You'd have to stay up for 2 solid weeks to listen to 80 GB worth of mp3s at 128 kbps or 4 days sans bathroom breaks to watch all the video that would fit on it. Yeah right. What most people do is listen to the few new songs they like and update those every so often as new stuff comes out and they get tired of the old stuff and it falls off the list never to be listened to again. And typically, there'll be a few hundred "old standbys" that they go to whenever they feel like it. You can easily store all of that on 10 gigs. There are much cheaper and more durable ways to back up your entire collection than a massively overkill mp3 player.
So now you're bitching about the iPod and iTunes because your files weren't properly tagged?
No, asswipe, I should have the CHOICE whether I want to tag my files or not.
As for your "Snoop Dogg" (which isn't music BTW)
It was an example, dumbshit. Get a clue.
just read about "smart playlists",
So-called smart playlists is the dumbest idea I have ever seen. I don't need Jobs and cos. iTMS crapware algorithmically mis-predicting what I want to listen to. A person that primarily listens on shuffle will find smart playlists to be quite "dumb" to say the least.
When you're done polishing Jobs dick, please crawl back into your hole and stay there.
I have a great system to replace the batteries in my mp3 player! I just open the battery cover on the back and dump the old ones out to be replaced by fresh ones from my charger. You should try it sometime. Oh...
Here are some of my legitimate criticisms of the iPod. First of all, the way I like to listen to my music is to put it all on shuffle knowing that eventually it'll get to a song by an artist that just happens to work for me at that particular moment in time then I'll take it off shuffle and let that artist play out. Well, you can forget doing that easily on an iPod. When you finally drill through all the menus to deactivate shuffle mode (this should be a hardware button by the way), and you hit the menu option to take it off shuffle, guess what, it impudently and randomly shuffles to another song. So, let me get this straight, I choose to take my device off shuffle on a particular song and it takes it upon itself to get one last shuffle in totally defeating the point of me taking it off shuffle. This is maddening.
Issue two: I understand that most people don't get the concept of directories and file hierarchies so sorting songs by metadata only makes good sense. But for christ's sake, is it necessary to just dump all of the files into one big directory and then renaming them cryptically so that those of us who prefer organizing our music via directories and such aren't left out in the cold. I don't know about you people but I find it to be much faster and simpler to just dump all of my Snoop Dogg into a folder and play out of that than to have to go file by file editing id3 tags. Or at least give me the option. When I bought my iPod (by the way at the time I didn't know about these problems) and realized this I figured, okay, a new way of doing things, I can deal with that, then I sat for at least six hours editing all that crap only to reload my iPod and still have orphaned files, some songs with the artist's name spelled slightly differently, etc. Ridiculous.
Oh, and another thing about the shuffle deal, if you're listening to a song and it's not on shuffle and you decide to put it on shuffle, better wait until the song is just about over because when you put it on shuffle, it shuffles immediately whether your song is finished or not. Yeah, fucking stupid. Well, that's the end of my rant. To sum it up, I tolerated this crap for about a week until I returned my iPod for a refund.
Its gotten to the point now that responding to your sophomoric rants is just getting boring. If you can't honestly see how moronic and juvenile you sound, I'm not even going to try. Your entire debate "style" consists of attack after attack that are so misconstrued and irrelevant, they aren't even wrong. You make no valid points because you have none. What should I expect from such a vacuous intellect as yours. Your head is so far up your own ass I'm surprised you haven't pinched your butt cheeks off and murdered yourself (see your idiotic sig). I would say you've lost this debate but actually, you haven't. There hasn't even been a debate. Just you going off and ranting like some drunk in a corner and obliviously ignoring every olive branch of reason and logic I have attempted to extend to you. Life must be fun in "Darby-world" where rationality is thrown completely out of the window whenever it conveniently suits your whims. Hopefully, you are either very young or mentally handicapped so at least you'll have some excuse. You are sad and I'm busy right now so I don't have time to play with you anymore.
If you take an objective view of the facts, you'll find that most of the issues we are facing now like poverty (remember the great depression, much worse), racism (remember slavery, jim crow, much worse), war (remember ww one and two and vietnam etc., much worse) religious fundamentalism (salem witch trials, puritanism, much worse), etc. have been overcome before and it stands to reason the results will be the same again.
