Do you work for Google? I have to ask because you are all over the ideological map in your comment.
On one hand, you chastise people for being a consumer, and give scatological examples like gas guzzling cars, and commercial airline flights. Which one is it? Do we need to each drive our own gas guzzling car when we travel long distances, or should we share a commercial plane?
On the other hand, you give props to Mark Cuban and company for flying his private jet, since he purchased carbon offsets. It would have been greener to fly a commercial airline and as an added bonus some airlines are giving the option for individual travelers to purchase carbon offsets with their ticket.
You do bring up the subject of coal plants. I know you were trying to give me a snow job about worse pollutants, but you inadvertently bring up a fine example of what carbon offsets are all about. The idea is that in order to continue to generate electricity with coal and meet tougher air quality standards, power companies will have to purchase "carbon offsets" to make up for the amount of pollutants they emit that is over the regulatory limit. They will have a market incentive to invest in cleaner technology that currently aren't as cheap to operate as coal but will save them money by not having to spend as much money on the carbon offsets. This is the whole idea behind "carbon offsets". The concept wasn't created so rich playboys can fly their jets around the world and then appear to be "green".
Now I'm against the idea of creating a fictional currency called "carbon offsets" because that just creates another market for investors to exploit. Instead I think we should tax over the limit emissions and use that money to offset the deficit. But politics aside, they accomplish the same thing.
You also go off topic by talking about politics and politicians flying in private planes. Other than trying to steer the conversation away from Mark Cuban and company what point do they serve? How does it relate to Mark Cuban? Other than some US congress people fly commercial airlines, and Mark Cuban doesn't. Even speaker of the house John Boehner has pledged to use commercial airlines instead of military aircraft to travel from his district to Washington DC.
Anyway... My point was and remains that you should practice what you preach, even if you are in the "Shark Tank".
I'm sorry but are you saying that their advocacy for reducing the carbon footprint has an exception for cases where it's inconvenient or contact with common people may be involved?
I think that if you want to accuse Google of something evil, it has to be on the privacy front, not the pollution part. So, I think it's reasonable to be apologetic.
If you are going to preach about the dangers of greenhouse gases, then actually practice what you preach. It's not like they couldn't have flown first class on a commercial airline (*gasp*). The idea of carbon offsets was to offset pollution caused by industry and encourage them to lower their emissions in order to save costs. In this case it was used to offset two billionaire's extravagant lifestyle.
While we are own the subject:
Google (as a company) is doing quite a lot for the development and implementation of sustainable energy, and the guys (as private persons) even seem to plant some trees (or something) to compensate for the fuel they burn.
The idea of buying a tree to compensate for jet fuel is marketing not being "green". That's like my local government justifying the filling in of 1000 acres of old wetlands for a ballpark, by building more ditches elsewhere and saying that they created new wetlands to replace what was lost.
The funny thing is that people who see nothing wrong with this scheme are the first to condemn the clear cutting of old growth forrest even though new tree saplings are going to be planted in their place. When you try to reconcile the difference between "clear cutting old growth with reforesting" and "polluting with carbon offsets", I hope you'll begin to see my point.
I clicked the link you provided and it does not look as bad as you say:
Under the new strategy, MeeGo becomes an open-source, mobile operating system project. MeeGo will place increased emphasis on longer-term market exploration of next-generation devices, platforms and user experiences. Nokia still plans to ship a MeeGo-related product later this year.
I didn't see anything that explicitly said the Nokia was abandoning MeeGo. I did see that Symbian will be killed in favor of Windows Phone.
I too think Neuromancer aged well. In fact it inspired "The Matrix" and that movie did well.
Think about it. Case is comparable to Neo, Molly is comparable to Trinity, and Armitage is comparable to Morpheous. I'm not saying that the Matrix has a one-to-one relationship with Neuromancer, just that I can see that "The Matrix" was inspired by Nueromancer. Especially since Gibson coined the phrase "cyberspace", "jacked-in", and "the matrix" and used them within Neuromancer.
