How does the fact that someone misquoted a document (in this case by claiming that it is policy, when the document clearly states otherwise) underscore an inherent problem with said document?
I'm talking about the whole "should you edit your own bio or not" problem.
While I think Mr. Wales may have acted questionably, this summary makes him sound like a policy violator. Let's take a look, shall we?
Summary says: "Wired News reports that Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has edited
his own entry in the online encyclopedia at least 18 times, in violation of
Wikipedia's policy on autobiography."
And if you READ the "policy", it says: "However, it is not policy." Don't flame me, I like Wikipedia, too. But this underscores yet again the inherent problem with the site.
HP No Longer Exclusively Supporting Blue-Ray Saturday December 17, @02:53AM Journey Towards The Center of the Earth Friday December 16, @10:59AM Windows Gets Independent Security Certification Thursday December 15, @07:14AM
#4: When you're completely stumped, make sure there isn't something inside gunking up the works.
Huh? Maybe I'm just inexperienced, but what can a computer full of dust do to make it not work? I have only seen one instance of this. A fan was clogged and stopped working and the chip under it overheated and died. Is there anything else besides this type of thing dust can cause? The only moving parts in a computer that aren't contained are fans.
I was not very impressed with this article. I've never done this before but would like to attempt to do so. Unfortunately, there are not enough pictures and of what there are, they are not especially clear. Also, the article is FULL of misspellings and typos. I understand that may not change the steps you need to take, but it greatly decreases my confidence in the author's intelligence. Sorry, my $0.02.
I find it interesting that so many people (not just in this thread, but in general) think that the Old and the New Testaments depict two different Gods. The old, vengeful and mean, the new, loving and forgiving. Do you realize that there are FAR more references in the Old Testament that reference God's love than in the new? I won't type out the whole verse to keep from annoying people, but these references:
Exodus 34:6, Numbers 14:18, Nehemiah 9:17, Psalm 86:15, Psalm 103:8, Psalm 145:8, Joel 2:13, Jonah 4:2, and Nahum 1:3 ALL say something like this: "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness..."
Let's take the awful city of Ninevah at the time. We all know the account of Jonah and the whale whether or not you choose to accept it as truth. God cared for that city and did not want to see it destroyed. Jonah fought tooth and nail with God about going and telling that city of God's love because he KNEW that if he told them and they repented, God would show His love to them. Jonah WANTED them to die. But in the end, God told him, "But Nineveh has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left, and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that great city?" Yet again, we see God's love and his relenting.
And if there is any question left as to whether the God of the Old Testament is "loving or vengeful", I present to you Nehemiah 9:5b-31 with emphasis added. I am not trying to spam the thread with tons of text, but I think this really gets the point across:
"Blessed be your glorious name, and may it be exalted above all blessing and praise. You alone are
the LORD . You made the heavens, even the highest heavens, and all their starry host, the earth and
all that is on it, the seas and all that is in them. You give life to everything, and the multitudes
of heaven worship you. "You are the LORD God, who chose Abram and brought him out of Ur of the
Chaldeans and named him Abraham. You found his heart faithful to you, and you made a covenant with
him to give to his descendants the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Jebusites
and Girgashites. You have kept your promise because you are righteous. "You saw the suffering of our
forefathers in Egypt; you heard their cry at the Red Sea. You sent miraculous signs and wonders
against Pharaoh, against all his officials and all the people of his land, for you knew how
arrogantly the Egyptians treated them. You made a name for yourself, which remains to this day. You
divided the sea before them, so that they passed through it on dry ground, but you hurled their
pursuers into the depths, like a stone into mighty waters. By day you led them with a pillar of
cloud, and by night with a pillar of fire to give them light on the way they were to take. "You came
down on Mount Sinai; you spoke to them from heaven. You gave them regulations and laws that are just
and right, and decrees and commands that are good. You made known to them your holy Sabbath and gave
them commands, decrees and laws through your servant Moses. In their hunger you gave them bread from
heaven and in their thirst you brought them water from the rock; you told them to go in and take
possession of the land you had sworn with uplifted hand to give them. "But they, our forefathers,
became arrogant and stiff-necked, and did not obey your commands. They refused to listen and failed
to remember the miracles you performed among them. They became stiff-necked and in their rebellion
appointed a leader in order to return to their slavery. But you are a forgiving God, gracious and
compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love. Therefore you did not desert them, even when
they cast for themselves an image of a calf and said, 'This is your god, who brought you up out of
Egypt,' or when they committed awful blasphemies. "Because of your great compassion you did not
abandon them in the desert. By day the pillar of cloud
The incident does raise important questions about Google as a desktop software vendor and its plans for rolling out future security fixes, said MacDonald.