I suppose that we have differing definitions of "overcome," too. If they were overcome before, then they wouldn't be issues, even diminished issues, now. I don't agree even that they are diminished. Just more subtle now.
I'm not sure what your definition of "overcome" is either but please allow me to clarify mine. The great depression is over and has been for quite a while, slavery is over, jim crow laws have been overturned, world wars one and two are over witches can practise their religion freely these days, etc. If your arguement is that these things are only truely overcome when there are no longer any observable negative impacts on our society then you are fantasizing. Some would even say that these societal scars are even a necessary part of our maturity and further growth. It would seem that overcoming is really more a process than a destination.
"It's not as bad as it could be" does not, by any logic, mean that it's good. It just means we haven't deteriorated to the point where you think it's worth fixing yet.
I never used "It's not as bad as it could be" to support my arguement and wouldn't. Society is cyclical. It has its ups and downs kind of like the stock market. Occasionally there are corrections but in the long term, things tend to get better. If you find yourself pining after the "good old days" crack open a history book or two and prepare to be enlightened. You really do have it very easy. I'm not saying that modern society is perfect, far from it. We have plenty of room for improvement. But let's try to enjoy at least some sense of satisfaction in the accomplishments of our forebears while at the same time looking to a better future.
If by "thank" you mean "hold in utter contempt," then I agree with you.
Now that's just sad. Maybe you should look inward to discover why you feel the need to waste so much hate on others and so much unhappiness on yourself.
I'm not certain what they are upholding about my way of life, or how lavish it is. That's a mighty assumption on your part.
You got me there. I was being assumptive. Or more accurately, projective. I tend to assume that because I am successful and happy in my life despite having to overcome great adversity that everyone has the wherewithal to do the same. My bad.
Your purpose for entering into this discussion was quite plainly to attempt to marginalize my opinion and attack me for having the nerve to go against the typical group-think by saying that flag waving is okay and should be encouraged more. Obviously you have a problem with that. That's fine, but instead of finding out exactly what point I was trying to communicate, you launch into your tirade about how I'm desecrating it and all it stands for, etc. So basically, your whole plan was to score points by trying to distort my meaning completely and pigeonhole me into your little ideological box. So the foundation for everything you've said was based on presumptions that you made about someone you don't even know. In other words, based on ignorance. Your ignorance. That's probably got a lot to do with why I don't seem to be making any sense to you. You are basing your arguement on your own distorted perception of what I said that bear no actual relation to what I actually meant.
You accuse me of making fascistic statements but yet you have the audacity to be just as fascist attempting to marginalize my voice by calling my opinions "laughable" as if that is some sort of cogent arguement. Assuming you have any idea what my opinions are and you probably don't since you seem so eager to jump the gun and make your own assumptions, by attempting to dismiss me out of hand you reveal your own intolerant, repugnant nature.
In the interest of an admittedly less than complete disclosure, flag-waving to me can be partially exemplified as, loving your country though not necessarily your elected officials. It means not taking every opportunity to grand stand in an international forum by denigrating your fellow citizens. It means to take pride in where you come from, maintain a sense of satisfaction in the positive accomplishments of your forebears yet always looking to a better future. I don't understand how you could have a problem with that. That was my original point and I stand by it.
Strangely, we've been going round and round about this all day as I've been trying my damndest to get some work done and you just keep mouthing off rapid fire nonsense that has had nothing to do with my original post at all. Please get a clue.
I'm much more optimistic about the numbers for the "vocal minority" than you are. It seems that's where we disagree. If the political reality in this country were really that dismal, it would have disintegrated long ago. As it stands, we're all more or less chugging along just fine. And not only from momentum.
If you take an objective view of the facts, you'll find that most of the issues we are facing now like poverty (remember the great depression, much worse), racism (remember slavery, jim crow, much worse), war (remember ww one and two and vietnam etc., much worse) religious fundamentalism (salem witch trials, puritanism, much worse), etc. have been overcome before and it stands to reason the results will be the same again.
