"In May, during BBC Radio 4's Today programme, the environmental activist and Guardian columnist George Monbiot challenged Myron Ebell, a climate sceptic at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, in Washington DC, to a £5,000 bet. Mr Ebell declined, saying he had four children to put through university and did not want to take risks."- In other words, Monbiot flat out chickened out.
Those are indeed other words. In fact they're words with a completely different meaning to the previous ones.
> Yeah, not many people download movies in OGG > format, and the ones that do probably spend a lot > of time trying to figure out why the sound works > perfectly but the picture is so garbled.
Actually ogg is a container format which can contain both sound and video. Vorbis is the audio format.
> What would you do if you got a job stomping baby > duck or penguins? By new shoes or just where > whatever.
My friend Patrick had a job killing baby ducks (actually he gassed them) which hatched at the wrong time for supermarkets. He worked through an agency which supplied steel-toecapped boots, presumably for insurance / legal reasons.
Think what you will about it, but recieving a free copy of something someone else has invested time and money to produce is not a "right."
The whole concept of rights a bit nebulous. Having a "right" to something could mean
a) Being permitted to do something
or b) Being entitled to something
You are confusing the two meanings. The general guiding principal is that you should be permitted to do anything that does't impact on anyone else's "rights". If two set of rights come into conflict things get more complicated and a balance has to be struck.
This story is about whether the balance of rights is struck in favour of the consumer or the copyright holder. Unless you produce more copyrighted material than you consume, this is a story about your rights being negatively impacted by the FBI upholding the copyright holders'.
Replacement of Win32 with.NET, even explorer.exe is running as managed code in the leaked betas. I can't even begin to list the advantages of this..NET is great, and with Mono making great strides in the language specification, any language will be able to compile intermediate.NET code, and code from different languages will operate together without a care.
Avalon--presentation system that is completely hardware-accelerated and vector-based. One video showed two Notepads rotating around while still completely usable at the same time a video played in Media Player. Old apps will be compatible.
XAML and other technologies--I've said it before, but it was just such a cool example. During an MSDN video (freely available at the site), the dev used Win32 Emacs to write a 10-15 XAML app that let him update his blog, complete with resized vector graphics and a video of moving clouds looping on the background of the window, all using the command-line.NET compiler.
WinFS will still exist. They're just cutting a few features that will probably be re-introduced in a service pack anyway. WinFS is incredibly exciting--one WinFS dev went to the command line and did a query for certain employees within the last week, and it came up in less than a second. No more brute-force searching. Also, no file drives. And yet, they're retaining folder and drive structures in case you want to operate that way.
Aero--this is their top-secret interface yet to be unvieled. See, Longhorn has multiple tiers of visual operation. If you can't handle the effects, it scales back to a lesser tier, going all the way down to an unaccelerated 2D inteface like that of Windows 2000. Aero is the top tier and is supposed to be, according to them, "photorealistic" and will be a new interface for Windows taking advantage of 3D acceleration. They said they don't want to reveal any of it until release because they fear it will be ripped off by competitors (a fair judgment considering all the ripped-off Start menus and taskbars on standard Linux desktops...).
If you saw Pink Floyd's rather marvellous performance at Live 8 the other day, you'll have seen Rick Wright playing a Kurzweil keyboard. That's the same Kurzweil too.
Did you do any research on the possible dangers of nanotech before dismissing its opponents as "people who run up and start protesting before they know a damned thing about what they're protesting"?
The hilarious thing is these pants don't have the specific definition of "nanotechnology" in them at all. They are deliberately skewing the use of the word from the specific common-use meaning of "very small machines" to a very general case "very small manmade things". ALL it is is very small fibers of teflon, which is not a machine at all, just some molecules.
So, this is retarded every way you look at it. The protesters are protesting something that isn't even nanotechnology as it is commonly referred to in the first place!
The hilarious thing is that behind your scorn for the 'retarded' protestors lies the fact that they are correct and it's you that doesn't understand what nanotech is.
The poster's talking about VST plugins. Many Mac / Windows musicians are addicted to these. Linux tools like Ardour will bring a lot more musicians to Linux if they support the plugins people are used to.
A couple of years ago I went to a public meeting about GM in the UK. There was a guy with an American accent who kept putting forward pro-GM arguments. Eventually the chairperson asked him what he did for a living. He tried to dodge the question but eventually the chair got him to admit he worked for Monsanto's PR department.
