You're joking, right? Poor people are poor decision makers? Wow.
Sure, they might not have a great education (owing to you having to buy one in the US), but you can't say that they don't realise about keeping food. If you've ever been hungry, you realise quicker than any Ph.D ingenious ways to keep food, and where the cheapest stuff is.
You've come to the right conclusion, but you're slightly mislead about poor people:)
Maybe because you've missed the whole point of the movies. I mean, yes, sex is mentioned in the films, but it's not a pivotal part. Rushmore is a film about desire and yearning for things we can't have. If you go see it expecting tits and trampolines, you're gonna be out of luck.
What do you mean Chinese films? There are some excellent Chinese films out there. Again, just because you can't understand them, doesn't mean they're bad films.
So the US military is perfectly excused from being responsible for killing women, kids and innocent people in Iraq, as Saddam used to kill more?
I thought the war was supposed to be fought from a moral high-ground - how can that be when your excuse is "We're bad, just not as bad as the last guy".
One more thing - Even saddam managed to keep the power going. The US can't even do that.
The US doesn't try to avoid civilian deaths. It tries (and usually succeeds) in covering them up. If they did care about civilian deaths, the US attack helicopters wouldn't strafe building complexes where rebels were staying. They'd send guys in to get them. The US helicopters shot up tens of apartments, killing occupants. The thing is, America is responsible for dead American troops, not dead locals. If you really think the US cares a jot about any Iraqi civilian, you really should go read some impartial media. I'm not being rude, I can honestly see you haven't seen the whole picture.
You don't see the US special forces celebrating the deaths of civilians? No - those tapes are never let out. We have seen plenty of footage of regular US troops celebrating the deaths of Iraqi civilians, though. And plenty of footage of war crimes in progress (against Iraqi civilians). The US is the dirtiest fighter out there, and the biggest terrorist entity the world has ever seen. Luckily for you guys, it's your "freedom fighter".
Have you lost your mind? Islamofascism and freedom? Who's freedom? Certainly not that of Muslims. Saudi Arabia (and, in fact, lots of moderate Arab nations) have US military bases in them. The US has killed tens of thousands of Muslims over the years, and doesn't seem to want to stop. What are the Islamists fighting for? Exactly - freedom, the same thing you say we are fighting for. Please get your argument straight. As with most right-wing nonsense, just reading it logically and objectively for 5 seconds quickly shows it was pulled out of some whacko's ass between racial epithets.
Please get back to us with some sort of logical argument for your incredibly fascist view of world politics... it's interesting.
You down-play the military aid the US gives Israel. $1bn annually. That's right. Israel has over 100 nuclear weapons. You can't even start to compare Palestinian might with Israeli.
Israel has made some horrible decisions, and most Americans (thanks to the ADF) seem to think the sun shines out of its ass, and anything bad said about Israel is anti-semitic. Genius.
It's more rational than you think. Islam and Judaism (and Christianity) are trying to figure out how to share the holy lands they collectively acknowledge, and the re-placement of the Jewish people and state. Now, in the midst of this discussion, one side which happens to be the most powerful teams up with the second-most-powerful side, and decides to effectively pool their resources. The third side is left trying to defend their faith against what is now one great-big-infidel. You can imagine how pissed off some people would be.
I'm not for violence at all, and terrorism is even worse. You can, however, see that the argument that terrorists "hate democracy, hate our freedom and hate our values" is just plain bullshit. They want exactly what we want, they just don't want their religion and their countries desecrated by other countries. Just like us.
Yes, basically Bush is saying that, but as a President, he should be saying it more accurately. He did specifically state that the administration is actively trying to figure out how to harm the people, not protect them. Great.
I'm not quite sure what good emergency broadcasts would have done on 9/11... No-one knew what was going on before the first plane hit, then everyone in the towers figured something bad was happening and tried to get out. Same goes for the Pentagon (conspiracy theories aside). No magic-message-on-the-TV would have saved any lives at all, just provided a good way to scare the country senseless.
/. can't even get its moaning excuses straight any more. If you read the article, you can see it's not racially motivated. I mean, just read the thing, and you'll see how stupid you sound right now. sheesh.
They blatantly don't, as the BBC is constantly in trouble with the government for doing what the hell it wants:) Remember pretty much everything before the Iraq war? If it was smoking the government pole, none of those scandals would have even aired.
I understand fully the idea of embedded computers. I took a degree in computing for real-time systems, so I'm aware of what's involved.
