If you see a beer everywhere, then it's mosty likely crap.
Why must anything a lot of people like be awful? Does obscurity make something better? Seems to be a common geek thing.
Wait, now there's the problem coming to a head... if a lot of people take the obscure view, and it becomes popular to think that way, then I guess you can't think that way anymore, and you have to like what's popular. Which recurses. What a difficult situation.
Maybe people should just have their own taste, and you can keep pretending you are arbitrarily right in your opinions, but maybe be a little quieter about the condescension.
The fact that Ebay won't allow a particular sale in no way interferes with your rights. You can still sell it elsewhere. This company doesn't want your business along these lines.
Ebay also doesn't allow the sale of used underwear. Is this also a violation of your 'rights' online? If so, please explain to me where I can find the enumeration of my Ebay rights.
Awww, you're telling the world all about how big your penis is on the internet.
We all know that means you sport about 3 and a half hard inches. Sorry, flappysack. Go post in a thread that interests you instead of trolling the ones that don't, please.
Anything in the way of proof for these assertations? I suspect it's just your hatred of all things American, but I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Wow, whoever wrote that article doesn't really understand what makes a joke funny at all. Every line is essentially the same thing: start with a tangentially related, but untrue, factish statement about PHP, then wildly shift gears in a contradictory clause in non-sensical fashion. How wacky!
It makes me long to watch Son of the Mask again. I won't laugh at that either, but I won't expect to, so it won't be nearly as disappointing.
Is it feasible to set up a domain for the software to run in? It's not a good answer, I know, but it may work, and the costs involved will probably be trivial if the software is critical enough.
I must admit, however, I'm having an incredibly hard time imagining what this software could be doing that requires Domain Administrator privileges. Poorly written doesn't even cover it.
As for movies, building a Linux media center works just as well as the DRM-crippled offering from M$FT.
Well, for certain values of almost as well... like if you aren't extremely technical, you may actually get MythTV running. Possibly.
And of course, it gives you exactly one additional capability over the Windows Media Center - the ability to freely 'share' the content over the internet. Quite a freedom, that. I don't know how consumers get away without it.
It's a "why is America so full of whiny-ass bitches who thing the whole world ought to cater exclusively to them" issue.
You really took it a bit far, although since you made fun of Americans you caught some insightful mods. Naturally, the FCC regulating TV really doesn't have much with controlling the whole world, but once again, putting the US down is a sure karma boost on this site.
Personally, I find the mindless violence abhorrant on TV
Such as? Or are you just firing off the typical rebuttal whenever the FCC levies a sex-related fine?
but I don't see the FCC giving a damn about that
Just because it didn't make the YRO section of Slashdot (and watching 'indecent' TV on a broadcast network is neither a right, nor online) doesn't mean it didn't happen.
You must be new to Slashdot. Anything related to the US is bad bad bad, and anything opposed to the US is good good good. It's just how it works around here. Europeans and other associated low-self-esteem inferiority complex victims need somewhere to vent their penis envy induced frustrations.
So ready for beginners includes such niceties as failing without warning and running it three times in succession as a leap of faith to getting things finished? Don't get me wrong, I like Ubuntu, but I'm a techie.
I know for sure that the software I produce can't have gotcha like that and still be considered 'ready'
That's not what a representative is supposed to do at all. What you've descsribed is closer to democracy. A representative is supposed to vote his conscience, not slavishly follow the will of the people. His check is that if he deviates too far from the will of the people, they can replace him.
I personally wouldn't want a representative to follow the will of the people too closely. The masses are fickle and rarely understand the issues the feel strongly about.
IE on the Mac has nothing in common with IE on Windows, aside from the name and some interface conventions. They don't behave even remotely the same.
Re:Explain the fricken 12,000 bucks for this...
on
WinXP on a Mac, Hoax?
·
· Score: 1
To be fair it's more like buying a Volkswagen and putting a Toyota engine in it. Neither system is really spectacular, and neither is really better than the other. The Mac hardware is pretty externally, but vanilla inside.
