Targetting the cause of these weirdos would be a better use of everyone's time and money, as opposed to investing heavily in monitoring random sets of people looking for bad guys.
That's not how dictionaries work. They don't define the proper use of a word, but merely report on how it is used. If a dictionary was just the ages-old definition of a word, it would be pretty useless in a modern context. If people are using it as a verb to describe searching on the web, then that's how the dictionary will define it, regardless of what Google has to say.
You don't even need that. A latex prosthesis beer belly could hold enough liquid explosives to take a sizeable chunk out of a plane. The detonator can be something as simple as a shorting-out wire, surely. A modified watch could give out enough juice to do the deed.
I'm just a regular guy, and I thought of it, so if it's viable, some bad dude has thought of it too. The best protection from this sort of attack is to not make someone hate you enough to want to attack you. We can cry "ooh they hate our freedoms", but their problems are more tangible than that. meh. flame on.
This is something very different. If you change the DPI on a 95/2000/XP machine, the UI doesn't resize. The DPI isn't actually changed. The only DPI that is changed is for the font rendering. It seems DPI and resolution have been incorrectly switched in Windows:)
Vista, apparently, allows you to increase the actual resolution of your display, keeping the high native screen dimensions, but increasing the DPI, giving larger, clearer fonts on higher-dimension screens. So on the 1900x1200 screen, the fonts can be as physically large as on a 800x600 screen, but with much better definition.
It's not just the reactors that are the issue with nuclear power. I'm all for nuclear power, btw. It's the supporting infrastructure, where nuclear materials are shipped to/from the different establishments. That is usually done via train (in the UK at least), and as the nuclear containers do fail occasionally, and as trains have been known to de-rail, it makes people a bit uneasy. Especially as these trains can and do go through major cities. So, until all that part of the deal is thought out a bit more thoroughly, I can see why people raise objections.
I saw a demonstration on TV of a guy with a big yellow jacket and walkie-talkie, sitting in a car park with an "Out of order" sign over the ticket machine. He just started taking money off people and writing receipts from an old store log. Uniforms and assertion win every time.
I prefer my right to not allow some drunk jackass to have a gun in my vicininty. If the government wants to put me in prison or kill me, having a handgun will not change that. Poland had an entire army, and Germany still walked all over it. If guns made countries safer, the US would be the safest country in the western world, as it is, it isn't anywhere near the top of that list.
The legal and moral notion of "stealing" is based on depriving someone of property by theft, not acquiring something for free. Stealing a car is not bad because you get something you didn't pay for, but because someone now doesn't have their car. The only way for the Russians to steal a nuke from the US would be to load it into a truck - getting *a copy* of information does not deprive anyone of anything. Copyright infringement is not a crime, but a civil offense (in sane countries anyway). Copyright infringement for commercial gain, however, is, and that's not the guy downloading futurama at home.
So when you watch TV, you don't change channels when the commercials are on? You sit there, paying as much attention to them as you do the program they accompany, I take it. Otherwise, by your logic, you're stealing.
So make sure your government can't run away with technology. Make sure they're accountable for what they do. Otherwise we'd never adopt any technology, as it can all be used for evil. The ability to control the government allows society to adopt technology that could prove harmful. The government has a fucking ARMY - if they misused that, we'd be fucked a great deal more than if our passports could announce themselves over 10ft.
It would be good if TV companies used filesharing statistics of copies of their shows to determine ratings. Most people who download a show will watch it when it's on TV, so it's a pretty good indicator. No-one's going to download a show they wouldn't watch on TV... It must be better then the Nielsen ratings, anyway:) That would allow the benefits of DVD sales statistics (real statistics, not just small samples), but during a show's life, episode-by-episode.
It's not really a question of corporatists trying to control the people - if you sign your name to a document, would you want someone fucking with it afterwards, to make it appear as if you signed something detrimental to your image? That's what this ruling is protecting against, in this case. If Mr. Director directs a film, then some christian guy in the midwest decides he doesn't like something and cuts it out of the film, then Mr. Director no longer directed the film. I certainly wouldn't want my work being modified to shit with my name still attached. Try to think of all the parties involved, and not just the consumer.
The real beauty is its syntax and lack of explicit type definitions. That change is very logical, and removes a lot of the legwork required to develop (which isn't a bad thing).
Also, as it's just as easy to install Perl, your argument doesn't hold a lot of water... there must be another reason it's so popular;)
He asked specifically for AV software. Chiming in with linux doesn't make you look good or even further the linux movement one iota. It just pisses people off.
And, maybe, he wants his folks to download whatever software they want off the net. Maybe some Sudoku software, or genealogy or whatever. Linux isn't for everyone. In fact, Windows is more suitable for many, many people than linux simply is not. No amount of fanboyism or selective representation can skew that (though I'm sure someone will try).