Of course the drivers are static. Embedded devices don't run windows update. They do, however, require drivers to talk to external hardware. Windows, being windows, has lots of drivers for it. Linux, being linux, has not as many. That's a fact. You can't even begin to say otherwise, as anyone will tell you. Of course you will, though.
XP Embedded is 100% customisable. You can choose to keep every single part of the OS, or as little as you want. It runs on low-power, low-cost chips.
With your final argument, isn't linux late to the desktop party? Maybe everyone should just give up on that, too.
There aren't any 2xPCI-Express mobos yet. It's not hype. It's already been demonstrated, and they're going to get it up to 190%+ performance for the two cards, which is pretty incredible considering a 100% performance of the basic card can play Doom 3 at 1600x1200 at over 40fps.
Because we want to do more with our computers than play rudimentary games and run very basic apps, or even have a nice looking GUI. GUI speed != GUI looks.
With your "2 or 3GHz" comment, you've obviously never seen a hardware-accelerated GUI working on some normal hardware. Linux user, perchance?
Because, maybe, only 1% of their listeners even know what Ogg Vorbis is, let alone actually have software to play it, let alone wanting to use that software. You're suggesting putting a lot of effort and processing into creating a stream 5 people are going to listen to. I'd prefer them to not waste MY money on some obscure codec. They support other codecs readily available on every platform, so what's your point? Being elitist?:)
Do you have any idea about the quality of the codec the BBC are working on? It'll make Theora look like animated GIFs. The BBC are slightly more professional than a bunch of disparate guys all over the world. They are professional coders, coding this professionally, in a large company with a buttload of cash. It's not full of hobbyists;)
The BBC are the feds, dude. Part of the UK government. Seriously. They can do whatever they want when it comes to TV, as in most cases, they're the world leaders in it. As for the rights-managed peer-to-peer, that's a great idea, as if they're going to release their back catalogue, only those who've paid their license fees should see them. Everyone else can just wait for poorer versions on bittorrent or edonkey.
Right. Right. The VC ran circles around the US troops. The Americans had to practically inihilate entire swathes of a country to make a dent.
I seem to remember it was the northern tanks that rolled into the US compound, not the other way round, so you guys couldn't have been that good. Of course, to Americans, cover it in enough flags and bullshit, and they'll believe it was santa claus.
Throwing napalm at a bunch of kids saved US lives?? Wow. You really are nuts. I mean, come on. Use some logic there. The US acted disgracefully, using its usual tactic of no subtlety, no hearts and minds, just "blow the fuck out of everything that moves". You want cowards? Look at those soldiers. Using helicopters and jet planes against a bunch of guys hiding in tunnels using improvised weapons.
Pathetic. Don't fool yourself the US is anything but a big, selfish bully. You'll be disappointed.
So libertarians are against welfare. They suck, then. Selfish, selfish people. I mean, wouldn't they want help if they didn't have any money? Oh, wait. Most libertarians are well-off. There's a shock. It's hardly a political persuasion the whole country can get behind, seeing as it's trying to condemn those who need it most. I really can't understand how anyone can be against welfare. If your parents were starving hungry, you'd not give them any money? You'd not want anyone else helping them out? Sheesh. Selfish, selfish people.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, they might not have a great education (owing to you having to buy one in the US), but you can't say that they don't realise about keeping food. If you've ever been hungry, you realise quicker than any Ph.D ingenious ways to keep food, and where the cheapest stuff is.
You've come to the right conclusion, but you're slightly mislead about poor people :)
One game. The games for cooking and preperation are seperate, most likely. It's an obvious area for education - I'm sure they didn't miss it :)
What do you mean Chinese films? There are some excellent Chinese films out there. Again, just because you can't understand them, doesn't mean they're bad films.
I thought the war was supposed to be fought from a moral high-ground - how can that be when your excuse is "We're bad, just not as bad as the last guy".
One more thing - Even saddam managed to keep the power going. The US can't even do that.
by the Sardines in Sardinia
I joke, of course. ;)
You don't see the US special forces celebrating the deaths of civilians? No - those tapes are never let out. We have seen plenty of footage of regular US troops celebrating the deaths of Iraqi civilians, though. And plenty of footage of war crimes in progress (against Iraqi civilians). The US is the dirtiest fighter out there, and the biggest terrorist entity the world has ever seen. Luckily for you guys, it's your "freedom fighter".
Please get back to us with some sort of logical argument for your incredibly fascist view of world politics... it's interesting.
