Say what you will about them, but I've always found MSNBC to be QUITE impartial when it comes to reporting on Microsoft. And believe me... whenever I read Microsoft stories on MSNBC, I always have my eyes wide open for signs of bias. Haven't found it yet though-
You need to look a little bit harder then. Even when the reporting is borderline impartial, notice that whenever they mention microsoft they have a link whereas whenever they mention Redhat, Sun, Oracle, Netscape or any other competitor they *never* have a link.
This, in a website, is the least impartial thing you can do.
Are we sure the blast would be comparable to that of a nuclear explosion?
Well, nuclear explosions are measured in terms of TNT explosions i.e. a one megaton nuclear blast has the same explosive force as one million tons of TNT. Radioactive affects and characteristics of the explosions would be different.
I think that the airport security should have been able to prevent Sept 11, and I don't see a big hue and cry to lynch the metal detector jockeys and their bosses.
Well, since the government knew about it beforehand they could have prevented it but chose not to. This is not conspiracy theory or speculation, since they warned many VIPs not to fly that day.
Imagine being able to walk into a crowded, noisy bar and be able to have a whispered conversation with the person standing next to you. Neither of you would be able to hear the rest of the bar, and the rest of the bar would be unable to hear you.
Now this has potential. Is it discreet enough that you could keep it hidden? Imagine, you walk up to that attractive person and start chatting. They aren't aware of the device and think that they're having some sort of supernatural experience. This would do a lot for your success ratio.
The backups are NOT supposed to be used at the same time as the originals. If you sell the original, you are supposed to destroy the backups.
Without paying the extra tax, this is true. The point which you missed is that they are paying this tax essentially for the right to "pirate" as much as they want.
hey, don't you go talking bad about Poway! the Poweians might hear you and make it illegal for you go enter the town or something. lol. (i live here. i mean there. whereever.)
If you live in Poway, then you should know that you are referred to as "Powegians". It just sounds better. I live in PB. They call us lots of things, but it's just jealousy;-)
Besides, the point here is not that the US will use Nuclear Weapons. The point is that it CAN use them and that it WILL use them if chemical/bio/etc agents are used against its people.
No, this is exactly *not* the point. US policy has been to retaliate to nukes, bios or chems with nukes ever since we've had nukes.
The point of this new policy is that "We can and will use nukes if we damn well please." Please try to read all 3 of the cases in which the US will nuke. The third one implicitly says "whenever".
The more I hear about AOL, the more it seems like their users actually *are* stupid. At the least they are painfully ignorant. They are paying for a service and then getting bombarded by ads. If it was a free service it would be one thing, but they are already paying. Then to have pop ups whenever they log on?!? That is utterly fucking ridiculous. I have never heard of another ISP that you pay for that clutters up your screen with ads. I visit lots of sites on the web that have ads pop up and otherwise,but they only appear once I choose to visit that site and I have the option of not visiting it if it bothers me. AOL users don't seem to have this choice. By choosing to use AOL they are paying twice. This is dumb.
and the method of figuring out how to type a password was nonintuitive.
This one comes under the heading of stupid user as he suggested. Click button. Computer says you can't do that, click the lock to do what you want to do. He went all over the computer looking for a way to do it and then R'dTFM. So clicking the icon might be unintuitive, but it was clearly recognized as such which is why the dialog told him explicitly what to do.
More people are killed by speeding drivers than are murdered.
You didn't show any source for this, but I'm sure you could find one. The issue I have with this is how many of these accidents were caused not by the speeder blamed for it, but by the person driving 50 on the freeway and pulling over even farther to the left without looking. I have seen many accidents caused by these people. Too careful is more dangerous than too fast up to a point.
Pepsi didn't make their soda out of a base of Coke, they didn't extract something from Coke and use it in Pepsi,
Nor does Bnetd use something of Blizzards. It is a clean implementation.
In this case, they are using software based off Blizzard material,
No again. they are using software they wrote. They reverse engineered the Battlenet server protocol which is legal even with the DMCA since reverse enginering for the purpose of interoperability is completely legal.
ya thats right, you've just been made an ass of, now why don't YOU think before you make a post.
I think it's clear who is the ass here. Also your complete lack of understanding of the issue is apparent.
If it's something ILLEGAL and cuts sales, that's a different story.
That much is certainly true, however this is NOT illegal. copying the game and giving it away is illegal, but making a clone of Battlenet is NOT illegal. So Blizzard going after someone giving away their games is justified, but this is not what the discussion is about.
Do we really want to regulate how/who a political party can nominaate for office?