Your absolutely right, the act of opening up my phone was not the cause of my problems. It was the use of the Cynamod ROM that was the cause of my problems. To be fair, the problems were a nuisance at first since you get used to closing the force close dialog box when it pops up on occasion. The straw that broke the camel's back was when my daughter was in an automobile accident, and every time I dialed '911' the phone would reboot. I had to borrow someone else's phone to make the call.
I think they meant testing for any vulnerabilities (eg. backdoors, time bombs) left by Terry Childs. Being system admin, Terry Childs could have left exploits behind that would not be detectable in log files, etc. You'd pretty much would have to manually inspect each configuration, since you couldn't trust the audit software since the checksums being compared could be checksums of configuration files that were already compromised in the previous audit.
I agree that luck may not be involved when it comes to actually rooting your phone. However, there is some luck with getting reliable service from your phone after it is rooted. I had issues with my previous phone after I rooted it. The problems outweighed any possible advantages so when I got my replacement phone, I decided against rooting it.
My point was that you are comparing "apples to oranges". The parent was talking about using Mono on other operating systems, and you are talking about using.NET on XBox and Windows.
.NET is the best tool for the job when you are talking about making games that run on both XBox and Windows especially since they both use the SDK built and supported by Microsoft. I wonder how the performance of.NET compares to non-XNA games running on the XBox.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you Mr. Buzz Killington.
Of course you are not factoring the labor required to mine, mill, convert, enrich, and fabricate the uranium pellets used to fuel the nuclear reactor.
Do you work for Google? I have to ask because you are all over the ideological map in your comment.
On one hand, you chastise people for being a consumer, and give scatological examples like gas guzzling cars, and commercial airline flights. Which one is it? Do we need to each drive our own gas guzzling car when we travel long distances, or should we share a commercial plane?
On the other hand, you give props to Mark Cuban and company for flying his private jet, since he purchased carbon offsets. It would have been greener to fly a commercial airline and as an added bonus some airlines are giving the option for individual travelers to purchase carbon offsets with their ticket.
You do bring up the subject of coal plants. I know you were trying to give me a snow job about worse pollutants, but you inadvertently bring up a fine example of what carbon offsets are all about. The idea is that in order to continue to generate electricity with coal and meet tougher air quality standards, power companies will have to purchase "carbon offsets" to make up for the amount of pollutants they emit that is over the regulatory limit. They will have a market incentive to invest in cleaner technology that currently aren't as cheap to operate as coal but will save them money by not having to spend as much money on the carbon offsets. This is the whole idea behind "carbon offsets". The concept wasn't created so rich playboys can fly their jets around the world and then appear to be "green".
Now I'm against the idea of creating a fictional currency called "carbon offsets" because that just creates another market for investors to exploit. Instead I think we should tax over the limit emissions and use that money to offset the deficit. But politics aside, they accomplish the same thing.
You also go off topic by talking about politics and politicians flying in private planes. Other than trying to steer the conversation away from Mark Cuban and company what point do they serve? How does it relate to Mark Cuban? Other than some US congress people fly commercial airlines, and Mark Cuban doesn't. Even speaker of the house John Boehner has pledged to use commercial airlines instead of military aircraft to travel from his district to Washington DC.
Anyway... My point was and remains that you should practice what you preach, even if you are in the "Shark Tank".
I'm sorry but are you saying that their advocacy for reducing the carbon footprint has an exception for cases where it's inconvenient or contact with common people may be involved?
brain fart:
"However I hypocritical is a better word than immoral." should have read "However I think hypocritical is a better word than immoral."
It's a bad sign when you start dropping whole words...
I think you completely missed his point.
The poster didn't say that it was immoral to burn fuel, he inferred it from Mark Cuban who justified his fuel use by purchasing "carbon offsets".
The poster equated Mark Cuban's action as:
In this case, I agree with lorenlal. However I hypocritical is a better word than immoral.
