One of the things about slackware that IMHO simply rocks are the BSD-style init scripts
This is slightly OT, in that it's not a direct question for Patrick (though it could be, but it's not as important a question as some of the others...). Why do you like the BSD style of init scripts so much more than SysV style?
My first distro was slackware, 'way back in '95. I use RedHat now for most stuff, though. I recently tried Slack 7.0 just to see what it was like these days, and found that I've gotten too used to RH's SysV init system. I like being able to/etc/rc.d/init.d/somedaemon start|stop|restart... I know I could just kill or kill -HUP, but then I have to go looking for the pid, and editing monolithic rc. init files just seems so messy instead of having the various daemon startup/shutdown foibles in their own files.
*shrug* To each their own, I guess. I am curious as to why people like the BSD style of doing things. Perhaps I'm missing something.
You're silly. They want to avoid contaminating Europa so that if they DO find lifeforms, they can say that they didn't get there when Galileo crashed into Europa.
Is this a plausible scenario (polluting Europa I mean) considering all the radiation the probe has endured? Shouldn't all organic organisms be completely destroyed?
One would think so, yes. However, I can see why they would rather be SURE that any life forms they may find in the future aren't due to pollution from Galileo if it were to crash.
Are viruses immune to radiation? Considering we've never been able to cure a single one (go ahead, do the research, we can't kill the buggers) I'm guessing that they are...
Basically, viruses are strands of RNA. These strands have evolved to be good at fooling their way into healthy cells, re-writing those cells' DNA with their own instructions, and churning out copies of themselves. You can't kill a virus because techinically it's not alive (though there are some who would argue that they meet a loose definition of life). You can, however, destroy it or render it incapable of doing its dirty work.
The answer to your second question is that no, they are not immune to radiation. Ionizing radiation will have basically the same effect on a virus as it would on DNA. It will probably be scrambled and not work correctly.
I know it's bad form to post OT, but I figure this might be seen by someone willing to help me.
I'm currently an admin with a few years' experience on various flavors of unix-alikes on peecee hardware. I'd love to get some experience on big iron, but I'm not sure how to go about that.
If anyone is willing to spend a few hours a week mentoring, I'd love the opportunity to learn from someone in the Boston Metro area with experience. You have scut work to be done? I'll do it, if I get to learn. I'm busy, but I can spare a few hours a week. If you're interested and like to teach, please drop me a line (jerkbob_at_pobox_dot_com).
I'm finding the comments to this article fascintating in a way. There are a lot of people who seem to be unreasonably harsh on the institution of American football. They remind me of fundamentalist (xian, catholic, blah) who get their rocks off on dissing that which they do not approve of. It's as if these people get some sort of self-affirmation from decrying the Superbowl and the commercialism which surrounds it.
"Oh no, I knitted a sweater and had a deep conversation regarding my feelings toward sea turtle mating patterns with my mother during the Superbowl. Too bad most of America wasted its time watching such drivel."
Wow, it's great that you did something other than get together with your friends (you do have friends, yes?) and watch some TV for a few hours. Not to mention abstaining from partaking in the enjoyment of watching some brilliant strategy because it's so barbaric. "EEeew! Sweat! Yuck! Gross!"
Well, I hope that superiority you feel carries you through your day. You might consider relaxing a bit and realizing that there other people in this world who enjoy things that you don't. It's a rather mature and advanced concept, but it's worth looking into.
This isn't an emacs flame. I'm just wondering... How the hell would you use emacs with a handheld? I don't think chording on one of those chicklet keyboards would be fun, and that's assuming that the thing even has a keyboard. Round hole square peg?
Not to mention the fact that helium-squeaking is NOT a good thing for your vocal chords. They squeak because they're FROZEN! Helium can damage you if you do it too much.
Wrong wrong wrong... Your vocal chords might be frozen if you're sucking in liquid helium, but then you've got things other than your vocal chords to worry about.
You sound funny after inhaling helium because helium is lighter than the air mixture your vocal chords normally generate sound in. Because the gas mixture is lighter, the speed of sound is faster. Basically, (lighter gas + vibrations from vocal chords) = higher-pitched sound.
The only danger from inhaling helium is possible asphyxiation, if you forget to breathe some oxygen occasionally.
Don't believe me? Check out what howstuffworks.com has to say about it.