Later on Percy Schmeiser showed up at the meeting and completely demolished him. It was a joy to watch.
> I think it's disingenuous for RMS to claim the > high road of "non-violence" while advocating > exactly the opposite.
Eh? He just decided not to say he'd endorse any and all violent activity to promote the adoption of a particular law. He didn't say he was absolutely against any kind of violence ever under any circumstances. How is this disingenuous?
> I think it's disingenuous for RMS to claim the high
> road of "non-violence" while advocating exactly the
> opposite.
Eh? He just decided not to say he'd endorse any and all violent activity to promote the adoption of a particular law. He didn't say he was absolutely against any kind of violence ever under any circumstances. How is this disingenuous?
Slashdot Mirror
Those are indeed other words. In fact they're words with a completely different meaning to the previous ones.
> Yeah, not many people download movies in OGG
> format, and the ones that do probably spend a lot
> of time trying to figure out why the sound works
> perfectly but the picture is so garbled.
Actually ogg is a container format which can contain both sound and video. Vorbis is the audio format.
> What would you do if you got a job stomping baby
> duck or penguins? By new shoes or just where
> whatever.
My friend Patrick had a job killing baby ducks (actually he gassed them) which hatched at the wrong time for supermarkets. He worked through an agency which supplied steel-toecapped boots, presumably for insurance / legal reasons.
Not remotely amusing but completely true.
The whole concept of rights a bit nebulous. Having a "right" to something could mean
a) Being permitted to do something
or b) Being entitled to something
You are confusing the two meanings. The general guiding principal is that you should be permitted to do anything that does't impact on anyone else's "rights". If two set of rights come into conflict things get more complicated and a balance has to be struck.
This story is about whether the balance of rights is struck in favour of the consumer or the copyright holder. Unless you produce more copyrighted material than you consume, this is a story about your rights being negatively impacted by the FBI upholding the copyright holders'.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site%3Anews.bbc.c o.uk+terrorist+OR+terrorists+london+july+2005
returns "about 777" pagesThe League of Gentlemen, particularly the first series.
Or alternatively: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Napoleon_Bonaparte
I presume the developer was using 10-15 lines, although whether it was code or coke I can't say,
If you saw Pink Floyd's rather marvellous performance at Live 8 the other day, you'll have seen Rick Wright playing a Kurzweil keyboard. That's the same Kurzweil too.
Did you do any research on the possible dangers of nanotech before dismissing its opponents as "people who run up and start protesting before they know a damned thing about what they're protesting"?
Has it occurred to you that maybe the various serious commentators advising caution might have a point?
The hilarious thing is that behind your scorn for the 'retarded' protestors lies the fact that they are correct and it's you that doesn't understand what nanotech is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NanotechThis has been thought of before:
> Does this mean that we will have to program in > proper English with a stiff upper lip? I think you mean "programme". Bloody Americans.
>> I've been getting into Linux music lately
>So why use Windows tools any more?
The poster's talking about VST plugins. Many Mac / Windows musicians are addicted to these. Linux tools like Ardour will bring a lot more musicians to Linux if they support the plugins people are used to.
I was going to suggest a "muffdiva" product, but it seems that niche has already been filled
Have you tried Viagra?
> seems to have been
> built with certain ergonomic principles in mind
> (e.g., one-handed use during battle).
Battle? I've never heard it called that before.
A couple of years ago I went to a public meeting about GM in the UK. There was a guy with an American accent who kept putting forward pro-GM arguments. Eventually the chairperson asked him what he did for a living. He tried to dodge the question but eventually the chair got him to admit he worked for Monsanto's PR department.
Later on Percy Schmeiser showed up at the meeting and completely demolished him. It was a joy to watch.
> I think it's disingenuous for RMS to claim the
> high road of "non-violence" while advocating
> exactly the opposite.
Eh? He just decided not to say he'd endorse any and all violent activity to promote the adoption of a particular law. He didn't say he was absolutely against any kind of violence ever under any circumstances. How is this disingenuous?
> I think it's disingenuous for RMS to claim the high > road of "non-violence" while advocating exactly the > opposite. Eh? He just decided not to say he'd endorse any and all violent activity to promote the adoption of a particular law. He didn't say he was absolutely against any kind of violence ever under any circumstances. How is this disingenuous?
I thought Britain / Bletchly park cracked the Enigma machine?