It's easy to give up but maybe you should take a long hard look at history as well as an objective comparison of life in the United States versus most of the rest of the world to see how good you actually do have it here. And you can thank your fellow "apathetic masses" for helping uphold the rather lavish way of life we enjoy.
Then I'm sure that you will have no problem pointing out one single use of the word "Americans" in my post.
Not necessary. Your initial post was to defend the original poster who liberally used the word "American" throughout. In coming to his rescue, you by extension assumed his arguement and hence the word "American". I'm only using your own logic by the way. Remember this diarheatic expulsion of yours? You're the one defending them, so they're yours.
Oh and as for this. What, you mean using facts instead of relying solely on epithets? I actually mean the opposite. Your entire line of rhetoric is so full of straw men and ad hominim attacks as to render the attempt at an intelligent conversation with you worthless. For a reference simply re-read everything you have written thus far. You have yet to even acknowledge what this discourse is even about. Again, for the nth time for the really slow learners, blanket stereotypical statements about the supposed proto-typical American destroy your credibility in an arguement. But you already knew that. You just do it anyway because all your mutual circle jerk liberal friends do it. Keep blowing smoke up each other's asses all the way to November and see what happens. And you wonder why you constantly hear the question, "Why do you hate America?".
I'm busy right now so I'm simply going to reply in short to the most pertinent points. First, the original poster, in how he worded his comment, was directing the "brain turning off" and "fart fearing" comments to all Americans. Not just those that voted Bush into office. What I am trying to get across to you is that it offends those of us that didn't vote for him when you lump us into one big group you so graciously call "Americans". Please get it through your thick skull. That is my point. Damn. And no, your comments were not in any way quite clear in being directed only towards Republicans. They were quite clear in your use of the word "Americans". Americans != Republicans. GET IT?
That's it. Simply word your comments in a way that clearly delineates who you are talking about versus everybody else. Is that so hard? And the reason I keep "dropping the L bomb" is that arguing in the particular manner that you are is typical of liberals. And of course the people who voted Bush into office in '04 are to blame but what about the other 59 million that voted for Kerry or the so and so 100 thousands that voted for Nader? I would expect a little more logical thinking from a Slashdot poster.
I can answer your question, because you don't own your country. We do.
(Sigh.) In typical foreigner fashion, you just Don't Get It. If you were an American, I'd have the desire to smack you for making such a misinformed statement. But since you aren't, I'll let it slide with a little elucidation. Quite simply, the industries you have listed are the typical, big-business, lumbering bohemoths indicative of the older economy. We Americans learned long ago the advantage and efficiency of outsourcing the ownership of these. You see, the core of the American economic engine is actually small business. The early realization of that fact is what has kept us nimble and competitive. So competitive in fact that we continue to, ahem, kick your ass.
And regarding the alleged spelling mistakes, no they aren't rearrangements, they (or more accurately, it) is an outright misspelling. I'm not saying I'm perfect, I'm just calling someone on the onus that as Jesus so eloquently put it, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
While you're waving your flag around desecrating it by your contempt for all that it stands for, people who actually do give a shit aobut this country are working to fix the problems created by the ignorant flag wavers.
(Sigh.) How perfectly you exemplify my comment to the previous poster. Instead of intelligently replying or even attempting a cogent refutation, you, in typical liberal fashion, resort to name calling and insults. You'd make Michael Moore proud.
Sorry, but you do not love this country if you think those who are actually defending it (from the savage assaults unleashed by cowardly traitors like *your* leaders look like they hate it.
And how simply does it need to be put so that even your pea brain can grasp, insulting the citizens of the entire country and calling them cowards and saying they "turn off their brains" therefore implying that they are acting out of complete ignorance and that they are afraid of their own farts, though hilarious in its inanity, is not defending your country. If those comments are directed specifically towards Bush loving republicans then say so. Just making a blanket statement seemingly about all Americans does nothing more than piss people off and quite simply borders on bigotry. In typical liberal fashion it comes off as being tolerant of everyone and everything as long as they agree with you.
And no that does not nearly qualify as defending it (from the savage assaults unleashed by cowardly traitors like *your* leaders look like they hate it.