I question Mr. MacDonald's credibility. If this is the same gentleman I'm thinking of, he's an older man who has a farm...or at least had one.
How much do you want to bet the second that car hits the road, people will be sueing the car maker for distracting them into a wreck? "Honest officer, I ran into the back of him because a flashing car caught my attention!" And don't think they won't win the suit. Where I live, there is a local radio station with a guy on it named "Stupid Mike". He gets paid to go out in public and do stupid things for entertainment. His latest stunt involved standing on the side of the road with no shirt on and advertisers bought space on his chest. The cops stopped and told him he could stand on the corner of the road like that because he was distracting drivers and he would causea wreck.
While I understand many/.'ers don't believe there is anything wrong with pornography, and don't flame me for having my own opinion, I do. That said, I also believe that there are enough people out there who also believe it's not right or at least want to protect there kids from it. So we should accomodate them.
Yes, routing porn images and text through specific ports is a joke. That would take such a major reworking of our present systems that it's not even funny. But what about TLD's? I have long thought that if all porn sites (and yes, "porn" can be defined) were hosted from sites with a TLD of.XXX, it would make blocking incredibly easy...and probably put all "Net Nanny" type companies out of business....for better or worse. The problem is who is going to force porn sites to be restricted to.XXX?
Oh, and if the people who WANT porn have a problem with this, why complain? It makes it easier for you to find it. Just google site:.xxx
Why in the world would a person want their MOUSE to notify them when they get an Email?
The monitor? OK.
Speakers? Sure.
Mouse!? Come on. What would it do? Jiggle slightly?
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, thanks for your comment. It was useful! Just wanted to tell you I got a good laugh out of this:
It peeled off in a single solid rectangle you could have cut boot insoles out of.
How does the fact that someone misquoted a document (in this case by claiming that it is policy, when the document clearly states otherwise) underscore an inherent problem with said document?
I'm talking about the whole "should you edit your own bio or not" problem.
While I think Mr. Wales may have acted questionably, this summary makes him sound like a policy violator. Let's take a look, shall we?
Summary says: "Wired News reports that Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has edited his own entry in the online encyclopedia at least 18 times, in violation of Wikipedia's policy on autobiography."
And if you READ the "policy", it says: "However, it is not policy." Don't flame me, I like Wikipedia, too. But this underscores yet again the inherent problem with the site.
Too bad MS didn't think of this sooner. They would have avoided a lot of problems.
HP No Longer Exclusively Supporting Blue-Ray Saturday December 17, @02:53AM
Journey Towards The Center of the Earth Friday December 16, @10:59AM
Windows Gets Independent Security Certification Thursday December 15, @07:14AM
linumax is getting to be like BB.
Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?
#4: When you're completely stumped, make sure there isn't something inside gunking up the works.
Huh? Maybe I'm just inexperienced, but what can a computer full of dust do to make it not work? I have only seen one instance of this. A fan was clogged and stopped working and the chip under it overheated and died. Is there anything else besides this type of thing dust can cause? The only moving parts in a computer that aren't contained are fans.
Play-Doh was invented by Noah McVicker and Joseph McVicker...
who shot JFK...
Just had to say...that was funny!
I was not very impressed with this article. I've never done this before but would like to attempt to do so. Unfortunately, there are not enough pictures and of what there are, they are not especially clear. Also, the article is FULL of misspellings and typos. I understand that may not change the steps you need to take, but it greatly decreases my confidence in the author's intelligence. Sorry, my $0.02.
I find it interesting that so many people (not just in this thread, but in general) think that the Old and the New Testaments depict two different Gods. The old, vengeful and mean, the new, loving and forgiving. Do you realize that there are FAR more references in the Old Testament that reference God's love than in the new? I won't type out the whole verse to keep from annoying people, but these references:
Exodus 34:6, Numbers 14:18, Nehemiah 9:17, Psalm 86:15, Psalm 103:8, Psalm 145:8, Joel 2:13, Jonah 4:2, and Nahum 1:3 ALL say something like this: "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness..."
Let's take the awful city of Ninevah at the time. We all know the account of Jonah and the whale whether or not you choose to accept it as truth. God cared for that city and did not want to see it destroyed. Jonah fought tooth and nail with God about going and telling that city of God's love because he KNEW that if he told them and they repented, God would show His love to them. Jonah WANTED them to die. But in the end, God told him, "But Nineveh has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left, and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that great city?" Yet again, we see God's love and his relenting.
