It isn't about features or technology it is about mindset.
Oh how right you are about that. However, the point you bring up in you post directly runs opposite of the point that you are trying to make.
The biggest thing about cell phones is that most people change out phones every two to three years. The iPhone is no different. I've seen many of friends ditch the iPhone after their contract was up. It's no different than when I ditched my LG last year as soon as my contract was up. People's "mindset" as you would call it is to junk the phone they've got every time their contract is up. iPhone is no different. It's not about apps or technical merit. It's about advertising. Right now Apple has got word of mouth on their side and Google is doing its best with their TV ads to counter that. AT&T dropping the exclusive part of iPhone sounds like Apple try to make their phone more like the Driod. Everywhere. Beside, the iPhone has shown how shit the AT&T network is and AT&T is fighting an uphill battle with that. So, yeah I think the honeymoon between AT&T and Apple is over, burned, and now they are tossing bricks at each other. Soon we may see them fighting over custody of the kids but who knows?
So, I would not say that Apple has a better phone because of apps, or what have you. They just have better marketing. Also, most apps are tested for the iPhone because it has the most market share at the current time, but some, it is a slow growing trend, commercial API for cellular devices are becoming cross API. Think of it like the toolkits that people like EA use to code for PS3 and XBOX 360 at the same time. Eventually that's exactly what we will see in the mobile market. At that point it is pretty moot about the apps issue and who is building what for what.
When it come to cellphones be damned the technical merit. Most people buy whatever looks cool on the TV. You'd be an idiot to think otherwise.
No but how about a balance between the two. Repos for what most people want. PGP signed debs for the 3rd parties. Straight deb for all those feeling frisky. It's not hard to warn people that, "Hey you're installing a unsigned package, chances are this will ruin your computer, sure you want to do that?" If a third party wants to distribute packages the least they can do is self-sign (bottom end), get a real cert (higher end).
The inherent problem with the iPhone is that you can only go to one store to buy apps (namely iTunes). With Repos you can pick and choose which stores you trust and which you don't. Much like how I choose if I want to buy software from BigBoxMart or BestStolen. The Internet in general could (since I am using a store analogy apparently) be seen as buying stuff off the street. Yeah, the stuff looks cool and at these bargain prices you can't beat. But I do need to exercise some caution when I flash my wallet to some guy hanging out the back of a van.
So yes, I agree, I'm not too hip on the one store to rule them all policy. But I do believe that the store concept actually has some utility to offer if given the ability to go to another store should I so choose later. I obviously don't want to exclude the random vendor on the street that is selling hand made crafts, or even the random kisok by the bus stop selling phones. I do however what to keep in mind the burly looking thug over there selling "Snoby" Radios. I think it is all a matter of getting people to get inside a way of thinking.
To me, and that only applies to me, Mac OSX screams "Hey buy more shiny Apple stuff" (Security by insulating ones self by coolness). Linux says to me "Hey subscribe to a Repo because we are always changing stuff and you want to have the latest build." (Security by trust of subscription [or maybe sheer geekness]). Windows just looks like, "Hey we're cool with everyone, you want herpes? No problem we're cool with that. Want to do really neat spreadsheets? We're cool with that too." (Insecurity by being a software whore. We're just trying to please everyone.)
Microsoft ended up in hot water for tying a !@#$ing BROWSER to their operating system and everyone cheered for their defeat.
Therein you missed the parent's point. Apple is not in the business of software, they are in the business of hardware. Microsoft is in the business of software. If Apple was to try to use their hardware to remove HP and Dell from the market then, "yes" you would have something that looks like an antitrust case. Microsoft got hauled into court over the fact that a software company was trying to use it's software to remove other software vendors. Please note the word software being repeated in that last sentence.
Now let's try that with say Apple. Apple should be hauled into court because a hardware company is trying to use it's software to remove other hardware.
Nope, sorry, doesn't seem to hold water quite as well as you would have hoped. What you are arguing is almost like trying to sue some CD player manufacture for not allowing the ability to load your own ROM image on their chips. Understand that the first Macs had ROM images for the OS, Apple has not moved away from this thinking of OS = machine. Are you going to sue Apple for not allowing you any way to replace the chips in an early Macintosh with your own?