And just it's known, I regularly use WinXP, OSX, and various flavors of Linux, plus the occasional foray into Solaris.
Oh, so you mean I should point out that this amendment is being followed, because Google said no, went to a judge, and a judge is now making a decision according to those guidelines?
And thanks for the personal attack. It's always nice when someone refute themselves immediately with invalid arguments.
You: So the reduced demand somehow makes it okay to violate first-Amendment rights?
The Constitution: Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Me: WTF? I hope you don't get paid for your legal brainery. Same goes for the mods that gave you insightful.
(NOTE: this post in no way expresses my opinion regarding the government's actions. Please keep that in mind if you decide to mod/respond.)
Yeah, exactly. Civil disobediance towards the end of free entertainment.
These Swedes are going to make the world safe for everyone to listen to all the MP3s they want with their selfless display of personal endangerment for the good of mankind (excluding musicians, filmmakers, tv producers, software engineers, and associates.)
Considering the massive size and enormous growth rate of the US economy, plus the fact that there are new 'millionaire CEOs' created all the time, I'd say investing in publically owned corporations has a lot of benefits all around.
Of course, maybe you'd rather force that money to be handed to people who don't feel like doing for themselves. I can't tell from your post, so I admit that I am inferring this. Is it true?
You forget the basic flaw in the socialist argument is also present here: since it's exactly what this one person wants, then everyone else should be forced to live under it as well.
That's why capitalism is the only system I can support - it gives everyone the opportunity to live as they wish, provided they are willing to obtain what is necessary to allow it. Naturally, there are lazy fuckers who want to be taken care of. Too bad, in the general sense, I say. Let them figure it out on their own. I'm not helping them.
Yeah, it's still *merely* a religion. Just because a power-mad 'prophet' decided to specify how everyone was going to live down to the tiniest detail doesn't make it anything more than a belief system.
Slashdot Mirror
If you see a beer everywhere, then it's mosty likely crap.
Why must anything a lot of people like be awful? Does obscurity make something better? Seems to be a common geek thing.
Wait, now there's the problem coming to a head... if a lot of people take the obscure view, and it becomes popular to think that way, then I guess you can't think that way anymore, and you have to like what's popular. Which recurses. What a difficult situation.
Maybe people should just have their own taste, and you can keep pretending you are arbitrarily right in your opinions, but maybe be a little quieter about the condescension.
The fact that Ebay won't allow a particular sale in no way interferes with your rights. You can still sell it elsewhere. This company doesn't want your business along these lines.
Ebay also doesn't allow the sale of used underwear. Is this also a violation of your 'rights' online? If so, please explain to me where I can find the enumeration of my Ebay rights.
I see the rest of the world is full of whiny ass bitches with mod points. Do your worst - I get censored all the time by the groupthink machine.
Awww, you're telling the world all about how big your penis is on the internet.
We all know that means you sport about 3 and a half hard inches. Sorry, flappysack. Go post in a thread that interests you instead of trolling the ones that don't, please.
Anything in the way of proof for these assertations? I suspect it's just your hatred of all things American, but I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Killing virtual stuff is fun. Mending virtual socks doesn't even merit a put down.
Wow, whoever wrote that article doesn't really understand what makes a joke funny at all. Every line is essentially the same thing: start with a tangentially related, but untrue, factish statement about PHP, then wildly shift gears in a contradictory clause in non-sensical fashion. How wacky!
It makes me long to watch Son of the Mask again. I won't laugh at that either, but I won't expect to, so it won't be nearly as disappointing.
Is it feasible to set up a domain for the software to run in? It's not a good answer, I know, but it may work, and the costs involved will probably be trivial if the software is critical enough.
I must admit, however, I'm having an incredibly hard time imagining what this software could be doing that requires Domain Administrator privileges. Poorly written doesn't even cover it.
As for movies, building a Linux media center works just as well as the DRM-crippled offering from M$FT.
Well, for certain values of almost as well... like if you aren't extremely technical, you may actually get MythTV running. Possibly.