Please don't be so presumptious as to assume that they are *my* leaders. Again, in unadulterated liberal fashion you put your true colors of intolerance, bigotry, name-calling, and condescension to the fore. When you don't agree with someone, they are "ignorant", a "coward", "Sparky" whatever that means, etc. Congratulate yourself on being a perfect example of why liberals attract nothing but derision by mainstream America.
You just keep waving that flag as opposed to standing up for anything it represents, little coward.
If you weren't such a narrowminded asinine little ass (see now you have me doing it), I'd inform you that it is perfectly reasonable to do both. But I'm sure you'd just stick your fingers in your ears and start singing "la la la" or something. Yes, I am a liberal, just not a sniveling, Michael Moore acolyte like you. And, yes, I intend to keep waving my flag. Part of that being to constructively and rationally engage in political discourse by not marginalizing and antagonizing Americans as a whole like they are all part of some dronelike hive conservative front but actually pinning blame where it really fits. Namely, W and friends, true republicans that actually are a member of the aforementioned dronelike hive, and whiney bitches like you.
Please, speak for yourself. Its sad when I see Americans lashing out at each other about things of which none of them have any control over whatsoever. Its like fighting over crumbs. It makes you look pathetic.
Grow a spine; if you don't like what's going on, do something about it instead of denigrating your fellow countrymen over decisions made by people neither you nor he have ever seen except on the television.
And maybe you should try a little flag waving. That's one of the main reasons liberals in this country aren't taken seriously. You look like you hate this country and all it stands for. I can understand you hating the current leadership but its hard to distinguish the difference when you use rhetoric like We turn off our brains and We hide under our beds. Maybe people like you do hate the United States. Hmm, don't let the door hit you in the ass.
As a person born and raised in the United States, I can honestly say I have never met a single person that could not read and write on a level that could at least be considered basically literate. Where this supposed 3 percent comes from, I don't have the slightest clue. Though, you seem to have ignored the other poster's comment of illiterate Mexicans coming into the country; maybe that could be a not so subtle hint.
As for your assertion of an uninformed populace, has it occurred to you that Americans are informed and choose to act on that information in a different way than you do. Most Americans are pro-business, pro-democracy, pro-rule of law conservatives. Deal with it. Contrary to what seems to be the consensus belief of our European and Oceanic cousins, we are doing quite well, are quite happy, and still have the largest (and growing) economy in the world. Ask yourself, if the United States was really as bad as its made out to be, how are we still able to kick every other country in the world's ass economically, technologically, socially, etc. I know, this comment is getting more and more disjointed but its late and I'm tired. Just two more things. First, socio-economic mobility isn't just a buzzword here, its a reality. I was born dirt poor. Now, I run my own business and am doing quite well thank you. Only in America, baby. Second, if you insist on lecturing people about literacy, do yourself a favor and run a spell check on your posts. You'll look a lot less like the egotistical, asshat, pseudo-elitest, non-spelling bee winning idiot that you are.
You should be aware that as well as being hell on your car, it is also safer. It is a well known fact to traffic engineers and now you that people drive slower and more carefully on roads that are in "deplorable condition" than on smooth blemish free ones. Many roads are intentionally kept in a partial state of disrepair due to this simple fact.
See, what happens is all the data eventually gets displaced to the outer edge due to centrifugal force. Fortunately, the drives are sealed so your files don't just slide off completely!
Seriously, old school, each cylinder had the same amount of blocks but now-a -days, the number of blocks change per cylinder so there are more on the outside.
Of course, as you said, the angular speed is consistent so the outer blocks would fly under the heads at a much higher rate than the inside.
I find it funny that you have been modded insightful at +5 no less when a 7200 RPM 2.5" drive is still considerably slower than a 3.5 inch 7200 RPM drive due in large part to the the extra inch in diameter of the platters. The data recorded on the half inch outer ring of the platters is passing under the heads at a much faster rate and are being written to and read from much more quickly than the rest of the drive. Of course this is all predicated on the assumption that your comment was made in response to the speed of the drive whereas the OP actually seemed to be more concerned with price.
Erm...since when did Americans not want to do construction work?
The popular refrain of "illegal immigrants doing work Americans don't want to do" is as much old and tired as it is disingenuous. Please turn the TV off and stop repeating the mantras your big business, labor at slave wages loving, corporate masters are giving you.