Trust me, I think Apple is pure evil and Steve Jobs sold his soul and hides the scar where it was extracted with those trendy Turtlenecks. But you are going about your argument in totally the wrong way and as an Apple hater to another, let's not do any disservice by making Monopoly claims by argument of the OS. Apple = hardware company, I would have thought the 70s would have shown why static images by the hardware vendor were such a bad idea.
Well to me, watching ads during a recorded show usually equals; getting up going to the bathroom and then coming back to skip the rest of the ads. I don't know about everyone else, but ads are useful as an excuse to start ignoring the TV for ten or so minutes. If I don't need such a break from the TV I'll just skip the ads.
Yes, yes, I know about the almighty pause button and I use it when I need to break from the TV for thirty or so minutes (pull dinner out, talk to children, eat dinner, go on walk, check snail-mail box, watch sunset, enjoy cup of coffee on patio, enjoy what life is really all about, etc...) but usually the power button is used for that purpose rather than the pause. I don't know about everyone else, but I just can't seem to stand watching today's TV programming for more than twenty minutes at a time (it's not that I don't like the content, otherwise I wouldn't be watching the show, just something about how it just isn't the pace that real life usually works at) even without the ads, which 90% of the time most shows fit nicely into, but every so often I need to break a show into pieces.
For those looking to get Ubuntu 9.10 on a ATI grfx card with a R600/700 chipset, you may want to take a look at the latest drivers from AMD. As opposed to the usual Envyng or Ubuntu provided drivers. There are a few people who are having a bit of weirdness with the ones shipped there (nothing big just a bit of oddities).
I'm still looking forward to the advancement of the experimental support that X.org has added to the new Xserver (1.7 me thinks) for R600/700 chipsets, go open source drivers FTW!
I have a MiFi that I use when I go on business related trips. Usually it is a small party of two or three people that come with me on trips (actually I am coming with them but that's just a matter of perspective.) I tote the MiFi device and when we're somewhere where there is no WiFi (I know sounds hard to come by these days but they do exist) we just slap this little device on the table and right onto our VPN we go.
They simplify the whole thing greatly and that is one of the big appeals that drive this type of device in my (actually someone else's I just work for them, see perspective above) company, simplicity. I think that is what underlines a lot of technological choices where boxen are the alternatives. Some people have time to maintain boxen for every single thing, others do not. I prefer my Linux router over any store bought device any day, but that's because that's what I like to spend time on. At work I don't get to have a lot of time so anything that simplifies the process is welcomed.
I see a lot of Google's products needing the oh so familiar Beta label again.
Seriously, Google's offering is not without it's serious drawbacks, and I suspect that the good stuff is to be had from actual paid services. However, this kind of letting crap slip where people can spoof the name of a valid member is a serious Alpha quality flaw. What's the point of identifying anyone, if everyone can pretend to be everyone else? I mean that is the actually concept of identity, to uniquely label something as different as other things.
I think Google is trying to take on more than it can handle and it is beginning to really show now that they've removed the excuse of "Beta".
Since we know that Wikipedia lies all the time:-) I've included the link straight to the FAQ on Slackware.
I think the next move will be to start making the release versions match up to the date it was released. Slackware 13.10.04. However, I'm a big supporter of Hexadecimal release numbers: Slackware D.A.4 FTW! However we should make it a point to avoid a 190.11.10-13 release, just too cheesy.
I have to agree with the grandparent. VASMIR is old news as far as cutting edge technology. Really, why not put out an article about how awesome Blu-Ray is (rolls eyes)? So let's look pass the whole VASMIR thing and start looking at the applications themselves, "to be used on ISS in 2013" strikes me as the most useful piece of information in the summary. VASMIR technology is getting better and better every day, but so is diesel and bio-diesel technology.
At some point, continuing to beat the gong on something starts to make it look like those "Wow" commercials from the Windows Vista days, or all those promises of action during the campaigning days here in the United States.
