (and probably last) attempt at posting AC. Looking back on it now, I'm wondering what it was about my posts that made me think I should do it that way. Memo to self: no more posting whilst exhausted!
Actually, the only thing it would do is satsify my curiosity. I'm 30 and pretty set in my ways, so no major life changes (or medication for that matter) would be involved were I to be diagnosed. The 'label' thing would also not be an issue as I wouldn't exactly advertise it beyond my immediate family, and I definitely wouldn't worry about it, but thanks for the concern.
Also meant to say more power to them as they've come to terms and seem to be finally in control (somewhat) of the situation.
That's more than most of us can say...
92192138248446827
Actually, I found the interview to be curious enough to compel me to look at the wiki entry (never knew anything about Asperger's other than "autism" until today). Long story short, I'm wondering if I should get myself checked out, as quite a few things were made much clearer.
Also, I need a little more than they 'were roommates at Harvard'. I've had plenty of roommates, and I didn't get along with all of them.
Dude, just say you didn't read it, it'll save us both precious time.
Yeah, and you know why? Because I'm sick and tired of dipshits like you that can't be bothered to actually look for information. I mean, fuck, it's 2005. Can't you do a Google search?
I welcome your fact-based reply.
Facts coming right up, sah! (link is here, scroll down a bit.) And remember, before you bitch about the article length, you asked for it.
Where does spin come from? Inventing the Internet
CHAPTER I--GORE IGNORED: The press corps' twenty-month War against Gore began on March 11, 1999. Two days earlier, Gore had given an interview to Wolf Blitzer for a special, weeknight broadcast of CNN's Late Edition. Gore was the sitting vice president of the United States, and the leading contender for the Democratic presidential nomination. As such, the taped session was previewed and promoted by the network. It was Gore's "first on-camera interview since filing as a candidate," one CNN promo said.
A year of impeachment had come to an end; Gore's informal campaigning was about to begin. And a spin campaign from the Washington press corps would follow in extremely short order. This campaign would be built on a nasty charge--the charge that Candidate Gore was a liar. The theme would dominate campaign coverage for the entire twenty months of the race.
In the Late Edition interview, Blitzer asked Gore to explain what set him apart from Bill Bradley, his opponent for the Dem nomination. Somewhat clumsily, Gore offered a list of career accomplishments. One part of his answer drew more attention than any remark by any candidate in the entire 2000 campaign.
"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet," Gore said. "I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth, environmental protection, improvements in our educational system." On the whole, this was the kind of chest-thumping statement which candidates routinely make on the stump. But as anyone who followed this election will know, Gore's initial, sixteen-word comment was widely dissected for the next twenty months. Almost surely, Gore's brief remark about the Net was the most widely-discussed statement of Campaign 2000. The spinning of this one remark drove a nasty War Against Gore--a spin campaign which almost surely decided the 2000 race.
Gore's remark would be widely attacked. But surprise! At the time Gore made his statement, it received no attention whatever. Blitzer didn't ask Gore to explain his remark; he showed no surprise at what Gore had said. And in its on-air promotions for the taped interview, CNN showed no sign of thinking that Gore had "made news" with his comment. Meanwhile, major papers which covered Gore's interview completely ignored the comment. On March 10, for example, the Washington Post ran a full report about the Gore-Blitzer session. But the paper only discussed Gore's remarks on U.S. relations with China. On March 11, the Washington Times' Greg Pierce reviewed the interview in his "Inside Politics" column. But Pierce only mentioned what Gore had said about early campaign polling. Similarly, the AP's dispatches about Gore's interview completely ignored his Internet comment. And another major organ passed over Gore's statement. On March 10, the Hotline--the widely-read, on-line digest of the day's political news--ran extensive excerpts from the Late Edition Q-and-A's, but omitted the Internet remark altogether. In fact, in the first two days after Gore's appearance, no press entity remarked, in any way, on what Gore said about the Net. Gore's comment would be critiqued, attacked, burlesqued and spun over the course of the next twenty months. But it evoked no reaction from the press--none at all--at the time Gore made it. Repeat: No one in the press said even one word about Gore's st
Amazing what lengths you guys will go to in revising history to save this pompous son of a Senator.
No, amazing what right-wing hacks will believe to make themselves feel superior.
Tools-->Options-->Go to the "Advanced" button next to where it says "Enable Javascript"-->Deselect "Move or resize existing windows".
Still, don't think I'll be using that. That's the thing with Firefox: It does a ton of shit that I'll never get to use whereas IE doesn't even do the shit I want it to do.