Huh? Any graphics card from the past four years has a TV-out, and any console from the last two can output to a monitor, so the distinction you're making simply doesn't exist.
No, it didn't do well because it sucked. It had a clever conceit, yes, but what happened for the remaining hour or two was your typical action movie, only without the effects budget.
The Running Man book predicted the prevalence of reality TV, unfortunately the reality of reality TV is no where as good as the reality in the book.
If you want an astonishingly prophetic look at the rise of reality TV, track down a copy of the BBC television play "The Year of the Sex Olympics". (Sadly, the colour version seems to have been lost, but it's still an excellent production).
No. The strong equivalence principle means that even accelerating frames are equivalent. Observe the fact that physics works fine in a free-falling lift.
The liberals I'm familiar with believe that, through no fault of your own, you are incapable of running your own life without massive government intervention to prevent you from choosing unwisely. After all, you might choose to buy a gun and not an airbag, so government must "guide" you into making the socially responsible choice, as determined by the government.
Then I suspect you're only familiar with neo-socialists you think of as liberals, and haven't actually seen any "good old-fashioned left-liberals". Well, either that or you're inaccurately stereotyping your political opposition.
No, you're putting too much effort to try and get your party name in there. Liberal (at least in the classical sense, and I did take care to specify "old-fashioned") implies both leftist economic and - surprisingly enough - liberal social policy.
Sooo you're saying the right-conservative DISAGREE with:
-collecting taxes
-providing infrastructure
-helping people
-government health care
No, I'm saying that left-liberals agree with those things. But yes, less support for these kind of things is the distinction between left and right - whether one believes in taxing the wealthy to fund benefits to society in general, or not.
And AGREE with:
-government monitoring of who people sleep with
-government monitoring of what people smoke
In terms of traditional positions, no - those are things pursued my more authoritarian sectors on both left and right. But in terms of current party politics, yes, those are very much right-wing positions.
Nice how only US citizens count. Yes, the US gave very few lives to major war efforts; all us in other countries know that. Try counting how many others were killed in those conflicts, or even just the civilian casualties.
Of course there are flaws in a democratic government - hence representative rather than direct democracy. Yes, there are still flaws in that - and if you have a way to mitigate them by all means suggest it. No-one's claiming our government is perfect, just that it's better than the alternatives.
I'm fine with the government collecting taxes to provide infrastructure that benefits society as a whole, as well as helping people in need (which doesn't mean spending money stupidly; training and educating people would be a lot more effective than just sending them a check every month). I'd even be okay with the government helping with health care for people that need it, since a healthy population is far more productive, which benefits everybody. For issues other than economics, I'm pretty far down the libertarian side; the government shouldn't be involved in what people do in private, including who they sleep with and how much marijuana they smoke.
That's not libertarian, that's good old-fashioned left-liberal.
If you're willing to block-by-default and whitelist then yes, you can make a working filter. Good luck having the time to whitelist any significant proportion of the internet, though. So you blacklist, at which point it's always going to be trivial to get around, because I and the internet as a whole can adapt faster than you can, and it only needs one anti-filter proxy to be around at any time for the filter to be useless.
Name me one right--just ONE--that gay people have, or are seeking, that straight people do not enjoy
Thanks to a quirk of how the law was implemented, in my country gays getting married get to change their name as they see fit (wheras hetrosexual marriages only allow the wife to change to the husband's surname; if you want to go for a double-barrelled surname or wife's name you have to do a separate legal change of name, and pay for it).
/no opposition to gay rights, just couldn't resist giving the answer.
why not offer songs in.wav or flac format ? That will fill a hard drive pretty quick
No it won't. How many albums in flac does it take to match the size of a single bluray movie? (Answer, from a quick look: 60). Size is not a relevant concern when it comes to music these days - home machines have more than enough space, and if you can be bothered to transcode down to quality levels appropriate for noisy public places (I use 48kbps mp3 - yes, really, 48; for on the bus / in the office / around town etc. the external noise is such that you really can't hear the difference), so do portable devices.
It would also give a much needed competitive edge to legitimate sources of music.
Hardly. Pirated music is already available in flac.
Oh, sorry, somehow managed to miss what you were replying to. Yes, and I'm pretty sure the gravitational attraction of water to the iceberg is negligible in any case.
"Less gravity" doesn't make sense. It has less weight than the volume of water it displaces - that's why it floats. Going further, a given chunk of ice will weigh as much as about 9/10th the same volume of water - hence why it'll float with 9/10 of itself below the waterline.