Between the calls that the US President is the worst yet, the stories that we are living the the darkest of days, the we've already cover that but we'll cover it again articles, and now the premature calls of the end of some technology; I'm having a really difficult time keeping up with the number of shots I should be doing. I see now why drinking games were invented. To keep all the repeated things sounding fresh.
Microtransactions aren't really included in that model.
Says who? This is where our dated laws really show. Income is income and until we start looking at changing the law to better match what the population thinks is income, we're at a stalemate on the issue. I think this just highlights the lack of change that is going on in our country (US), I can't speak for anyone else.
Because there are many vendors in the home computer market. Such as Dell, HP, Gateway, and so forth. Remember government labels things differently than say how the rest of the world would label it. As far as many regulators see it Apple = Dell = HP = Gateway...
The thing that gets you on anti-competitive charges, or at least one of the things, is how you behave in a given market. Apple created OSX, much how Microsoft created Office (I know it is a OS versus a piece of software, I'll cover that in a bit.) No one expects Apple or Microsoft to share their product with the competition. That would be like saying Ford should share their blueprints with GM. No, but Ford can't keep GM from building a car. Likewise, Apple created OSX, they don't have to share their code with anyone, just like Microsoft doesn't have to share the code to Office. The matter at hand is the code. Apple can not prevent Microsoft from coding (unless it is patented but that's not asking to open a big can of worms from "teh Slashdot" crowd) that would be anti-competitive.
Microsoft is free to implement any of Mac OSX's UI features that aren't covered by the twenty or so patents (just the obvious and really cool looking UI elements, they hold a ton of patents on their UI in general) they hold (that excludes MS from ever making a dock).
People are free to install Mac OSX so long as they agree to the licensing agreement, which prohibits you from installing on anything but a Mac.
IBM is just straight up refusing to license anything to competitors, they refuse you to make clone hardware, and deny first sale doctrine on their software products.
What Apple does falls within the bad but it is legal area (I'm sorry, I love Apple but the company is evil, I'll let the MacBois get me). What IBM is doing is pushing people out of their way and stone walling people. Apple is at the very least giving you a license, it just says you have no rights.
Trust me I don't understand it all too well either but I had a lawyer friend briefly explain it to me, after he was done I walked away with the knowledge that our legal system is a cluster fuck.
Unfortunately, a matter/anti matter reactor is not enough to create an Alcubierre drive
Hell the reaction that they are carrying out yields in the best of times about 500 KeV * 2 (two, due to laws about linear momentum and energy) per reaction. Say we have about million reactions (a million electrons annihilating a million positrons) That only yields somewhere around 7 to 8 x 10^-8 joules * 2 of energy. Hell, I can't even remember what the resulting particle would be in this case so I'm going to just guess it is a photon, really high energy photon so I'm guessing a gamma ray.
Point being the reaction falls incredibly shy of even powering a light bulb at a million reactions. One hour of a 60 watt bulb = 60 * 36000 = 216000 joules. In fact that is like (2 or 3 * 10^18) / 2 reactions needed just to power one light bulb for one hour.
I think we've got a way to go before we even use this method for any kind of drive. Also, I'm not even sure that my numbers or my physics are correct. I'm thinking that they are but I'm still waking up, anyone care to chime in?
Okay now correct me if I'm wrong on this, but if I remember correctly, Positrons and Electrons are in the group of Leptons. More generally they are a type of fermion. I understand that fermions make up Baryons and so forth, but aren't we getting ahead of ourselves when we call this reactor a "matter-anitmatter" reactor? Wouldn't it be more fitting to call it a "particle-antiparticle" reactor?
So maybe they don't need mindless entertainment like TV
I've always advocated the construction of human sized hamster wheels in prison. We could hook them up to a generator and have inmates spend four or six hours, broken into three shift, generate energy. I was so pitching this idea back in 99 and everyone called me crazy, well now that everyone is on this green energy kick, who's crazy now?!
Exactly how does that advance anything that has been said up to this point? Do you even know what incongruity means? I'd like to know how you place that word into what I've said about the article here.