Yeah, that'd work great right up until "someone who cares" cross references the transactions made with the cash card you bought with your credit card. There has to be a central way to differentiate between different cash cards and the cash card also has to have a central database to keep track of how much money is on it otherwise people would be cloning the cards and the whole system would go to hell in like a day.
While I accept your assertion that copyright was intended to protect publisher investments as plausible, my understanding is that copyright was instituted for the sole purpose of "encouraging the production of creative works for the public benefit". This also seems to be the view taken by U.S. courts in their interpretation as well.
If you have a credible source you can link to that supports this belief, I would be very interested in reading it.
In my mind, the division is more of personal vs corporate works -- part of the reason I support copyright for the life of the artist is because it just seems insulting to suggest that in my 60s I should be forced to watch other people change and resell my own earlier work in ways that might be completely contrary to my original intent. Personal works usually draw from the life of the artist, from the people he knows and situations he has been in, so in that sense there is more than commerce at stake when discussing what is fair to the artist. And it certainly WILL curtail the work created by an artist if they feel they are losing control of their own creations, we see this with work-for-hire situations and short copyright terms would only exacerbate the situation.
You misunderstand the original intent of copyright. Copyright law was put into effect for the public interest. It was just long enough so the artist could make some money and therefore be bothered to produce the work in the first place but short enough so that within a reasonable amount of time the work would enter the public domain. Copyright for the life of the artist does not serve this purpose at all. It worked great in its original form. Currently, the disenfranchisement of the public is quite appalling and only serves to enrich the coffers of parasitic private entities.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Super Mario 3. You know you've played that game enough times when you can get through all 8 worlds with just one small mario.
2. Unreal. Yeah, it's unreal.
3. Megaman 3. By far the hardest (good) Famicom game there was. Also one of the best.
4. Keith Courage in Alpha Zones. You know you want more of that PC Engine goodness.
5. Quake. The almighty.
You'd have to stay up for 2 solid weeks to listen to 80 GB worth of mp3s at 128 kbps or 4 days sans bathroom breaks to watch all the video that would fit on it. Yeah right. What most people do is listen to the few new songs they like and update those every so often as new stuff comes out and they get tired of the old stuff and it falls off the list never to be listened to again. And typically, there'll be a few hundred "old standbys" that they go to whenever they feel like it. You can easily store all of that on 10 gigs. There are much cheaper and more durable ways to back up your entire collection than a massively overkill mp3 player.
No, asswipe, I should have the CHOICE whether I want to tag my files or not.
As for your "Snoop Dogg" (which isn't music BTW)
It was an example, dumbshit. Get a clue.
just read about "smart playlists",
So-called smart playlists is the dumbest idea I have ever seen. I don't need Jobs and cos. iTMS crapware algorithmically mis-predicting what I want to listen to. A person that primarily listens on shuffle will find smart playlists to be quite "dumb" to say the least.
When you're done polishing Jobs dick, please crawl back into your hole and stay there.
I have a great system to replace the batteries in my mp3 player! I just open the battery cover on the back and dump the old ones out to be replaced by fresh ones from my charger. You should try it sometime. Oh...
Issue two: I understand that most people don't get the concept of directories and file hierarchies so sorting songs by metadata only makes good sense. But for christ's sake, is it necessary to just dump all of the files into one big directory and then renaming them cryptically so that those of us who prefer organizing our music via directories and such aren't left out in the cold. I don't know about you people but I find it to be much faster and simpler to just dump all of my Snoop Dogg into a folder and play out of that than to have to go file by file editing id3 tags. Or at least give me the option. When I bought my iPod (by the way at the time I didn't know about these problems) and realized this I figured, okay, a new way of doing things, I can deal with that, then I sat for at least six hours editing all that crap only to reload my iPod and still have orphaned files, some songs with the artist's name spelled slightly differently, etc. Ridiculous.
Oh, and another thing about the shuffle deal, if you're listening to a song and it's not on shuffle and you decide to put it on shuffle, better wait until the song is just about over because when you put it on shuffle, it shuffles immediately whether your song is finished or not. Yeah, fucking stupid. Well, that's the end of my rant. To sum it up, I tolerated this crap for about a week until I returned my iPod for a refund.