Assume that someone using an OS is using it because they want to. Assuming otherwise means you think they're an idiot.
Most Mac users are not tech-savvy... many claim to be, but believe me they are not.:) There are, though, some real tech-savvy mac users, but they're in the minority.
Resolution 1441 was agreed upon to need a further resolution before armed intervention could be undertaken. Also, the fact that the US went in without the UN shows how little the US cares about the resolutions, so calling upon them after the fact is just paying lip-service.
Al-Zarqawi was not an Al-Qaida operative until *after* the invasion, when he allied his group, Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, with Al-Qaida. All other tales of Al-Qaida operatives in Saddam's Iraq at Saddam's behest or with his support are bullshit, as Saddam hated those guys more than we do. I could point out the fact that Al Qaida operatives have been in the US, and say that the Bush government wanted them there - clearly that's not the case.
As for the WMDs? The UN inspections prior to 1998, and the UN sanctions, were working well. There was agreement on that. Obviously, if the UN weapons inspectors had been allowed to stay in Iraq, that would have been ascertained. The sheer amount of harassment Iraq was receiving was hindering it greatly. The money Saddam did have was diminishing rapidly. We saw that when his army failed to do anything when we attacked.
Why do you think all those countries didn't want any part in this? They didn't want to get their jeeps dirty? Scared of scratching their jets? If you want to take a look at this situation just from news outlets, then please - judge the situation by the tiny amount of information you're getting. Look at the big picture. Why weren't any of Iraq's neighbours calling for his WMDs to be destroyed? Iraq hasn't exactly played nicely in that area - if he did have weapons, if he was able to use them, the west would know in no uncertain terms. Just because all those countries are muslim doesn't mean they're all in cahoots:)
Read about the downing street memos. Read about the scandal surrounding the "sexing-up" of intelligence dossiers to make Saddam sound dangerous - it seems you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
The fact their status is arguable, and people must be given the benefit of the doubt (that is the basis for law in the US, and most of Europe) means they should not be there.
As for Iraq somehow needing to be invaded, you really must read those news stories deeper. Iraq did nothing to provoke an invasion. They had not invaded another country, they did not have weapons to threaten other countries. Every one of its neighbours was not scared of Iraq, as Iraq was effectively neutered after the first gulf war and the sanctions. The ISG even agrees with that.
Every single reason for going into Iraq was proven incorrect. The whole world knew what would be found in Iraq, yet Bush et al. steamed on anyway. They obviously DID make the stuff up, as nothing was found. And they've had years to find it.
I saw Bowie a couple of years ago, and he played about 50/50 old/new, and it was fantastic. He still rocked the massive arena. Madonna and Bjork can take turns sucking my balls.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, waterwheels! Suck it!
Targetting the cause of these weirdos would be a better use of everyone's time and money, as opposed to investing heavily in monitoring random sets of people looking for bad guys.
That's not how dictionaries work. They don't define the proper use of a word, but merely report on how it is used. If a dictionary was just the ages-old definition of a word, it would be pretty useless in a modern context. If people are using it as a verb to describe searching on the web, then that's how the dictionary will define it, regardless of what Google has to say.
I'm just a regular guy, and I thought of it, so if it's viable, some bad dude has thought of it too. The best protection from this sort of attack is to not make someone hate you enough to want to attack you. We can cry "ooh they hate our freedoms", but their problems are more tangible than that. meh. flame on.
My wireless has been faultless for years. It's been just as reliable as my wired connection.
This is something very different. If you change the DPI on a 95/2000/XP machine, the UI doesn't resize. The DPI isn't actually changed. The only DPI that is changed is for the font rendering. It seems DPI and resolution have been incorrectly switched in Windows :)
Vista, apparently, allows you to increase the actual resolution of your display, keeping the high native screen dimensions, but increasing the DPI, giving larger, clearer fonts on higher-dimension screens. So on the 1900x1200 screen, the fonts can be as physically large as on a 800x600 screen, but with much better definition.
It's not just the reactors that are the issue with nuclear power. I'm all for nuclear power, btw. It's the supporting infrastructure, where nuclear materials are shipped to/from the different establishments. That is usually done via train (in the UK at least), and as the nuclear containers do fail occasionally, and as trains have been known to de-rail, it makes people a bit uneasy. Especially as these trains can and do go through major cities. So, until all that part of the deal is thought out a bit more thoroughly, I can see why people raise objections.
I saw a demonstration on TV of a guy with a big yellow jacket and walkie-talkie, sitting in a car park with an "Out of order" sign over the ticket machine. He just started taking money off people and writing receipts from an old store log. Uniforms and assertion win every time.