You know what? Never mind, after reading your drivel here, I'd rather not speak to a complete moron. Oh what, let me clear that up for you, seeing how drivel can mean to salivate. It also means mindless chatter. I'm sure, however, you can go out and find a couple other dozen meanings for it. Just so you can feel big about pointing out how wrong or incorrect I am about whatever it is that you're talking about.
And finally let me wrap it up in saying. I suck at the English language, it is no secret what-so-ever. Is that what you are looking for? Because my follow up is that I didn't write an article, I am merely commenting on it. Are you to say that people who do not have a perfect working mindset for a given subject matter are not allowed to comment on the subject given to the public? I'm just curious.
It's ironic that someone who portrays himself to be an expert on linguistic devices couldn't even get the language itself right.
Even more amusing is someone who assumes another person's position.
Using just one definition and discarding the rest in an attempt to prove a point?
I love this argument. Wait, wait let me respond. When you actually start opening your mouth to show the world how absolutely dim witted you are, do you mean all of the meanings to the words that come out of your mouth, or do those words just mean one and thing and you are trying to convey that one idea? Pardon me for giving the finger to an absolute ass-hole.
More like how important it is to AT&T not to have network neutrality codified into regulation.
This is incredible true for most industries. It's a shame to see how most people miss this as being a huge point in turns in an industry. The liquor industry had an unspoken rule of not advertising directly on television for quite sometime. They didn't want any government entity jumping up and down mad and threaten regulation. It wasn't until the middle 90's that a couple of liquor companies actually tried advertisements on television. A couple of states filed objections to the FCC about the commercials but in the end no one really cared that they were advertising liquor on TV. However, liquor companies still tread with caution when it comes to this media, you'll always see beer commercials out number liquor commercials three/four to one . Ultimately they don't want to end up like tobacco and television.
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't about features or technology it is about mindset.
Oh how right you are about that. However, the point you bring up in you post directly runs opposite of the point that you are trying to make.
The biggest thing about cell phones is that most people change out phones every two to three years. The iPhone is no different. I've seen many of friends ditch the iPhone after their contract was up. It's no different than when I ditched my LG last year as soon as my contract was up. People's "mindset" as you would call it is to junk the phone they've got every time their contract is up. iPhone is no different. It's not about apps or technical merit. It's about advertising. Right now Apple has got word of mouth on their side and Google is doing its best with their TV ads to counter that. AT&T dropping the exclusive part of iPhone sounds like Apple try to make their phone more like the Driod. Everywhere. Beside, the iPhone has shown how shit the AT&T network is and AT&T is fighting an uphill battle with that. So, yeah I think the honeymoon between AT&T and Apple is over, burned, and now they are tossing bricks at each other. Soon we may see them fighting over custody of the kids but who knows?
So, I would not say that Apple has a better phone because of apps, or what have you. They just have better marketing. Also, most apps are tested for the iPhone because it has the most market share at the current time, but some, it is a slow growing trend, commercial API for cellular devices are becoming cross API. Think of it like the toolkits that people like EA use to code for PS3 and XBOX 360 at the same time. Eventually that's exactly what we will see in the mobile market. At that point it is pretty moot about the apps issue and who is building what for what.
When it come to cellphones be damned the technical merit. Most people buy whatever looks cool on the TV. You'd be an idiot to think otherwise.
Oooooh! I love Mad Libs. Someone suggest a verb!
I accidentally flushed the DRM keys for the movie... is this bad for __(direct object)__?
No but how about a balance between the two. Repos for what most people want. PGP signed debs for the 3rd parties. Straight deb for all those feeling frisky. It's not hard to warn people that, "Hey you're installing a unsigned package, chances are this will ruin your computer, sure you want to do that?" If a third party wants to distribute packages the least they can do is self-sign (bottom end), get a real cert (higher end).
The inherent problem with the iPhone is that you can only go to one store to buy apps (namely iTunes). With Repos you can pick and choose which stores you trust and which you don't. Much like how I choose if I want to buy software from BigBoxMart or BestStolen. The Internet in general could (since I am using a store analogy apparently) be seen as buying stuff off the street. Yeah, the stuff looks cool and at these bargain prices you can't beat. But I do need to exercise some caution when I flash my wallet to some guy hanging out the back of a van.