Its gotten to the point now that responding to your sophomoric rants is just getting boring. If you can't honestly see how moronic and juvenile you sound, I'm not even going to try. Your entire debate "style" consists of attack after attack that are so misconstrued and irrelevant, they aren't even wrong. You make no valid points because you have none. What should I expect from such a vacuous intellect as yours. Your head is so far up your own ass I'm surprised you haven't pinched your butt cheeks off and murdered yourself (see your idiotic sig). I would say you've lost this debate but actually, you haven't. There hasn't even been a debate. Just you going off and ranting like some drunk in a corner and obliviously ignoring every olive branch of reason and logic I have attempted to extend to you. Life must be fun in "Darby-world" where rationality is thrown completely out of the window whenever it conveniently suits your whims. Hopefully, you are either very young or mentally handicapped so at least you'll have some excuse. You are sad and I'm busy right now so I don't have time to play with you anymore.
I suppose that we have differing definitions of "overcome," too. If they were overcome before, then they wouldn't be issues, even diminished issues, now. I don't agree even that they are diminished. Just more subtle now.
I'm not sure what your definition of "overcome" is either but please allow me to clarify mine. The great depression is over and has been for quite a while, slavery is over, jim crow laws have been overturned, world wars one and two are over witches can practise their religion freely these days, etc. If your arguement is that these things are only truely overcome when there are no longer any observable negative impacts on our society then you are fantasizing. Some would even say that these societal scars are even a necessary part of our maturity and further growth. It would seem that overcoming is really more a process than a destination.
"It's not as bad as it could be" does not, by any logic, mean that it's good. It just means we haven't deteriorated to the point where you think it's worth fixing yet.
I never used "It's not as bad as it could be" to support my arguement and wouldn't. Society is cyclical. It has its ups and downs kind of like the stock market. Occasionally there are corrections but in the long term, things tend to get better. If you find yourself pining after the "good old days" crack open a history book or two and prepare to be enlightened. You really do have it very easy. I'm not saying that modern society is perfect, far from it. We have plenty of room for improvement. But let's try to enjoy at least some sense of satisfaction in the accomplishments of our forebears while at the same time looking to a better future.
If by "thank" you mean "hold in utter contempt," then I agree with you.
Now that's just sad. Maybe you should look inward to discover why you feel the need to waste so much hate on others and so much unhappiness on yourself.
I'm not certain what they are upholding about my way of life, or how lavish it is. That's a mighty assumption on your part.
You got me there. I was being assumptive. Or more accurately, projective. I tend to assume that because I am successful and happy in my life despite having to overcome great adversity that everyone has the wherewithal to do the same. My bad.
You accuse me of making fascistic statements but yet you have the audacity to be just as fascist attempting to marginalize my voice by calling my opinions "laughable" as if that is some sort of cogent arguement. Assuming you have any idea what my opinions are and you probably don't since you seem so eager to jump the gun and make your own assumptions, by attempting to dismiss me out of hand you reveal your own intolerant, repugnant nature.
In the interest of an admittedly less than complete disclosure, flag-waving to me can be partially exemplified as, loving your country though not necessarily your elected officials. It means not taking every opportunity to grand stand in an international forum by denigrating your fellow citizens. It means to take pride in where you come from, maintain a sense of satisfaction in the positive accomplishments of your forebears yet always looking to a better future. I don't understand how you could have a problem with that. That was my original point and I stand by it.
Strangely, we've been going round and round about this all day as I've been trying my damndest to get some work done and you just keep mouthing off rapid fire nonsense that has had nothing to do with my original post at all. Please get a clue.
If you take an objective view of the facts, you'll find that most of the issues we are facing now like poverty (remember the great depression, much worse), racism (remember slavery, jim crow, much worse), war (remember ww one and two and vietnam etc., much worse) religious fundamentalism (salem witch trials, puritanism, much worse), etc. have been overcome before and it stands to reason the results will be the same again.