And if there is any question left as to whether the God of the Old Testament is "loving or vengeful", I present to you Nehemiah 9:5b-31 with emphasis added. I am not trying to spam the thread with tons of text, but I think this really gets the point across:
"Blessed be your glorious name, and may it be exalted above all blessing and praise. You alone are the LORD . You made the heavens, even the highest heavens, and all their starry host, the earth and all that is on it, the seas and all that is in them. You give life to everything, and the multitudes of heaven worship you. "You are the LORD God, who chose Abram and brought him out of Ur of the Chaldeans and named him Abraham. You found his heart faithful to you, and you made a covenant with him to give to his descendants the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Jebusites and Girgashites. You have kept your promise because you are righteous. "You saw the suffering of our forefathers in Egypt; you heard their cry at the Red Sea. You sent miraculous signs and wonders against Pharaoh, against all his officials and all the people of his land, for you knew how arrogantly the Egyptians treated them. You made a name for yourself, which remains to this day. You divided the sea before them, so that they passed through it on dry ground, but you hurled their pursuers into the depths, like a stone into mighty waters. By day you led them with a pillar of cloud, and by night with a pillar of fire to give them light on the way they were to take. "You came down on Mount Sinai; you spoke to them from heaven. You gave them regulations and laws that are just and right, and decrees and commands that are good. You made known to them your holy Sabbath and gave them commands, decrees and laws through your servant Moses. In their hunger you gave them bread from heaven and in their thirst you brought them water from the rock; you told them to go in and take possession of the land you had sworn with uplifted hand to give them. "But they, our forefathers, became arrogant and stiff-necked, and did not obey your commands. They refused to listen and failed to remember the miracles you performed among them. They became stiff-necked and in their rebellion appointed a leader in order to return to their slavery. But you are a forgiving God, gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love. Therefore you did not desert them, even when they cast for themselves an image of a calf and said, 'This is your god, who brought you up out of Egypt,' or when they committed awful blasphemies. "Because of your great compassion you did not abandon them in the desert. By day the pillar of cloud
...and AOL user's are idiots. No news here.
The incident does raise important questions about Google as a desktop software vendor and its plans for rolling out future security fixes, said MacDonald.
I question Mr. MacDonald's credibility. If this is the same gentleman I'm thinking of, he's an older man who has a farm...or at least had one.
I think they are trying to reinvent the wheel here...
How much do you want to bet the second that car hits the road, people will be sueing the car maker for distracting them into a wreck? "Honest officer, I ran into the back of him because a flashing car caught my attention!" And don't think they won't win the suit. Where I live, there is a local radio station with a guy on it named "Stupid Mike". He gets paid to go out in public and do stupid things for entertainment. His latest stunt involved standing on the side of the road with no shirt on and advertisers bought space on his chest. The cops stopped and told him he could stand on the corner of the road like that because he was distracting drivers and he would causea wreck.
What morons.
Touche. I agree. I'm a geek, so my first thought was technological, not philosophical...but you're right.
How hard is that? Stateful TCP Inspecting firewalls come to mind...
Only 61538? Is that the unallocated count? Because last I checked, there were 65535 ports.
While I understand many /.'ers don't believe there is anything wrong with pornography, and don't flame me for having my own opinion, I do. That said, I also believe that there are enough people out there who also believe it's not right or at least want to protect there kids from it. So we should accomodate them.
.XXX, it would make blocking incredibly easy...and probably put all "Net Nanny" type companies out of business....for better or worse. The problem is who is going to force porn sites to be restricted to .XXX?
Yes, routing porn images and text through specific ports is a joke. That would take such a major reworking of our present systems that it's not even funny. But what about TLD's? I have long thought that if all porn sites (and yes, "porn" can be defined) were hosted from sites with a TLD of
Oh, and if the people who WANT porn have a problem with this, why complain? It makes it easier for you to find it. Just google site:.xxx
and when you get spammed it breaks your wrist.
Why in the world would a person want their MOUSE to notify them when they get an Email? The monitor? OK. Speakers? Sure. Mouse!? Come on. What would it do? Jiggle slightly?
On my next birthday, when my wife asks me what kind of cake I want, it's going to be Urinal Cake.
Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?
As far as XP goes, don't think that's going to be a hot methodology for too much longer.
I'm interested in your opinion...why do you believe that to be true?
I SMOKE THESE THINGS TO RUIN MY LUNGS! Would you stop trying to make them safe?!