About 30% of the US population thinks President Bush has done a fantastic job with the Iraq war, and has made the country safer from terrorists.
I personally cannot come to any other conclusion than that the last seven years have been a disaster for our nation, but you'd be downright amazed what some people base their opinions on. Usually, it's pretty simplistic, along the lines of "there have not been any more 9/11s" or "we're killing bunches of them over there instead of them coming over here and killing us." What it comes down to is not that these people are insane (as much as I'd like to believe otherwise) or cannot divorce themselves from an ideal (though in many cases this is true) but that they simply have different metrics than you or I do.
While the employees and shareholders of Apple have every right to boast of its success, I fail to see why fanboys can make any kind of claims as a result. "Hah, I'm superior to you because these people that I am unaffiliated with are better than some other people!" isn't a sane position.
*shrug* Here is another history page which says the company's first big sale was 5000 AD-600As to Circuit City in February 2000. I guess it's possible that Amazon was selling them a couple of months before this, though there are no reviews from that product before late 2000 on the Amazon page you link to. I don't know if that's because nobody bought one before then, because amazon's review system did not exist before then, or what.
One thing I do find interesting, to bring this subthread back on topic, is the note from my link above which says "Adding to the popularity was a retail price of $179--about $100 less than others." Whether this was late 1999 or early 2000 (on reflection, I'll happily cede the date to you, because it really is rather absurd to continue to argue over a four month difference in the release date of a dvd player) I think we can agree that DVD players did NOT hit the sub-$200 mark until at least two and a half years after introduction.
That being the case, I don't find the current pricing to be particularly high.
I bought an Apex DVD player sometime between 1997-1998 for under $200. I'd have to dig out the receipt to be absolutely certain, but it was definitely purchased before 2000.
Can I borrow your time machine? Because I'm pretty sure you didn't buy an Apex DVD player before they started selling them. See the company history.
I think that it is very interesting that he does not try to use super high-end gear. It really tells you where the sweet spot is for gaming - might as well use the gear that the developers do.
WTF? In what universe does a Dell Precision with "eight cores and 16GB of RAM" not count as "super high-end gear?"
Here is the scene in question. I think the "There, there, you won't have to cry for much longer..." is kind of telling, and the look on her face at the end of the scene appears to be remorse.
Even before the attack Baltar's Six, a.k.a. Caprica Six, snapped a newborn's neck just because she felt like it and could get away with it.
I actually read that as an act of mercy--instead of leaving the baby to whatever fate had in store for it (if it were lucky, incineration, if not, death from radiation) she ended it quickly.
to make reality conform to the records. Purely as an administrative procedure you see. Off the record of course, but much quicker than setting about altering the records.
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile.
For the record, no I did NOT support the war in 2002/2003, but I do support it today. Why? Because we have a moral responsibility to clean up the messes we make. I'd love to see our troops come home, but what was started is, unfortunately, not over yet.
By the way, why ever would you think I would support John McCain? He's not too big on the constitution, either!
The Nazi movement, or The Nazis began to take over the USA starting with Roy Cohn and Senator McCarthy in the '50s, through Nixon, Reagan, Bush I/II.
You're delusional.
Not because of the point you're raising (I believe it's a valid one, though I would not use the word "nazi" to describe what is happening) but because you mentioned every republican administration after Eisenhower and left out every democratic administration. You're ignoring the fact that democrats controlled congress for most of the period that you're talking about, and that significant attacks on civil liberties occurred with a democrat in the white house.
Face it, both of the major political parties in the US are responsible for what has been happening. Both of them will eventually lead us to the same place. I honestly don't know how you could have made the statement you did without realizing this...unless you are one of those people that believes that Barack Obama is going to magically change everything for the better?
While on many policy issues they probably come out differently, on basic Constitutional issues they would seem both to look to the Constitution, which would be an improvement over our current situation in which the President is basically Caesar and Congress' job is to fund the President's projects.
Understanding constitutional law does not mean that you have any respect for the constitution or that you intend to "support, protect, and defend," same. One of Ron Paul's key points is that lots of what the government is doing (and largely has been doing since the 1930s) is unconstitutional and needs to be changed, whereas Obama is in favor of expanding social programs, gun control, etc. This is not just a question of "policy issues."
There's also the problem that if Obama is elected, and the congress stays democrat controlled (which seems likely) you will have the exact same formula that you had in 2000--and look how well that turned out. Recall that in the 1990s, Congress was anything but a rubber stamp.