It's easy to give up but maybe you should take a long hard look at history as well as an objective comparison of life in the United States versus most of the rest of the world to see how good you actually do have it here. And you can thank your fellow "apathetic masses" for helping uphold the rather lavish way of life we enjoy.
Not necessary. Your initial post was to defend the original poster who liberally used the word "American" throughout. In coming to his rescue, you by extension assumed his arguement and hence the word "American". I'm only using your own logic by the way. Remember this diarheatic expulsion of yours? You're the one defending them, so they're yours.
Oh and as for this. What, you mean using facts instead of relying solely on epithets? I actually mean the opposite. Your entire line of rhetoric is so full of straw men and ad hominim attacks as to render the attempt at an intelligent conversation with you worthless. For a reference simply re-read everything you have written thus far. You have yet to even acknowledge what this discourse is even about. Again, for the nth time for the really slow learners, blanket stereotypical statements about the supposed proto-typical American destroy your credibility in an arguement. But you already knew that. You just do it anyway because all your mutual circle jerk liberal friends do it. Keep blowing smoke up each other's asses all the way to November and see what happens. And you wonder why you constantly hear the question, "Why do you hate America?".
That's it. Simply word your comments in a way that clearly delineates who you are talking about versus everybody else. Is that so hard? And the reason I keep "dropping the L bomb" is that arguing in the particular manner that you are is typical of liberals. And of course the people who voted Bush into office in '04 are to blame but what about the other 59 million that voted for Kerry or the so and so 100 thousands that voted for Nader? I would expect a little more logical thinking from a Slashdot poster.
(Sigh.) In typical foreigner fashion, you just Don't Get It. If you were an American, I'd have the desire to smack you for making such a misinformed statement. But since you aren't, I'll let it slide with a little elucidation. Quite simply, the industries you have listed are the typical, big-business, lumbering bohemoths indicative of the older economy. We Americans learned long ago the advantage and efficiency of outsourcing the ownership of these. You see, the core of the American economic engine is actually small business. The early realization of that fact is what has kept us nimble and competitive. So competitive in fact that we continue to, ahem, kick your ass.
And regarding the alleged spelling mistakes, no they aren't rearrangements, they (or more accurately, it) is an outright misspelling. I'm not saying I'm perfect, I'm just calling someone on the onus that as Jesus so eloquently put it, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
(Sigh.) How perfectly you exemplify my comment to the previous poster. Instead of intelligently replying or even attempting a cogent refutation, you, in typical liberal fashion, resort to name calling and insults. You'd make Michael Moore proud.
Sorry, but you do not love this country if you think those who are actually defending it (from the savage assaults unleashed by cowardly traitors like *your* leaders look like they hate it.
And how simply does it need to be put so that even your pea brain can grasp, insulting the citizens of the entire country and calling them cowards and saying they "turn off their brains" therefore implying that they are acting out of complete ignorance and that they are afraid of their own farts, though hilarious in its inanity, is not defending your country. If those comments are directed specifically towards Bush loving republicans then say so. Just making a blanket statement seemingly about all Americans does nothing more than piss people off and quite simply borders on bigotry. In typical liberal fashion it comes off as being tolerant of everyone and everything as long as they agree with you.
And no that does not nearly qualify as defending it (from the savage assaults unleashed by cowardly traitors like *your* leaders look like they hate it.
Please don't be so presumptious as to assume that they are *my* leaders. Again, in unadulterated liberal fashion you put your true colors of intolerance, bigotry, name-calling, and condescension to the fore. When you don't agree with someone, they are "ignorant", a "coward", "Sparky" whatever that means, etc. Congratulate yourself on being a perfect example of why liberals attract nothing but derision by mainstream America.
You just keep waving that flag as opposed to standing up for anything it represents, little coward.
If you weren't such a narrowminded asinine little ass (see now you have me doing it), I'd inform you that it is perfectly reasonable to do both. But I'm sure you'd just stick your fingers in your ears and start singing "la la la" or something. Yes, I am a liberal, just not a sniveling, Michael Moore acolyte like you. And, yes, I intend to keep waving my flag. Part of that being to constructively and rationally engage in political discourse by not marginalizing and antagonizing Americans as a whole like they are all part of some dronelike hive conservative front but actually pinning blame where it really fits. Namely, W and friends, true republicans that actually are a member of the aforementioned dronelike hive, and whiney bitches like you.