So yes, I agree, I'm not too hip on the one store to rule them all policy. But I do believe that the store concept actually has some utility to offer if given the ability to go to another store should I so choose later. I obviously don't want to exclude the random vendor on the street that is selling hand made crafts, or even the random kisok by the bus stop selling phones. I do however what to keep in mind the burly looking thug over there selling "Snoby" Radios. I think it is all a matter of getting people to get inside a way of thinking.
To me, and that only applies to me, Mac OSX screams "Hey buy more shiny Apple stuff" (Security by insulating ones self by coolness). Linux says to me "Hey subscribe to a Repo because we are always changing stuff and you want to have the latest build." (Security by trust of subscription [or maybe sheer geekness]). Windows just looks like, "Hey we're cool with everyone, you want herpes? No problem we're cool with that. Want to do really neat spreadsheets? We're cool with that too." (Insecurity by being a software whore. We're just trying to please everyone.)
Microsoft ended up in hot water for tying a !@#$ing BROWSER to their operating system and everyone cheered for their defeat.
Therein you missed the parent's point. Apple is not in the business of software, they are in the business of hardware. Microsoft is in the business of software. If Apple was to try to use their hardware to remove HP and Dell from the market then, "yes" you would have something that looks like an antitrust case. Microsoft got hauled into court over the fact that a software company was trying to use it's software to remove other software vendors. Please note the word software being repeated in that last sentence.
Now let's try that with say Apple. Apple should be hauled into court because a hardware company is trying to use it's software to remove other hardware.
Nope, sorry, doesn't seem to hold water quite as well as you would have hoped. What you are arguing is almost like trying to sue some CD player manufacture for not allowing the ability to load your own ROM image on their chips. Understand that the first Macs had ROM images for the OS, Apple has not moved away from this thinking of OS = machine. Are you going to sue Apple for not allowing you any way to replace the chips in an early Macintosh with your own?
Trust me, I think Apple is pure evil and Steve Jobs sold his soul and hides the scar where it was extracted with those trendy Turtlenecks. But you are going about your argument in totally the wrong way and as an Apple hater to another, let's not do any disservice by making Monopoly claims by argument of the OS. Apple = hardware company, I would have thought the 70s would have shown why static images by the hardware vendor were such a bad idea.
Well to me, watching ads during a recorded show usually equals; getting up going to the bathroom and then coming back to skip the rest of the ads. I don't know about everyone else, but ads are useful as an excuse to start ignoring the TV for ten or so minutes. If I don't need such a break from the TV I'll just skip the ads.
Yes, yes, I know about the almighty pause button and I use it when I need to break from the TV for thirty or so minutes (pull dinner out, talk to children, eat dinner, go on walk, check snail-mail box, watch sunset, enjoy cup of coffee on patio, enjoy what life is really all about, etc...) but usually the power button is used for that purpose rather than the pause. I don't know about everyone else, but I just can't seem to stand watching today's TV programming for more than twenty minutes at a time (it's not that I don't like the content, otherwise I wouldn't be watching the show, just something about how it just isn't the pace that real life usually works at) even without the ads, which 90% of the time most shows fit nicely into, but every so often I need to break a show into pieces.
Exactly, the new X.org drivers support 3D so you can enable compiz. You can see them in effect here. Remember that they are still experimental.
For those looking to get Ubuntu 9.10 on a ATI grfx card with a R600/700 chipset, you may want to take a look at the latest drivers from AMD. As opposed to the usual Envyng or Ubuntu provided drivers. There are a few people who are having a bit of weirdness with the ones shipped there (nothing big just a bit of oddities).
I'm still looking forward to the advancement of the experimental support that X.org has added to the new Xserver (1.7 me thinks) for R600/700 chipsets, go open source drivers FTW!
I have a MiFi that I use when I go on business related trips. Usually it is a small party of two or three people that come with me on trips (actually I am coming with them but that's just a matter of perspective.) I tote the MiFi device and when we're somewhere where there is no WiFi (I know sounds hard to come by these days but they do exist) we just slap this little device on the table and right onto our VPN we go.