Honestly, I can't imagine that turning into anything other than a redux of the 1930s, with Obama playing the role of FDR.
We still have Obama. Party doesn't really matter anymore.
I agree with you about party not mattering, but in what universe is Barak Obama a viable alternative to Ron Paul? Politically, they're pretty much polar opposites. You can talk about "leadership" all you want, but I'm not particularly willing to be led by someone who is going in the opposite direction of where I think we should be. "Different" does not always mean "better."
The Christian god's name is God with a capital G. That's his name. Since he seemed to be thanking a specific god then it was incorrect English to use lowercase.
It's been a long time since I was a christian, but as I recall god's name isn't God--it's either Jehova or Yahweh. "Jesus" is also acceptable unless you have problems with the trinity.
The image would be more palpable and vibrant than anything we can imagine.
It must be sad to have such a poor imagination--or, worse yet, to think that a picture of something, no matter the resolution, could somehow look "better" than the real thing.
Not really. When you hit a connection to a domain you're most likely hitting a network load balancing switch and taking a slice of one of multiple servers. I simply prefer having the dedicated connection TO the internet like DSL and FiOS as opposed to being on a "hub" (not even a switch) with my neighbors.
WTF?
With DSL, the only dedicated pipe you have is to the central office. Whatever upstream bandwidth that is available to the DSLAM, headend, or whatever your provider calls your first hop is going to have FAR LESS capacity than your last mile connection.
I pointed out to you that not everyone is receiving analog cable. That help?
No, it doesn't. Go back and read the original post--here, I'll quote it for you:
There are many smaller towns whose cable providers currently don't even offer digital as an option; everyone receives 50 or 60 channels straight to the TV via coax with no STBs involved whatsoever. For such providers' customers, the next 13 months may be very interesting -- in the "Chinese curse" sense of that word.
The original poster apparently misunderstood what the scope of this transition is, and was assuming that a lot of people had a lot of work to due to meet the deadline, or a bunch of customers were going to be negatively impacted. This is false, since it is related to over-the-air broadcasts ONLY. Cable companies do not need to convert anything.
Thanks for assuming that I was dumb as a post and didn't understand that not everyone pays for television (and even of those who do, some get pay tv through other means) but I'm well aware of that fact.
If everyone is receiving analog cable using analog TVs... exactly how is this a problem? Cable companies are unaffected by the end of analog broadcast transmissions (cause, you know, "cable" companies send their signals via cable, and not over the air.)
Our clients have gone on to clarify, specifically, that the Office 2007 file formats are incompatible with the older MS Office versions and necessitate needless corporate updating for their thousands of internal users
Office 2007 file formats are readable and writable by Office 2000, 2002, and 2003.
But can they explain why knots form in your hair after laying still for as little as an hour? My wife blames gnomes, and I'm inclined to agree with her.
Well, duh! It actually has a really simple explanation. The gnomes have a business plan, which goes:
Slashdot Mirror
The only possible response to that is this Penny Arcade.
I personally cannot come to any other conclusion than that the last seven years have been a disaster for our nation, but you'd be downright amazed what some people base their opinions on. Usually, it's pretty simplistic, along the lines of "there have not been any more 9/11s" or "we're killing bunches of them over there instead of them coming over here and killing us." What it comes down to is not that these people are insane (as much as I'd like to believe otherwise) or cannot divorce themselves from an ideal (though in many cases this is true) but that they simply have different metrics than you or I do.
While the employees and shareholders of Apple have every right to boast of its success, I fail to see why fanboys can make any kind of claims as a result. "Hah, I'm superior to you because these people that I am unaffiliated with are better than some other people!" isn't a sane position.
*shrug* Here is another history page which says the company's first big sale was 5000 AD-600As to Circuit City in February 2000. I guess it's possible that Amazon was selling them a couple of months before this, though there are no reviews from that product before late 2000 on the Amazon page you link to. I don't know if that's because nobody bought one before then, because amazon's review system did not exist before then, or what.
One thing I do find interesting, to bring this subthread back on topic, is the note from my link above which says "Adding to the popularity was a retail price of $179--about $100 less than others." Whether this was late 1999 or early 2000 (on reflection, I'll happily cede the date to you, because it really is rather absurd to continue to argue over a four month difference in the release date of a dvd player) I think we can agree that DVD players did NOT hit the sub-$200 mark until at least two and a half years after introduction.
That being the case, I don't find the current pricing to be particularly high.