Please, speak for yourself. Its sad when I see Americans lashing out at each other about things of which none of them have any control over whatsoever. Its like fighting over crumbs. It makes you look pathetic.
Grow a spine; if you don't like what's going on, do something about it instead of denigrating your fellow countrymen over decisions made by people neither you nor he have ever seen except on the television.
And maybe you should try a little flag waving. That's one of the main reasons liberals in this country aren't taken seriously. You look like you hate this country and all it stands for. I can understand you hating the current leadership but its hard to distinguish the difference when you use rhetoric like We turn off our brains and We hide under our beds. Maybe people like you do hate the United States. Hmm, don't let the door hit you in the ass.
As for your assertion of an uninformed populace, has it occurred to you that Americans are informed and choose to act on that information in a different way than you do. Most Americans are pro-business, pro-democracy, pro-rule of law conservatives. Deal with it. Contrary to what seems to be the consensus belief of our European and Oceanic cousins, we are doing quite well, are quite happy, and still have the largest (and growing) economy in the world. Ask yourself, if the United States was really as bad as its made out to be, how are we still able to kick every other country in the world's ass economically, technologically, socially, etc. I know, this comment is getting more and more disjointed but its late and I'm tired. Just two more things. First, socio-economic mobility isn't just a buzzword here, its a reality. I was born dirt poor. Now, I run my own business and am doing quite well thank you. Only in America, baby. Second, if you insist on lecturing people about literacy, do yourself a favor and run a spell check on your posts. You'll look a lot less like the egotistical, asshat, pseudo-elitest, non-spelling bee winning idiot that you are.
Wal-Mart sells the censored version of some audio CDs. They don't do that with DVDs or VHS tapes. So your OZ episodes are safe for now.
You should be aware that as well as being hell on your car, it is also safer. It is a well known fact to traffic engineers and now you that people drive slower and more carefully on roads that are in "deplorable condition" than on smooth blemish free ones. Many roads are intentionally kept in a partial state of disrepair due to this simple fact.
Seriously, old school, each cylinder had the same amount of blocks but now-a -days, the number of blocks change per cylinder so there are more on the outside.
Of course, as you said, the angular speed is consistent so the outer blocks would fly under the heads at a much higher rate than the inside.
I find it funny that you have been modded insightful at +5 no less when a 7200 RPM 2.5" drive is still considerably slower than a 3.5 inch 7200 RPM drive due in large part to the the extra inch in diameter of the platters. The data recorded on the half inch outer ring of the platters is passing under the heads at a much faster rate and are being written to and read from much more quickly than the rest of the drive. Of course this is all predicated on the assumption that your comment was made in response to the speed of the drive whereas the OP actually seemed to be more concerned with price.
The popular refrain of "illegal immigrants doing work Americans don't want to do" is as much old and tired as it is disingenuous. Please turn the TV off and stop repeating the mantras your big business, labor at slave wages loving, corporate masters are giving you.
I beg to differ.
Yeah, that'd work great right up until "someone who cares" cross references the transactions made with the cash card you bought with your credit card. There has to be a central way to differentiate between different cash cards and the cash card also has to have a central database to keep track of how much money is on it otherwise people would be cloning the cards and the whole system would go to hell in like a day.
Yeah, then it gets cracked like 2 weeks later. I think the RIAA would be quite pissed.
While I accept your assertion that copyright was intended to protect publisher investments as plausible, my understanding is that copyright was instituted for the sole purpose of "encouraging the production of creative works for the public benefit". This also seems to be the view taken by U.S. courts in their interpretation as well.
If you have a credible source you can link to that supports this belief, I would be very interested in reading it.
You misunderstand the original intent of copyright. Copyright law was put into effect for the public interest. It was just long enough so the artist could make some money and therefore be bothered to produce the work in the first place but short enough so that within a reasonable amount of time the work would enter the public domain. Copyright for the life of the artist does not serve this purpose at all. It worked great in its original form. Currently, the disenfranchisement of the public is quite appalling and only serves to enrich the coffers of parasitic private entities.