They simplify the whole thing greatly and that is one of the big appeals that drive this type of device in my (actually someone else's I just work for them, see perspective above) company, simplicity. I think that is what underlines a lot of technological choices where boxen are the alternatives. Some people have time to maintain boxen for every single thing, others do not. I prefer my Linux router over any store bought device any day, but that's because that's what I like to spend time on. At work I don't get to have a lot of time so anything that simplifies the process is welcomed.
I see a lot of Google's products needing the oh so familiar Beta label again.
Seriously, Google's offering is not without it's serious drawbacks, and I suspect that the good stuff is to be had from actual paid services. However, this kind of letting crap slip where people can spoof the name of a valid member is a serious Alpha quality flaw. What's the point of identifying anyone, if everyone can pretend to be everyone else? I mean that is the actually concept of identity, to uniquely label something as different as other things.
I think Google is trying to take on more than it can handle and it is beginning to really show now that they've removed the excuse of "Beta".
Since we know that Wikipedia lies all the time :-) I've included the link straight to the FAQ on Slackware.
I think the next move will be to start making the release versions match up to the date it was released. Slackware 13.10.04. However, I'm a big supporter of Hexadecimal release numbers: Slackware D.A.4 FTW! However we should make it a point to avoid a 190.11.10-13 release, just too cheesy.
That's very informative. I wish I could mod you up. That's much better than TFA.
I have to agree with the grandparent. VASMIR is old news as far as cutting edge technology. Really, why not put out an article about how awesome Blu-Ray is (rolls eyes)? So let's look pass the whole VASMIR thing and start looking at the applications themselves, "to be used on ISS in 2013" strikes me as the most useful piece of information in the summary. VASMIR technology is getting better and better every day, but so is diesel and bio-diesel technology.
At some point, continuing to beat the gong on something starts to make it look like those "Wow" commercials from the Windows Vista days, or all those promises of action during the campaigning days here in the United States.
Between the calls that the US President is the worst yet, the stories that we are living the the darkest of days, the we've already cover that but we'll cover it again articles, and now the premature calls of the end of some technology; I'm having a really difficult time keeping up with the number of shots I should be doing. I see now why drinking games were invented. To keep all the repeated things sounding fresh.
Microtransactions aren't really included in that model.
Says who? This is where our dated laws really show. Income is income and until we start looking at changing the law to better match what the population thinks is income, we're at a stalemate on the issue. I think this just highlights the lack of change that is going on in our country (US), I can't speak for anyone else.
Because there are many vendors in the home computer market. Such as Dell, HP, Gateway, and so forth. Remember government labels things differently than say how the rest of the world would label it. As far as many regulators see it Apple = Dell = HP = Gateway...
The thing that gets you on anti-competitive charges, or at least one of the things, is how you behave in a given market. Apple created OSX, much how Microsoft created Office (I know it is a OS versus a piece of software, I'll cover that in a bit.) No one expects Apple or Microsoft to share their product with the competition. That would be like saying Ford should share their blueprints with GM. No, but Ford can't keep GM from building a car. Likewise, Apple created OSX, they don't have to share their code with anyone, just like Microsoft doesn't have to share the code to Office. The matter at hand is the code. Apple can not prevent Microsoft from coding (unless it is patented but that's not asking to open a big can of worms from "teh Slashdot" crowd) that would be anti-competitive.
Microsoft is free to implement any of Mac OSX's UI features that aren't covered by the twenty or so patents (just the obvious and really cool looking UI elements, they hold a ton of patents on their UI in general) they hold (that excludes MS from ever making a dock).
People are free to install Mac OSX so long as they agree to the licensing agreement, which prohibits you from installing on anything but a Mac.
IBM is just straight up refusing to license anything to competitors, they refuse you to make clone hardware, and deny first sale doctrine on their software products.
What Apple does falls within the bad but it is legal area (I'm sorry, I love Apple but the company is evil, I'll let the MacBois get me). What IBM is doing is pushing people out of their way and stone walling people. Apple is at the very least giving you a license, it just says you have no rights.
Trust me I don't understand it all too well either but I had a lawyer friend briefly explain it to me, after he was done I walked away with the knowledge that our legal system is a cluster fuck.