See the "key dates" section, which says:
2000: The first Apex DVD players are introduced in the United States via Circuit City.
Can I borrow your time machine? Because I'm pretty sure you didn't buy an Apex DVD player before they started selling them. See the company history.
If you think the FCC will go that easy on Comcast, you're mistaken. It will be "Bad Comcast! Bad Comcast! Bad!" The exclamation points are critical.
WTF? In what universe does a Dell Precision with "eight cores and 16GB of RAM" not count as "super high-end gear?"
Here is the scene in question. I think the "There, there, you won't have to cry for much longer..." is kind of telling, and the look on her face at the end of the scene appears to be remorse.
I actually read that as an act of mercy--instead of leaving the baby to whatever fate had in store for it (if it were lucky, incineration, if not, death from radiation) she ended it quickly.
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile.
See http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html. This appears to be a congressional authorization for the use of force. Based on that, how can you come up with the idea of an unconstitutional war?
For the record, no I did NOT support the war in 2002/2003, but I do support it today. Why? Because we have a moral responsibility to clean up the messes we make. I'd love to see our troops come home, but what was started is, unfortunately, not over yet.
By the way, why ever would you think I would support John McCain? He's not too big on the constitution, either!
You're delusional.
Not because of the point you're raising (I believe it's a valid one, though I would not use the word "nazi" to describe what is happening) but because you mentioned every republican administration after Eisenhower and left out every democratic administration. You're ignoring the fact that democrats controlled congress for most of the period that you're talking about, and that significant attacks on civil liberties occurred with a democrat in the white house.
Face it, both of the major political parties in the US are responsible for what has been happening. Both of them will eventually lead us to the same place. I honestly don't know how you could have made the statement you did without realizing this...unless you are one of those people that believes that Barack Obama is going to magically change everything for the better?
Understanding constitutional law does not mean that you have any respect for the constitution or that you intend to "support, protect, and defend," same. One of Ron Paul's key points is that lots of what the government is doing (and largely has been doing since the 1930s) is unconstitutional and needs to be changed, whereas Obama is in favor of expanding social programs, gun control, etc. This is not just a question of "policy issues."
There's also the problem that if Obama is elected, and the congress stays democrat controlled (which seems likely) you will have the exact same formula that you had in 2000--and look how well that turned out. Recall that in the 1990s, Congress was anything but a rubber stamp.
Honestly, I can't imagine that turning into anything other than a redux of the 1930s, with Obama playing the role of FDR.
I agree with you about party not mattering, but in what universe is Barak Obama a viable alternative to Ron Paul? Politically, they're pretty much polar opposites. You can talk about "leadership" all you want, but I'm not particularly willing to be led by someone who is going in the opposite direction of where I think we should be. "Different" does not always mean "better."
And when a 30,000 ton hunk of steel that used to be a ship (before it sank) crashes into your undersea tube at 30mph...?
It's been a long time since I was a christian, but as I recall god's name isn't God--it's either Jehova or Yahweh. "Jesus" is also acceptable unless you have problems with the trinity.
I'm not buying it, either--the nominal cost is actually $0.
It must be sad to have such a poor imagination--or, worse yet, to think that a picture of something, no matter the resolution, could somehow look "better" than the real thing.
WTF?
With DSL, the only dedicated pipe you have is to the central office. Whatever upstream bandwidth that is available to the DSLAM, headend, or whatever your provider calls your first hop is going to have FAR LESS capacity than your last mile connection.
The original poster apparently misunderstood what the scope of this transition is, and was assuming that a lot of people had a lot of work to due to meet the deadline, or a bunch of customers were going to be negatively impacted. This is false, since it is related to over-the-air broadcasts ONLY. Cable companies do not need to convert anything.
Thanks for assuming that I was dumb as a post and didn't understand that not everyone pays for television (and even of those who do, some get pay tv through other means) but I'm well aware of that fact.
Congratulations on your fiscal discipline. Now what, exactly, does that have to do with my post or the one I responded to?
If everyone is receiving analog cable using analog TVs... exactly how is this a problem? Cable companies are unaffected by the end of analog broadcast transmissions (cause, you know, "cable" companies send their signals via cable, and not over the air.)
Office 2007 file formats are readable and writable by Office 2000, 2002, and 2003.
Well, duh! It actually has a really simple explanation. The gnomes have a business plan, which goes:
1. Tie hair into knots.
2. ???
3. Profit!