Your point is taken, but I personally feel that we should just outlaw parties. So regulating the hell out of it couldn't do much worse than we're getting now;-)
We'd have Pat Buchanans running against Ralph Naders, rather than Bushs against Gores.
You say this like it would be a bad thing.
In this case, Buchanan would lose big, Nader would win by a landslide, and we would be much better off than we would be with either Bush or Gore.
Bush or Gore is no choice at all. They're both dirty as hell and bad people to boot.
not letting them ask your party affiliation wouldn't solve the problem of letting people intentionally screwing up primaries of parties they oppose by voting for candidates farthest from center. Opening primaries opens them for that risk.
This is only a problem for that party though.
It could be a very good thing for the country.
What if I, as a voter, would be ok with having candidate A or B or C in office, but it is very important to everything I believe in that candidate D is not elected.
If Candidate D is the most likely choice for one party, then why would it be a screw up if I helped him not get chosen?
Supreme Court justices aren't for sale for the sole reason that they don't have to fund election campaigns.
This is a frighteningly ignorant statement.
Since they are not up for election and have lifetime terms, they are free to accept all the bribes they want, support the people who are paying them at the expense of The People, and never fear for their jobs.
Elected officials have to be cleaner. Sure, they need reelection money, but if they go directly against the will of all their constituents (assuming everyone else agreed on anything) they are gone regardless of how much they have in their warchests.
Bowies from this family include Rezin Pleasant Bowie, Jr (the inventor of the Bowie knife, also correctly pronunced boo-ee), and Col. James Bowie who died defending the Alamo.
Amazing what you can learn here.
I thought the Alamo Bowie was the knife Bowie.
Slashdot Mirror
Say what you will about them, but I've always found MSNBC to be QUITE impartial when it comes to reporting on Microsoft. And believe me... whenever I read Microsoft stories on MSNBC, I always have my eyes wide open for signs of bias. Haven't found it yet though-
You need to look a little bit harder then.
Even when the reporting is borderline impartial, notice that whenever they mention microsoft they have a link whereas whenever they mention Redhat, Sun, Oracle, Netscape or any other competitor they *never* have a link.
This, in a website, is the least impartial thing you can do.
Remember what the Bikini atoll was famous for.
Testing the affects of radiation on unsuspecting people living nearby?
Are we sure the blast would be comparable to that of a nuclear explosion?
Well, nuclear explosions are measured in terms of TNT explosions i.e. a one megaton nuclear blast has the same explosive force as one million tons of TNT. Radioactive affects and characteristics of the explosions would be different.
I think that the airport security should have been able to prevent Sept 11, and I don't see a big hue and cry to lynch the metal detector jockeys and their bosses.
Well, since the government knew about it beforehand they could have prevented it but chose not to. This is not conspiracy theory or speculation, since they warned many VIPs not to fly that day.
Imagine being able to walk into a crowded, noisy bar and be able to have a whispered conversation with the person standing next to you. Neither of you would be able to hear the rest of the bar, and the rest of the bar would be unable to hear you.
Now this has potential. Is it discreet enough that you could keep it hidden? Imagine, you walk up to that attractive person and start chatting. They aren't aware of the device and think that they're having some sort of supernatural experience. This would do a lot for your success ratio.
... really solemn-looking men in bad suits and dark sunglasses that smelled like pistachios.
Why, pray tell, would they smell of pistachios?
The backups are NOT supposed to be used at the same time as the originals. If you sell the original, you are supposed to destroy the backups.
Without paying the extra tax, this is true.
The point which you missed is that they are paying this tax essentially for the right to "pirate" as much as they want.
I wonder how it will go with such a broken Java plugin support?
Well, in 0.9.9 the Java plugin installed with no problem and seems to work perfectly so far.
hey, don't you go talking bad about Poway! the Poweians might hear you and make it illegal for you go enter the town or something. lol. (i live here. i mean there. whereever.)
;-)
If you live in Poway, then you should know that you are referred to as "Powegians".
It just sounds better. I live in PB. They call us lots of things, but it's just jealousy
Besides, the point here is not that the US will use Nuclear Weapons. The point is that it CAN use them and that it WILL use them if chemical/bio/etc agents are used against its people.
No, this is exactly *not* the point. US policy has been to retaliate to nukes, bios or chems with nukes ever since we've had nukes.
The point of this new policy is that "We can and will use nukes if we damn well please."
Please try to read all 3 of the cases in which the US will nuke. The third one implicitly says "whenever".
The more I hear about AOL, the more it seems like their users actually *are* stupid. At the least they are painfully ignorant.