I've heard rumor that there might be some dual Athlon boards Q1 2000, but here we is and I still haven't heard anything new. *sigh*
Perhaps my understanding of the problem isn't complete. The Athlon will support MP, and the EV6 will support MP... There's just no chipset for it yet, correct? I wonder why AMD isn't cracking on that. Seems like the Athlon would be a great Intel-killer if they got some MP motherboards out there.
Can you dispence with either of those other two if you get that one?
If I had to pick only one Perl book to refer to for the rest of my life, it would be the Camel Book (Programming Perl).
The Llama Book (Learning Perl) was marginally helpful for me because it has lots of dumb little exercises to introduce the reader to Perl's way of doing things. I had CS programming classes to draw on for concepts, though.
The Ram Book (Perl Cookbook) has lots of solutions to typical programming problems with code snippets.
The Camel Book is the Perl bible. My life would be a lot harder if I didn't have this thing to refer to when I forget how pack() works, for example.
You can get most of this info through perldoc -f function_name, but I like dead tree versions of documentation. Plus, there's all kinds of info on stuff like object design, IPC, socket programming, etc.
In short, buy Programming Perl first, then see if you really need Learning Perl. I suspect that if you're really strapped for cash you can do well enough to find online tutorials and code examples to figure things out for yourself.
If all you had to do was string manipulation (like outputting HTML), then you're golden with perl. But would you choose to use Perl as a language for developing business logic?
Or to write a database? (insert your own examples here)
I don't think most people will argue with your contention that Perl isn't the best language for everything (I certainly won't). However, for people like me who do systems administration or for companies like mine which use Perl for allowing web pages to talk to databases, it's great. As our company grows and we add more logic to the system, we'll probably think about moving that logic from Perl to something compiled, but for now most of what we do is presentation, and this is where Perl shines.
Of course I wouldn't want to write a database (or compiler, or productivity app) in Perl. I also wouldn't want to write it in Java, or SmallTalk, or (insert lots of other languages here)... Perl is a good thing to have in a well-rounded toolbox, though. Sorta like an adjustable crescent wrench/hammer/screwdriver all rolled into one. Sure, that socket driver might work better for a certain situation, so it might save time to use it instead, but a lot of times the multi-tool will work just as well or better (faster since you've already got it).
Carrying the metaphor to an extreme, one could make the case that a good programmer should have a large toolbox of specialized tools. However, lugging around all of those tools is not practical, and it's much easier to have a multi-tool that fits in one's pocket, and the specialized tools are only pulled off of the shelf when the multi-tool doesn't work well enough. The key is recognizing when one is beginning to waste time by futzing with the multi-tool when the specialized tool would work better.
d'oh... wasn't done editing. sometimes i wish there was a "Are you sure you're ready to submit?" option for those times when i hit submit instead of preview. *sigh* Oh, well.
Perhaps, but the problem is that even well written Perl code requires a good knowledge of the syntax (which is not easy to remember) and a language-reference close to-hand, to be understood.
Is this not true of most (if not all) languages? One would assume that if one is trying to maintain already-written code that one has some knowledge of the syntax and language constructs. Frankly, I think well-written Perl is easier to read (more natural) than a lot of other languages. Compare the two following code fragments:
C
for (int i; i < MAXLENGTH; i++) { printf("array[%d]: %s\n", i, array[i]); }
Alternatively (and a bit more obfuscated, yet easy to read by an experienced Perl programmer:
print join "\n", @array_of_things, "\n";
There, was that so bad? I can see how it might be confusing that those two snippets do the same thing, but that's flexibility, and there's power in flexibility. Either fragment is much easier to natural language flow than the C fragment.
... Perl will generally try to "guess" what you want to do even if you don't quite express it correctly (Tom Christiansen's words, not mine). This may initially sound like a good idea, but it makes finding bugs a nightmare. Perl's design is not just a rebellion against established thinking, it is a rebellion against good software design and it shows.
Re: finding bugs in Perl... If you're not using -w and strict, you really should be. Even for quickie one-off scripts, take the time to program the script properly, using locally-scoped variables. It builds character, or something... I started off programming in C, but do systems administration now and use Perl all the time. Most of what I program still looks mostly like C (which earns me ridicule from the Perl-hacking webmonkeys here), but it works and is easily read and maintained by people other than myself. As far as weak typing in Perl goes, I think it's just a matter of shifting one's thinking. It's usually pretty obvious what the 'thingies' (scalars) are being used for if the programmer has taken the time to document and write unobfuscated code.