And of course, it gives you exactly one additional capability over the Windows Media Center - the ability to freely 'share' the content over the internet. Quite a freedom, that. I don't know how consumers get away without it.
It's a "why is America so full of whiny-ass bitches who thing the whole world ought to cater exclusively to them" issue.
You really took it a bit far, although since you made fun of Americans you caught some insightful mods. Naturally, the FCC regulating TV really doesn't have much with controlling the whole world, but once again, putting the US down is a sure karma boost on this site.
Personally, I find the mindless violence abhorrant on TV
Such as? Or are you just firing off the typical rebuttal whenever the FCC levies a sex-related fine?
but I don't see the FCC giving a damn about that
Just because it didn't make the YRO section of Slashdot (and watching 'indecent' TV on a broadcast network is neither a right, nor online) doesn't mean it didn't happen.
You must be new to Slashdot. Anything related to the US is bad bad bad, and anything opposed to the US is good good good. It's just how it works around here. Europeans and other associated low-self-esteem inferiority complex victims need somewhere to vent their penis envy induced frustrations.
Hate and jealousy are so ugly, and so prevalent.
So ready for beginners includes such niceties as failing without warning and running it three times in succession as a leap of faith to getting things finished? Don't get me wrong, I like Ubuntu, but I'm a techie.
I know for sure that the software I produce can't have gotcha like that and still be considered 'ready'
That's not what a representative is supposed to do at all. What you've descsribed is closer to democracy. A representative is supposed to vote his conscience, not slavishly follow the will of the people. His check is that if he deviates too far from the will of the people, they can replace him.
I personally wouldn't want a representative to follow the will of the people too closely. The masses are fickle and rarely understand the issues the feel strongly about.
I didn't say you were inferior to anyone. You're exhibiting an inferiority complex. The two are completely unrelated.
IE on the Mac has nothing in common with IE on Windows, aside from the name and some interface conventions. They don't behave even remotely the same.
To be fair it's more like buying a Volkswagen and putting a Toyota engine in it. Neither system is really spectacular, and neither is really better than the other. The Mac hardware is pretty externally, but vanilla inside.
And just it's known, I regularly use WinXP, OSX, and various flavors of Linux, plus the occasional foray into Solaris.
Oh, so you mean I should point out that this amendment is being followed, because Google said no, went to a judge, and a judge is now making a decision according to those guidelines?
And thanks for the personal attack. It's always nice when someone refute themselves immediately with invalid arguments.
Your inferiority complex has stunted your ability to not be a dick on the internet.
You:
So the reduced demand somehow makes it okay to violate first-Amendment rights?
The Constitution:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Me:
WTF? I hope you don't get paid for your legal brainery. Same goes for the mods that gave you insightful.
(NOTE: this post in no way expresses my opinion regarding the government's actions. Please keep that in mind if you decide to mod/respond.)
Yeah, exactly. Civil disobediance towards the end of free entertainment.
These Swedes are going to make the world safe for everyone to listen to all the MP3s they want with their selfless display of personal endangerment for the good of mankind (excluding musicians, filmmakers, tv producers, software engineers, and associates.)
Entertainment wants to be free!
Considering the massive size and enormous growth rate of the US economy, plus the fact that there are new 'millionaire CEOs' created all the time, I'd say investing in publically owned corporations has a lot of benefits all around.
Of course, maybe you'd rather force that money to be handed to people who don't feel like doing for themselves. I can't tell from your post, so I admit that I am inferring this. Is it true?
You forget the basic flaw in the socialist argument is also present here: since it's exactly what this one person wants, then everyone else should be forced to live under it as well.
That's why capitalism is the only system I can support - it gives everyone the opportunity to live as they wish, provided they are willing to obtain what is necessary to allow it. Naturally, there are lazy fuckers who want to be taken care of. Too bad, in the general sense, I say. Let them figure it out on their own. I'm not helping them.
Yeah, it's still *merely* a religion. Just because a power-mad 'prophet' decided to specify how everyone was going to live down to the tiniest detail doesn't make it anything more than a belief system.