I prefer my right to not allow some drunk jackass to have a gun in my vicininty. If the government wants to put me in prison or kill me, having a handgun will not change that. Poland had an entire army, and Germany still walked all over it. If guns made countries safer, the US would be the safest country in the western world, as it is, it isn't anywhere near the top of that list.
So when you watch TV, you don't change channels when the commercials are on? You sit there, paying as much attention to them as you do the program they accompany, I take it. Otherwise, by your logic, you're stealing.
So make sure your government can't run away with technology. Make sure they're accountable for what they do. Otherwise we'd never adopt any technology, as it can all be used for evil. The ability to control the government allows society to adopt technology that could prove harmful. The government has a fucking ARMY - if they misused that, we'd be fucked a great deal more than if our passports could announce themselves over 10ft.
It would be good if TV companies used filesharing statistics of copies of their shows to determine ratings. Most people who download a show will watch it when it's on TV, so it's a pretty good indicator. No-one's going to download a show they wouldn't watch on TV... It must be better then the Nielsen ratings, anyway :) That would allow the benefits of DVD sales statistics (real statistics, not just small samples), but during a show's life, episode-by-episode.
or am I smoking crack?It's not really a question of corporatists trying to control the people - if you sign your name to a document, would you want someone fucking with it afterwards, to make it appear as if you signed something detrimental to your image? That's what this ruling is protecting against, in this case. If Mr. Director directs a film, then some christian guy in the midwest decides he doesn't like something and cuts it out of the film, then Mr. Director no longer directed the film. I certainly wouldn't want my work being modified to shit with my name still attached. Try to think of all the parties involved, and not just the consumer.
Nothing important, nothing final, nothing being made public. Pure speculation ensues.
A dirty cop is no reason to disband a police force :)
Also, as it's just as easy to install Perl, your argument doesn't hold a lot of water... there must be another reason it's so popular ;)
So if both were happening at the same time, which would you stop first?
He asked specifically for AV software. Chiming in with linux doesn't make you look good or even further the linux movement one iota. It just pisses people off.
And, maybe, he wants his folks to download whatever software they want off the net. Maybe some Sudoku software, or genealogy or whatever. Linux isn't for everyone. In fact, Windows is more suitable for many, many people than linux simply is not. No amount of fanboyism or selective representation can skew that (though I'm sure someone will try).
Assume that someone using an OS is using it because they want to. Assuming otherwise means you think they're an idiot.
Most Mac users are not tech-savvy... many claim to be, but believe me they are not. :) There are, though, some real tech-savvy mac users, but they're in the minority.
Al-Zarqawi was not an Al-Qaida operative until *after* the invasion, when he allied his group, Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, with Al-Qaida. All other tales of Al-Qaida operatives in Saddam's Iraq at Saddam's behest or with his support are bullshit, as Saddam hated those guys more than we do. I could point out the fact that Al Qaida operatives have been in the US, and say that the Bush government wanted them there - clearly that's not the case.
As for the WMDs? The UN inspections prior to 1998, and the UN sanctions, were working well. There was agreement on that. Obviously, if the UN weapons inspectors had been allowed to stay in Iraq, that would have been ascertained. The sheer amount of harassment Iraq was receiving was hindering it greatly. The money Saddam did have was diminishing rapidly. We saw that when his army failed to do anything when we attacked.
Why do you think all those countries didn't want any part in this? They didn't want to get their jeeps dirty? Scared of scratching their jets? If you want to take a look at this situation just from news outlets, then please - judge the situation by the tiny amount of information you're getting. Look at the big picture. Why weren't any of Iraq's neighbours calling for his WMDs to be destroyed? Iraq hasn't exactly played nicely in that area - if he did have weapons, if he was able to use them, the west would know in no uncertain terms. Just because all those countries are muslim doesn't mean they're all in cahoots :)
Read about the downing street memos. Read about the scandal surrounding the "sexing-up" of intelligence dossiers to make Saddam sound dangerous - it seems you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
As for Iraq somehow needing to be invaded, you really must read those news stories deeper. Iraq did nothing to provoke an invasion. They had not invaded another country, they did not have weapons to threaten other countries. Every one of its neighbours was not scared of Iraq, as Iraq was effectively neutered after the first gulf war and the sanctions. The ISG even agrees with that.
Every single reason for going into Iraq was proven incorrect. The whole world knew what would be found in Iraq, yet Bush et al. steamed on anyway. They obviously DID make the stuff up, as nothing was found. And they've had years to find it.
For that price the seat should be on Madonna's face.
I saw Bowie a couple of years ago, and he played about 50/50 old/new, and it was fantastic. He still rocked the massive arena. Madonna and Bjork can take turns sucking my balls.
So you're saying China couldn't take out the seventh fleet? :)