Which leads to the comment about software design... Again and again I see people complaining about how awful Perl is to read and maintain. When I see that, I have to think that either they're digging their heels in and don't want to learn something new (I was there), or else they've only really seen nightmare scripts written by people with less than a clue about good software design. As many other people have pointed out, it's possible to program badly in any language. Some make it harder than others (java, smalltalk for examples), but there are always tradeoffs to be made.
In short, don't write off (npi) Perl without at least trying it out first. If you do systems administration or large amounts of text monkeying, you will not be sorry you tried it.
I'm asuming real guns are heavier and have more kickback and don't have unlimited ammo.
Depends on the gun. A lot of pistols are quite light. Glocks feel like toys to me, because they're so light. Your last two points are mostly valid, however. Still depends on the gun. A 9mm recoils some, but only enough to startle the shooter on the first shot. You don't have to have much experience to hit targets with a semiautomatic pistol at short range.
And I still don't think it's enough to warrant a slashdot story, especially when it's already plastered over all the major media.
Do you run slashdot? Hrm? Nope. Oops. Too bad, thanks for playing, try again sometime. Or not.
I'm tired of wankers like you who can't figure out how to read past news items which don't interest them, and feel the need to bitch about something THEY DON'T EVEN PAY FOR...
Incidentally, I didn't hear about it until I read slashdot, because I don't read the major media, and this matters to me, a nerd. It obviously mattered to Roblimo, also a nerd, and one of the slashdot staff.
It irritates me (didja pick up on that?) that you would impose your worldview on me if you could. Why do you feel that need? Why can't you just move on, and let people do or read things that interest them?
Requires access to a unix-ish shell account. May not be suitable for children under 5. Contains no MSG. Batteries not included. Not to be taken internally. Keep away from open flame. Do not taunt happy fun ball.
One of the major contributors to BIND development, Paul Vixie, runs a little service called The MAPS RBL. The RBL, if you don't know, is a service which maintains lists of servers from whence spam has originated and the admins didn't respond to requests to lock down their servers.
According to this story, MAPS threatened to put NSI on the RBL list because of the unsolicited email NSI was/(is?) sending to its domain registrants.
I think you've got your answer as to why NSI doesn't help with BIND. Buncha greedy bastards.
as you can imagine, it was too frustrating to communicate code to a typer like this.
Frustrating for him, maybe, but I'm sure it was even more frustrating for the typist. I've met RMS. He's not exactly a patient man. Brilliant visionary, to be sure, but not particularly forgiving if you're not blasting along at the same speed and direction of thought as he is.
In all fairness, Windows has gotten quite good at handling random reboots.
This is not a strong area of ext2, to say the least.
*eye*
You're making a joke, right?
*pace*
*eye*
You must be making a joke.
That's like saying that cars these days have gotten quite good at protecting their drivers from fatal crashes. The statement may be true, but that sort of thing should still NEVER happen. It is to be avoided at almost all costs.
I'm no linux apologist; I agree that ext2 needs to be replaced with a jfs. However, linux, as with most unix-like OSs, doesn't randomly reboot unless the hardware's flaky or the system is not using a stable series of software.
I'm not saying that windows isn't stable. I'm not saying that it is. I'm just saying that your argument is one of the dumbest I've encountered in a while.
I should have been more accurate in my description. It was late, though. I meant that 80 mph is at the top of the gauge, with 160 mph being the maximum speed (that the gauge can register; the car's maximum is 144 mph).
That's another thing cool about the metric system: 1000 cm (1000 cc) of water equals 1 L, which weighs 1 kg.
That is cool, yes. I'm all for chucking our (US) odd system of measurements. I've been using the 24 hr clock for several years now, at least for personal notation. People give me funny looks when I tell them it's 16:43, so I don't bother.
Heh. Not that anyone's reading this thread anymore...
I bet the ratio of people who had sex before their 20's will be insanely low in that theatre...
Hey... I got laid more in my teens than I do now. *sigh*
Actually, my first two girlfriends were both D&D players. The first introduced me to the game, then left for college. I met the second some time thereafter when she joined our group.