The term is used to refer to people who use "scientific-looking" methods and terminology (white coats, journals, etc.) while missing the fundamental point of science (testing through controlled experiments, ideally triple-blind), in the same way as a cargo cult constructs things that look like airstrips, radar towers etc. while missing the fundamental point of those things.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? Any graphics card from the past four years has a TV-out, and any console from the last two can output to a monitor, so the distinction you're making simply doesn't exist.
He doesn't use DHCP to lease the new IP, he just switches to it.
Because now he's using an IP that's listed in their log as unassigned at that time.
No, it didn't do well because it sucked. It had a clever conceit, yes, but what happened for the remaining hour or two was your typical action movie, only without the effects budget.
If you want an astonishingly prophetic look at the rise of reality TV, track down a copy of the BBC television play "The Year of the Sex Olympics". (Sadly, the colour version seems to have been lost, but it's still an excellent production).
Yeah, they'd end up looking rather slack-jawed.
No. The strong equivalence principle means that even accelerating frames are equivalent. Observe the fact that physics works fine in a free-falling lift.
Brave New World is a direct counter to Utilitarian philosophy; it's point is that happiness alone does not make a good society.
I found Animal Farm made a much better story when viewed as a tale about the power struggle between different types of animal.
Then I suspect you're only familiar with neo-socialists you think of as liberals, and haven't actually seen any "good old-fashioned left-liberals". Well, either that or you're inaccurately stereotyping your political opposition.
No, you're putting too much effort to try and get your party name in there. Liberal (at least in the classical sense, and I did take care to specify "old-fashioned") implies both leftist economic and - surprisingly enough - liberal social policy.
-collecting taxes
-providing infrastructure
-helping people
-government health care
No, I'm saying that left-liberals agree with those things. But yes, less support for these kind of things is the distinction between left and right - whether one believes in taxing the wealthy to fund benefits to society in general, or not.
And AGREE with:
-government monitoring of who people sleep with
-government monitoring of what people smoke
In terms of traditional positions, no - those are things pursued my more authoritarian sectors on both left and right. But in terms of current party politics, yes, those are very much right-wing positions.
Nice how only US citizens count. Yes, the US gave very few lives to major war efforts; all us in other countries know that. Try counting how many others were killed in those conflicts, or even just the civilian casualties.
Of course there are flaws in a democratic government - hence representative rather than direct democracy. Yes, there are still flaws in that - and if you have a way to mitigate them by all means suggest it. No-one's claiming our government is perfect, just that it's better than the alternatives.
That's not libertarian, that's good old-fashioned left-liberal.
If you're willing to block-by-default and whitelist then yes, you can make a working filter. Good luck having the time to whitelist any significant proportion of the internet, though. So you blacklist, at which point it's always going to be trivial to get around, because I and the internet as a whole can adapt faster than you can, and it only needs one anti-filter proxy to be around at any time for the filter to be useless.
No, 10,000 year motion. A hard task, to be sure, but by no means impossible.
Thanks to a quirk of how the law was implemented, in my country gays getting married get to change their name as they see fit (wheras hetrosexual marriages only allow the wife to change to the husband's surname; if you want to go for a double-barrelled surname or wife's name you have to do a separate legal change of name, and pay for it).
/no opposition to gay rights, just couldn't resist giving the answer.
You forgot TCL! Why is everyone always forgetting about TCL?
RedHat is nowhere near big enough, but since you mention it, what about Novell?
No it won't. How many albums in flac does it take to match the size of a single bluray movie? (Answer, from a quick look: 60). Size is not a relevant concern when it comes to music these days - home machines have more than enough space, and if you can be bothered to transcode down to quality levels appropriate for noisy public places (I use 48kbps mp3 - yes, really, 48; for on the bus / in the office / around town etc. the external noise is such that you really can't hear the difference), so do portable devices.
It would also give a much needed competitive edge to legitimate sources of music.
Hardly. Pirated music is already available in flac.
Oh, sorry, somehow managed to miss what you were replying to. Yes, and I'm pretty sure the gravitational attraction of water to the iceberg is negligible in any case.
"Less gravity" doesn't make sense. It has less weight than the volume of water it displaces - that's why it floats. Going further, a given chunk of ice will weigh as much as about 9/10th the same volume of water - hence why it'll float with 9/10 of itself below the waterline.
Because emailled files get onto your computer magically without you downloading them, right?
The term is used to refer to people who use "scientific-looking" methods and terminology (white coats, journals, etc.) while missing the fundamental point of science (testing through controlled experiments, ideally triple-blind), in the same way as a cargo cult constructs things that look like airstrips, radar towers etc. while missing the fundamental point of those things.