Israel has made some horrible decisions, and most Americans (thanks to the ADF) seem to think the sun shines out of its ass, and anything bad said about Israel is anti-semitic. Genius.
I'm not for violence at all, and terrorism is even worse. You can, however, see that the argument that terrorists "hate democracy, hate our freedom and hate our values" is just plain bullshit. They want exactly what we want, they just don't want their religion and their countries desecrated by other countries. Just like us.
Yes, basically Bush is saying that, but as a President, he should be saying it more accurately. He did specifically state that the administration is actively trying to figure out how to harm the people, not protect them. Great.
I'm not quite sure what good emergency broadcasts would have done on 9/11... No-one knew what was going on before the first plane hit, then everyone in the towers figured something bad was happening and tried to get out. Same goes for the Pentagon (conspiracy theories aside). No magic-message-on-the-TV would have saved any lives at all, just provided a good way to scare the country senseless.
basically :)
It does if you're Dubya.
/. can't even get its moaning excuses straight any more. If you read the article, you can see it's not racially motivated. I mean, just read the thing, and you'll see how stupid you sound right now. sheesh.
They blatantly don't, as the BBC is constantly in trouble with the government for doing what the hell it wants :) Remember pretty much everything before the Iraq war? If it was smoking the government pole, none of those scandals would have even aired.
Of course the drivers are static. Embedded devices don't run windows update. They do, however, require drivers to talk to external hardware. Windows, being windows, has lots of drivers for it. Linux, being linux, has not as many. That's a fact. You can't even begin to say otherwise, as anyone will tell you. Of course you will, though.
XP Embedded is 100% customisable. You can choose to keep every single part of the OS, or as little as you want. It runs on low-power, low-cost chips.
With your final argument, isn't linux late to the desktop party? Maybe everyone should just give up on that, too.
There aren't any 2xPCI-Express mobos yet. It's not hype. It's already been demonstrated, and they're going to get it up to 190%+ performance for the two cards, which is pretty incredible considering a 100% performance of the basic card can play Doom 3 at 1600x1200 at over 40fps.
Funnily enough, the idea behind SLI hasn't changed. 2xboards, 2xprice, 2xperformance. Yes, it's that simple ;)
With your "2 or 3GHz" comment, you've obviously never seen a hardware-accelerated GUI working on some normal hardware. Linux user, perchance?
Because, maybe, only 1% of their listeners even know what Ogg Vorbis is, let alone actually have software to play it, let alone wanting to use that software. You're suggesting putting a lot of effort and processing into creating a stream 5 people are going to listen to. I'd prefer them to not waste MY money on some obscure codec. They support other codecs readily available on every platform, so what's your point? Being elitist? :)
And it's not as good as Dirac will be. What's your point? :)
Do you have any idea about the quality of the codec the BBC are working on? It'll make Theora look like animated GIFs. The BBC are slightly more professional than a bunch of disparate guys all over the world. They are professional coders, coding this professionally, in a large company with a buttload of cash. It's not full of hobbyists ;)
The BBC are the feds, dude. Part of the UK government. Seriously. They can do whatever they want when it comes to TV, as in most cases, they're the world leaders in it. As for the rights-managed peer-to-peer, that's a great idea, as if they're going to release their back catalogue, only those who've paid their license fees should see them. Everyone else can just wait for poorer versions on bittorrent or edonkey.
I seem to remember it was the northern tanks that rolled into the US compound, not the other way round, so you guys couldn't have been that good. Of course, to Americans, cover it in enough flags and bullshit, and they'll believe it was santa claus.
Throwing napalm at a bunch of kids saved US lives?? Wow. You really are nuts. I mean, come on. Use some logic there. The US acted disgracefully, using its usual tactic of no subtlety, no hearts and minds, just "blow the fuck out of everything that moves". You want cowards? Look at those soldiers. Using helicopters and jet planes against a bunch of guys hiding in tunnels using improvised weapons. Pathetic. Don't fool yourself the US is anything but a big, selfish bully. You'll be disappointed.
So libertarians are against welfare. They suck, then. Selfish, selfish people. I mean, wouldn't they want help if they didn't have any money? Oh, wait. Most libertarians are well-off. There's a shock. It's hardly a political persuasion the whole country can get behind, seeing as it's trying to condemn those who need it most. I really can't understand how anyone can be against welfare. If your parents were starving hungry, you'd not give them any money? You'd not want anyone else helping them out? Sheesh. Selfish, selfish people.