Since most of your driving is done between 0 and 60, and rarely if ever above 80, all that part of the scale above 80 is just wasted
Most of your driving is done between 0 and 60, maybe. I live in and work around Boston, though. I flipping hated my old car with its speedometer that only went up to 85. My new car (a jetta VR6) has 80 up at the top of the meter, which is a nice place for it, I think.
I don't agree with your assertion that the english system is easier for humans to deal with, either. It's just a matter of what we're all used to. Personally, I wish we'd (americans) just bite the proverbial bullet and switch for most things. It's already been happening for years, as others have pointed out. For example, I go down to the store and buy a 2 liter bottle of dr. pepper(tm). I then mix that dr. pepper with my 750mL bottle of jack daniels'. I then wake up in the hospital to find an IV line in my arm hooked up to a 1000cc bag of saline solution...
Main Entry: atheist Pronunciation: 'A-thE-ist Function: noun Date: 1571 : one who denies the existence of God
Main Entry: agnostic Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g- Function: noun Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW Date: 1869 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
I suppose that one could argue with Merriam-Websters, but why? Maybe you should go argue with the ancient greeks about what they meant, too.
Slashdot Mirror
This is slightly OT, in that it's not a direct question for Patrick (though it could be, but it's not as important a question as some of the others...). Why do you like the BSD style of init scripts so much more than SysV style?
My first distro was slackware, 'way back in '95. I use RedHat now for most stuff, though. I recently tried Slack 7.0 just to see what it was like these days, and found that I've gotten too used to RH's SysV init system. I like being able to /etc/rc.d/init.d/somedaemon start|stop|restart... I know I could just kill or kill -HUP, but then I have to go looking for the pid, and editing monolithic rc. init files just seems so messy instead of having the various daemon startup/shutdown foibles in their own files.
*shrug* To each their own, I guess. I am curious as to why people like the BSD style of doing things. Perhaps I'm missing something.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Posting before thinking again, are we?
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
One would think so, yes. However, I can see why they would rather be SURE that any life forms they may find in the future aren't due to pollution from Galileo if it were to crash.
Are viruses immune to radiation? Considering we've never been able to cure a single one (go ahead, do the research, we can't kill the buggers) I'm guessing that they are...
Basically, viruses are strands of RNA. These strands have evolved to be good at fooling their way into healthy cells, re-writing those cells' DNA with their own instructions, and churning out copies of themselves. You can't kill a virus because techinically it's not alive (though there are some who would argue that they meet a loose definition of life). You can, however, destroy it or render it incapable of doing its dirty work.
The answer to your second question is that no, they are not immune to radiation. Ionizing radiation will have basically the same effect on a virus as it would on DNA. It will probably be scrambled and not work correctly.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
I'm currently an admin with a few years' experience on various flavors of unix-alikes on peecee hardware. I'd love to get some experience on big iron, but I'm not sure how to go about that.
If anyone is willing to spend a few hours a week mentoring, I'd love the opportunity to learn from someone in the Boston Metro area with experience. You have scut work to be done? I'll do it, if I get to learn. I'm busy, but I can spare a few hours a week. If you're interested and like to teach, please drop me a line (jerkbob_at_pobox_dot_com).
Apologies again about the OT post...
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
"Oh no, I knitted a sweater and had a deep conversation regarding my feelings toward sea turtle mating patterns with my mother during the Superbowl. Too bad most of America wasted its time watching such drivel."
Wow, it's great that you did something other than get together with your friends (you do have friends, yes?) and watch some TV for a few hours. Not to mention abstaining from partaking in the enjoyment of watching some brilliant strategy because it's so barbaric. "EEeew! Sweat! Yuck! Gross!"
Well, I hope that superiority you feel carries you through your day. You might consider relaxing a bit and realizing that there other people in this world who enjoy things that you don't. It's a rather mature and advanced concept, but it's worth looking into.
Blah.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
This isn't an emacs flame. I'm just wondering... How the hell would you use emacs with a handheld? I don't think chording on one of those chicklet keyboards would be fun, and that's assuming that the thing even has a keyboard. Round hole square peg?
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Wrong wrong wrong... Your vocal chords might be frozen if you're sucking in liquid helium, but then you've got things other than your vocal chords to worry about.
You sound funny after inhaling helium because helium is lighter than the air mixture your vocal chords normally generate sound in. Because the gas mixture is lighter, the speed of sound is faster. Basically, (lighter gas + vibrations from vocal chords) = higher-pitched sound.