They are paying for a service and then getting bombarded by ads. If it was a free service it would be one thing, but they are already paying.
Then to have pop ups whenever they log on?!? That is utterly fucking ridiculous. I have never heard of another ISP that you pay for that clutters up your screen with ads. I visit lots of sites on the web that have ads pop up and otherwise,but they only appear once I choose to visit that site and I have the option of not visiting it if it bothers me. AOL users don't seem to have this choice. By choosing to use AOL they are paying twice. This is dumb.
Of course, since we haven't managed to send any manned ships outside of Earth orbit for decades, this is all moot...
;-)
Well, technically the moon is in earth orbit so we've never actually done this
and the method of figuring out how to type a password was nonintuitive.
This one comes under the heading of stupid user as he suggested.
Click button. Computer says you can't do that, click the lock to do what you want to do.
He went all over the computer looking for a way to do it and then R'dTFM.
So clicking the icon might be unintuitive, but it was clearly recognized as such which is why the dialog told him explicitly what to do.
Um, how do you say "vi"?
I pronounce it exactly how it's spelled, "six".
More people are killed by speeding drivers than are murdered.
You didn't show any source for this, but I'm sure you could find one.
The issue I have with this is how many of these accidents were caused not by the speeder blamed for it, but by the person driving 50 on the freeway and pulling over even farther to the left without looking.
I have seen many accidents caused by these people.
Too careful is more dangerous than too fast up to a point.
Pepsi didn't make their soda out of a base of Coke, they didn't extract something from Coke and use it in Pepsi,
Nor does Bnetd use something of Blizzards. It is a clean implementation.
In this case, they are using software based off Blizzard material,
No again. they are using software they wrote. They reverse engineered the Battlenet server protocol which is legal even with the DMCA since reverse enginering for the purpose of interoperability is completely legal.
ya thats right, you've just been made an ass of, now why don't YOU think before you make a post.
I think it's clear who is the ass here. Also your complete lack of understanding of the issue is apparent.
If it's something ILLEGAL and cuts sales, that's a different story.
That much is certainly true, however this is NOT illegal.
copying the game and giving it away is illegal, but making a clone of Battlenet is NOT illegal.
So Blizzard going after someone giving away their games is justified, but this is not what the discussion is about.
Ah yes, a company shutting down a site that can potentially drastically cut their sales? How awful. Let's boycott them forever.
So you're saying that it is ok for Coke to shut down Pepsi's web site?
Before you shout "moron", make sure your argument doesn't qualify you.
This post, while not adding to the discussion in any useful way, is just trying to get it to #1.
Do we really want to regulate how/who a political party can nominaate for office?
;-)
Your point is taken, but I personally feel that we should just outlaw parties. So regulating the hell out of it couldn't do much worse than we're getting now
We'd have Pat Buchanans running against Ralph Naders, rather than Bushs against Gores.
You say this like it would be a bad thing.
In this case, Buchanan would lose big, Nader would win by a landslide, and we would be much better off than we would be with either Bush or Gore.
Bush or Gore is no choice at all. They're both dirty as hell and bad people to boot.
not letting them ask your party affiliation wouldn't solve the problem of letting people intentionally screwing up primaries of parties they oppose by voting for candidates farthest from center. Opening primaries opens them for that risk.
This is only a problem for that party though.
It could be a very good thing for the country.
What if I, as a voter, would be ok with having candidate A or B or C in office, but it is very important to everything I believe in that candidate D is not elected.
If Candidate D is the most likely choice for one party, then why would it be a screw up if I helped him not get chosen?
Supreme Court justices aren't for sale for the sole reason that they don't have to fund election campaigns.
This is a frighteningly ignorant statement.
Since they are not up for election and have lifetime terms, they are free to accept all the bribes they want, support the people who are paying them at the expense of The People, and never fear for their jobs.
Elected officials have to be cleaner. Sure, they need reelection money, but if they go directly against the will of all their constituents (assuming everyone else agreed on anything) they are gone regardless of how much they have in their warchests.
Bowies from this family include Rezin Pleasant Bowie, Jr (the inventor of the Bowie knife, also correctly pronunced boo-ee), and Col. James Bowie who died defending the Alamo.
Amazing what you can learn here.
I thought the Alamo Bowie was the knife Bowie.
I was trying to be moderate in my estimation. Thinking in realistic terms would just depress me...
;-)
Sorry, Bro. Not trying to bring you down
If it's any consolation, I have no evidence to back up my claim and was most likely exaggerating.