Unfortunately, a matter/anti matter reactor is not enough to create an Alcubierre drive
Hell the reaction that they are carrying out yields in the best of times about 500 KeV * 2 (two, due to laws about linear momentum and energy) per reaction. Say we have about million reactions (a million electrons annihilating a million positrons) That only yields somewhere around 7 to 8 x 10^-8 joules * 2 of energy. Hell, I can't even remember what the resulting particle would be in this case so I'm going to just guess it is a photon, really high energy photon so I'm guessing a gamma ray.
Point being the reaction falls incredibly shy of even powering a light bulb at a million reactions. One hour of a 60 watt bulb = 60 * 36000 = 216000 joules. In fact that is like (2 or 3 * 10^18) / 2 reactions needed just to power one light bulb for one hour.
I think we've got a way to go before we even use this method for any kind of drive. Also, I'm not even sure that my numbers or my physics are correct. I'm thinking that they are but I'm still waking up, anyone care to chime in?
Okay now correct me if I'm wrong on this, but if I remember correctly, Positrons and Electrons are in the group of Leptons. More generally they are a type of fermion. I understand that fermions make up Baryons and so forth, but aren't we getting ahead of ourselves when we call this reactor a "matter-anitmatter" reactor? Wouldn't it be more fitting to call it a "particle-antiparticle" reactor?
I'm cynical, but I'm not one to resort to name-calling when people tell me I'm wrong.
Well I am and you're still a dumb fuck.
So maybe they don't need mindless entertainment like TV
I've always advocated the construction of human sized hamster wheels in prison. We could hook them up to a generator and have inmates spend four or six hours, broken into three shift, generate energy. I was so pitching this idea back in 99 and everyone called me crazy, well now that everyone is on this green energy kick, who's crazy now?!
Oh, and 55% of the prison population are in for violent crimes
I'm sure that someone in DC is blaming video games for that.
Um? So you're saying we should invade Iran?
6. the incongruity of this.
Exactly how does that advance anything that has been said up to this point? Do you even know what incongruity means? I'd like to know how you place that word into what I've said about the article here.
You know what? Never mind, after reading your drivel here, I'd rather not speak to a complete moron. Oh what, let me clear that up for you, seeing how drivel can mean to salivate. It also means mindless chatter. I'm sure, however, you can go out and find a couple other dozen meanings for it. Just so you can feel big about pointing out how wrong or incorrect I am about whatever it is that you're talking about.
And finally let me wrap it up in saying. I suck at the English language, it is no secret what-so-ever. Is that what you are looking for? Because my follow up is that I didn't write an article, I am merely commenting on it. Are you to say that people who do not have a perfect working mindset for a given subject matter are not allowed to comment on the subject given to the public? I'm just curious.
So now Nintendo and Sony have both managed to brick consoles with firmware updates. Great.
I know I can't be the first person to think the next line was going to say something about Xbox 360 bricking so as to complete the unholy trinity.
It's ironic that someone who portrays himself to be an expert on linguistic devices couldn't even get the language itself right.
Even more amusing is someone who assumes another person's position.
Using just one definition and discarding the rest in an attempt to prove a point?
I love this argument. Wait, wait let me respond. When you actually start opening your mouth to show the world how absolutely dim witted you are, do you mean all of the meanings to the words that come out of your mouth, or do those words just mean one and thing and you are trying to convey that one idea? Pardon me for giving the finger to an absolute ass-hole.
More like how important it is to AT&T not to have network neutrality codified into regulation.
This is incredible true for most industries. It's a shame to see how most people miss this as being a huge point in turns in an industry. The liquor industry had an unspoken rule of not advertising directly on television for quite sometime. They didn't want any government entity jumping up and down mad and threaten regulation. It wasn't until the middle 90's that a couple of liquor companies actually tried advertisements on television. A couple of states filed objections to the FCC about the commercials but in the end no one really cared that they were advertising liquor on TV. However, liquor companies still tread with caution when it comes to this media, you'll always see beer commercials out number liquor commercials three/four to one . Ultimately they don't want to end up like tobacco and television.