The only danger from inhaling helium is possible asphyxiation, if you forget to breathe some oxygen occasionally.
Don't believe me? Check out what howstuffworks.com has to say about it.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Perhaps my understanding of the problem isn't complete. The Athlon will support MP, and the EV6 will support MP... There's just no chipset for it yet, correct? I wonder why AMD isn't cracking on that. Seems like the Athlon would be a great Intel-killer if they got some MP motherboards out there.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
If I had to pick only one Perl book to refer to for the rest of my life, it would be the Camel Book (Programming Perl).
- The Llama Book (Learning Perl) was marginally helpful for me because it has lots of dumb little exercises to introduce the reader to Perl's way of doing things. I had CS programming classes to draw on for concepts, though.
- The Ram Book (Perl Cookbook) has lots of solutions to typical programming problems with code snippets.
- The Camel Book is the Perl bible. My life would be a lot harder if I didn't have this thing to refer to when I forget how pack() works, for example.
You can get most of this info through perldoc -f function_name , but I like dead tree versions of documentation. Plus, there's all kinds of info on stuff like object design, IPC, socket programming, etc.In short, buy Programming Perl first, then see if you really need Learning Perl. I suspect that if you're really strapped for cash you can do well enough to find online tutorials and code examples to figure things out for yourself.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Or to write a database? (insert your own examples here)
I don't think most people will argue with your contention that Perl isn't the best language for everything (I certainly won't). However, for people like me who do systems administration or for companies like mine which use Perl for allowing web pages to talk to databases, it's great. As our company grows and we add more logic to the system, we'll probably think about moving that logic from Perl to something compiled, but for now most of what we do is presentation, and this is where Perl shines.
Of course I wouldn't want to write a database (or compiler, or productivity app) in Perl. I also wouldn't want to write it in Java, or SmallTalk, or (insert lots of other languages here)... Perl is a good thing to have in a well-rounded toolbox, though. Sorta like an adjustable crescent wrench/hammer/screwdriver all rolled into one. Sure, that socket driver might work better for a certain situation, so it might save time to use it instead, but a lot of times the multi-tool will work just as well or better (faster since you've already got it).
Carrying the metaphor to an extreme, one could make the case that a good programmer should have a large toolbox of specialized tools. However, lugging around all of those tools is not practical, and it's much easier to have a multi-tool that fits in one's pocket, and the specialized tools are only pulled off of the shelf when the multi-tool doesn't work well enough. The key is recognizing when one is beginning to waste time by futzing with the multi-tool when the specialized tool would work better.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
d'oh... wasn't done editing. sometimes i wish there was a "Are you sure you're ready to submit?" option for those times when i hit submit instead of preview. *sigh* Oh, well.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Is this not true of most (if not all) languages? One would assume that if one is trying to maintain already-written code that one has some knowledge of the syntax and language constructs. Frankly, I think well-written Perl is easier to read (more natural) than a lot of other languages. Compare the two following code fragments:
C
Perl
foreach $thing (@array_of_things) {
print "$thing\n";
}
Alternatively (and a bit more obfuscated, yet easy to read by an experienced Perl programmer:
print join "\n", @array_of_things, "\n";
There, was that so bad? I can see how it might be confusing that those two snippets do the same thing, but that's flexibility, and there's power in flexibility. Either fragment is much easier to natural language flow than the C fragment.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Re: finding bugs in Perl... If you're not using -w and strict, you really should be. Even for quickie one-off scripts, take the time to program the script properly, using locally-scoped variables. It builds character, or something... I started off programming in C, but do systems administration now and use Perl all the time. Most of what I program still looks mostly like C (which earns me ridicule from the Perl-hacking webmonkeys here), but it works and is easily read and maintained by people other than myself. As far as weak typing in Perl goes, I think it's just a matter of shifting one's thinking. It's usually pretty obvious what the 'thingies' (scalars) are being used for if the programmer has taken the time to document and write unobfuscated code.
Which leads to the comment about software design... Again and again I see people complaining about how awful Perl is to read and maintain. When I see that, I have to think that either they're digging their heels in and don't want to learn something new (I was there), or else they've only really seen nightmare scripts written by people with less than a clue about good software design. As many other people have pointed out, it's possible to program badly in any language. Some make it harder than others (java, smalltalk for examples), but there are always tradeoffs to be made.