If you are going to preach about the dangers of greenhouse gases, then actually practice what you preach. It's not like they couldn't have flown first class on a commercial airline (*gasp*). The idea of carbon offsets was to offset pollution caused by industry and encourage them to lower their emissions in order to save costs. In this case it was used to offset two billionaire's extravagant lifestyle.
While we are own the subject:
The idea of buying a tree to compensate for jet fuel is marketing not being "green". That's like my local government justifying the filling in of 1000 acres of old wetlands for a ballpark, by building more ditches elsewhere and saying that they created new wetlands to replace what was lost.
The funny thing is that people who see nothing wrong with this scheme are the first to condemn the clear cutting of old growth forrest even though new tree saplings are going to be planted in their place. When you try to reconcile the difference between "clear cutting old growth with reforesting" and "polluting with carbon offsets", I hope you'll begin to see my point.
/sbin/service iptables save
I clicked the link you provided and it does not look as bad as you say:
I didn't see anything that explicitly said the Nokia was abandoning MeeGo. I did see that Symbian will be killed in favor of Windows Phone.
I too think Neuromancer aged well. In fact it inspired "The Matrix" and that movie did well.
Think about it. Case is comparable to Neo, Molly is comparable to Trinity, and Armitage is comparable to Morpheous. I'm not saying that the Matrix has a one-to-one relationship with Neuromancer, just that I can see that "The Matrix" was inspired by Nueromancer. Especially since Gibson coined the phrase "cyberspace", "jacked-in", and "the matrix" and used them within Neuromancer.
I read it again a month ago, and it wasn't *that* bad. I will say that I kept hearing synthesized music from a Casio in my head while I read it.
"Though we adore men individually, we agree that as a group they’re rather stupid.”
Mrs. Banks in Mary Poppins
As mentioned above:
The New Oxford American Dictionary defined "electrocute" as "to injure or kill by electricity."
Actually "Electrocute" means to injure or kill by electricity. -- New Oxford American Dictionary
Didn't everybody know this 10 years ago?
Now your just being pedantic. ;P
Your absolutely right, the act of opening up my phone was not the cause of my problems. It was the use of the Cynamod ROM that was the cause of my problems. To be fair, the problems were a nuisance at first since you get used to closing the force close dialog box when it pops up on occasion. The straw that broke the camel's back was when my daughter was in an automobile accident, and every time I dialed '911' the phone would reboot. I had to borrow someone else's phone to make the call.
It's not the city's fault that the justice systems moves slowly. Everybody has to wait for their day in court.
You could have easily said "Why didn't the city just force him to pay $1.5 million dollars after his arrest?" Who needs courts?
I think they meant testing for any vulnerabilities (eg. backdoors, time bombs) left by Terry Childs. Being system admin, Terry Childs could have left exploits behind that would not be detectable in log files, etc. You'd pretty much would have to manually inspect each configuration, since you couldn't trust the audit software since the checksums being compared could be checksums of configuration files that were already compromised in the previous audit.
Sure if you don't count force close and spontaneous reboot.
What about Blackberry's Android? ;P
So is this advice for the user or the creator of the API that sends these nuggets of information from the device?
I agree that luck may not be involved when it comes to actually rooting your phone. However, there is some luck with getting reliable service from your phone after it is rooted. I had issues with my previous phone after I rooted it. The problems outweighed any possible advantages so when I got my replacement phone, I decided against rooting it.
I am glad that your luck is better than mine.
Ditto. However the replacement myTouch 4G hasn't given me any problems yet.
Which one is which?
My point was that you are comparing "apples to oranges". The parent was talking about using Mono on other operating systems, and you are talking about using .NET on XBox and Windows.
.NET is the best tool for the job when you are talking about making games that run on both XBox and Windows especially since they both use the SDK built and supported by Microsoft. I wonder how the performance of .NET compares to non-XNA games running on the XBox.