In short, don't write off (npi) Perl without at least trying it out first. If you do systems administration or large amounts of text monkeying, you will not be sorry you tried it.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Depends on the gun. A lot of pistols are quite light. Glocks feel like toys to me, because they're so light. Your last two points are mostly valid, however. Still depends on the gun. A 9mm recoils some, but only enough to startle the shooter on the first shot. You don't have to have much experience to hit targets with a semiautomatic pistol at short range.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Do you run slashdot? Hrm? Nope. Oops. Too bad, thanks for playing, try again sometime. Or not.
I'm tired of wankers like you who can't figure out how to read past news items which don't interest them, and feel the need to bitch about something THEY DON'T EVEN PAY FOR...
Incidentally, I didn't hear about it until I read slashdot, because I don't read the major media, and this matters to me, a nerd. It obviously mattered to Roblimo, also a nerd, and one of the slashdot staff.
It irritates me (didja pick up on that?) that you would impose your worldview on me if you could. Why do you feel that need? Why can't you just move on, and let people do or read things that interest them?
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Procmail to the rescue!
Kills spam dead!
Requires access to a unix-ish shell account. May not be suitable for children under 5. Contains no MSG. Batteries not included. Not to be taken internally. Keep away from open flame. Do not taunt happy fun ball.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
According to this story, MAPS threatened to put NSI on the RBL list because of the unsolicited email NSI was/(is?) sending to its domain registrants.
I think you've got your answer as to why NSI doesn't help with BIND. Buncha greedy bastards.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Frustrating for him, maybe, but I'm sure it was even more frustrating for the typist. I've met RMS. He's not exactly a patient man. Brilliant visionary, to be sure, but not particularly forgiving if you're not blasting along at the same speed and direction of thought as he is.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
This is not a strong area of ext2, to say the least.
*eye*
You're making a joke, right?
*pace*
*eye*
You must be making a joke.
That's like saying that cars these days have gotten quite good at protecting their drivers from fatal crashes. The statement may be true, but that sort of thing should still NEVER happen. It is to be avoided at almost all costs.
I'm no linux apologist; I agree that ext2 needs to be replaced with a jfs. However, linux, as with most unix-like OSs, doesn't randomly reboot unless the hardware's flaky or the system is not using a stable series of software.
I'm not saying that windows isn't stable. I'm not saying that it is. I'm just saying that your argument is one of the dumbest I've encountered in a while.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
I should have been more accurate in my description. It was late, though. I meant that 80 mph is at the top of the gauge, with 160 mph being the maximum speed (that the gauge can register; the car's maximum is 144 mph).
That's another thing cool about the metric system: 1000 cm (1000 cc) of water equals 1 L, which weighs 1 kg.
That is cool, yes. I'm all for chucking our (US) odd system of measurements. I've been using the 24 hr clock for several years now, at least for personal notation. People give me funny looks when I tell them it's 16:43, so I don't bother.
Heh. Not that anyone's reading this thread anymore...
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Hey... I got laid more in my teens than I do now. *sigh*
Actually, my first two girlfriends were both D&D players. The first introduced me to the game, then left for college. I met the second some time thereafter when she joined our group.
Ah, memories...
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Most of your driving is done between 0 and 60, maybe. I live in and work around Boston, though. I flipping hated my old car with its speedometer that only went up to 85. My new car (a jetta VR6) has 80 up at the top of the meter, which is a nice place for it, I think.
I don't agree with your assertion that the english system is easier for humans to deal with, either. It's just a matter of what we're all used to. Personally, I wish we'd (americans) just bite the proverbial bullet and switch for most things. It's already been happening for years, as others have pointed out. For example, I go down to the store and buy a 2 liter bottle of dr. pepper(tm). I then mix that dr. pepper with my 750mL bottle of jack daniels'. I then wake up in the hospital to find an IV line in my arm hooked up to a 1000cc bag of saline solution...
Hrm. Maybe the metric system is evil, after all.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
oops. forgot an &... you get the picture.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
<>==<nbsp;>
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Main Entry: atheist
Pronunciation: 'A-thE-ist
Function: noun
Date: 1571
: one who denies the existence of God
Main Entry: agnostic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
Date: 1869
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
I suppose that one could argue with Merriam-Websters, but why? Maybe you should go argue with the ancient greeks about what they meant, too.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast...