I haven't noticed any news articles reporting that Osama offered Clinton a truce; I'm not saying it isn't true, but I would like to see a few links in support.
I actually don't believe president Bush has been "Doing all he can to stop OBL"; in order to stop Osama when he was in Afghanistan, Bush decided to cut back operations in Afghanistan and focus on Iraq instead. Redirection of resources away from the main target and towards a target that was inappropriate within the context of the current conflict seems odd to me.
Having said that, I want to make two things quite clear: 1) I think that Saddam should have been removed from power. I just think Bush chose the wrong reason. He ought to have said "Saddam is murdering a lot of innocent people and civilised nations should not tolerate that." I personally would have backed that reason and been glad that some country finally said it out loud. 2) I want to make sure we understand that I'm not challenging you with the above statemnt that I'm unaware of the evidence for Osama offering Clinton a way out; I'd jut like to read a few articles backing it up. Friendly discussion is the main way that our ideas about the world mature, but with tone being difficult to read on a bulletin board system, things occasionally are taken as personal attacks that simply aren't meant that way, so I like to clarify that in advance.:)
Well, praise eveything that's holy that they've managed to capture Osama! Oh, no, in spite of the fact that this man is in need of a kidney dialasis machine, he can still run rings around some of the best trained troops in the world inside a closed network of caves.
Thank goodness someone said it. I received the distinct impression that the nonsense over gay marriage was just bush pouncing on one area he could count on to divide the people up because he had unpopular resolutions at the time. Most people seem to think that if they support one contentious issue, they're going to have to just support the president overall.
ANd yet the US did veto an investigation into the slaughter in Nicaragua that it had committed. It didn't stop the declaration, but it does veto any investigations it cares to into how it has since contravened the declaration.
Well, yes, in the same way as the National Health Service in England isn't actually free, the cost of it is spread out over taxes over your lifetime. However, I'd still rather have it that way than have it the US way of pay everything up front as billed. You're definitely de facto correct that the fees are paid somewhere by someone, but not many students are aware that they have in fact purchased these licenses and are able to use them. So I wanted to ensure they were aware that there wouldn't be an up front charge. But I take your point.
If you're a student and your university is part of the Microsoft Academic Alliance, you can get a copy of any Microsoft OS from Win 98 on (including NOSes) for free. YOu can also get a bunch of other cool software for free. It's a useful service.
From one who works as a sys admin to one who evidently doesn't: every stupid fucking user under the fucking sun seems to work for MONTHS without making a backup of their files, and when one day their computer suddenly starts to "misbehave", they THEN want their data recovered. It's the same principle in both cases, the difference is like that between microevolution and macroevolution. This is why we take backups FOR you: because you're not going to do it for yourself until it's way too late.
According to the Macbook Pro page, this will be the URL that the new keynote will be posted at. If you keep refreshing (although that's apparently a felony now...) you can let everyone know when it goes live!
I for one would like to congratulate our Open Source Geek overlords. Yes, I mean you, you GNU/Linux running geeks you. This isn't the radical overhaul that the patent system needs, but it's something, and it's a clear sign that our commitment to ideas and ideals that we know make sense can have an effect if we keep with them and keep pushing the good word.
I was thinking a very similar thing, namely that if mono manages to take care of all the new stuff, there's still going to be a shitload of old stuff that people want to use. The best that mono will achieve, from what I can tell of the project, will be to make the target APIs that WINE tries to recreate stand still instead of them having to keep up with every new version.
My frustration comes from the "unathorised reproduction prohibited" line apparently covering things like placing a copy of the music on a portable music player and having a copy on my computer because I don't want to carry the very scratchable CDs around. As I said, and you quoted me saying (and don't take my tone here as at all harsh because I'm quite a friendly guy and am glad to be able to offer the clarification) I want to do with the music "as I like". I don't like to fileshare music around, but I do want to be able to rip it to electronic format for personal use without having DRM forced upon me.
Seems to me that I don't buy software, I purchase a license to use it on a computer. So fair enough, I don't redistribute my software or my license key. But I never read the part on the music I bought that says "You are purchasing a license for one copy of this music." I was under the impression that I bought the CD and the copy of the music on the CD to do with as I like.
And given that that is the situation, I happily spend money on music so that I can use it as I want; I don't buy from Itunes because, like yourself, I don't like this notion that I'm "licensing" the music.
Thank god someone said this! I go into gnome or KDE and have things sensibly subset into various usability categories like "Office" (which stores word processors etc) or "Internet" (which stores messengers or file sharing programs or browsers), and there's a clear distinction between the administrative menu and the programs menu. I don't understand how this isn't a very clear, well organised system that anyone can use, as opposed to "let's dump EVERYTHING under weird names in the start menu!".
I installed Adobe CS2 the other day and had to spend five minutes working out how to reorganise everything into one folder. Because there's actually several subsets to the start menu: there's the global one and there's your personal one, and you have to learn how to navigate between the two within the filesystem to be able to reorganise the menu effectively. But there's no HINT of that being the case until you start to wonder "Huh, why does the start menu folder in the file browser only have four programs in it?"
I had problems getting anything to run properly on my new Dell XPS laptop until I tried Ubuntu. Download the live DVD and see if it works for you. It even set up wireless with DHCP for me if I broadcast the SSID and turned off security keys (which, when you think about it, is the same level of functionality as the competition).
Look at the figures here: four percent of yahoo users know what RSS is. Without the browser that has 88% of the marketshare not even supporting RSS, this means that we can completely discount almost 90% of the market as not knowing what RSS is because they can't access it. The remaining twelve or so percent ALL KNOW what RSS is, and four percent or around ONE THIRD of that amount use it regularly. This is actually a widely used technology amongst people who can access it.
Wait until IE7 comes out and people upgrade; I'll bet about a third to a half of people use RSS regularly then.
Bluetooth is a propietary technology; standardisation is being worked upon (IEEE 801.15). There are several patents involved on the technology, therefore companies that wish to use it sign a licensing agreement. I can't get a hand on the exact terms, though I read that it's royalty free.
I've thought about this a little, and think a system whereby your money was held in a 3rd party account after the auction until some specific steps had been followed. I don't know precisely what it should be, but maybe for every seller to have the package tracked and pass the tracking number to the overall auction site. That deals with one end of things.
Much as people are mocking this, it's entirely true that you should never ever believe what a user tells you the problem is. I had a user tell me she had tested EVERYTHING when a computer wouldn't display to the projector, that she was knowledgeable about this and had done this widdly thing and that super doodly, so I started looking at the cables thinking I'd have to test them. Before I wasted my time, though, I figured I'd try the most obvious thing: make sure the projector was set to "computer" as the input rather than "video player". And that solved that.
I'm looking forward to seeing if a company that seems willing to go forward and take chances on open source development succeeds, and if it doesn't what lessons we can learn as a community from this.
Slashdot Mirror
I haven't noticed any news articles reporting that Osama offered Clinton a truce; I'm not saying it isn't true, but I would like to see a few links in support.
:)
I actually don't believe president Bush has been "Doing all he can to stop OBL"; in order to stop Osama when he was in Afghanistan, Bush decided to cut back operations in Afghanistan and focus on Iraq instead. Redirection of resources away from the main target and towards a target that was inappropriate within the context of the current conflict seems odd to me.
Having said that, I want to make two things quite clear:
1) I think that Saddam should have been removed from power. I just think Bush chose the wrong reason. He ought to have said "Saddam is murdering a lot of innocent people and civilised nations should not tolerate that." I personally would have backed that reason and been glad that some country finally said it out loud.
2) I want to make sure we understand that I'm not challenging you with the above statemnt that I'm unaware of the evidence for Osama offering Clinton a way out; I'd jut like to read a few articles backing it up. Friendly discussion is the main way that our ideas about the world mature, but with tone being difficult to read on a bulletin board system, things occasionally are taken as personal attacks that simply aren't meant that way, so I like to clarify that in advance.
Well, praise eveything that's holy that they've managed to capture Osama! Oh, no, in spite of the fact that this man is in need of a kidney dialasis machine, he can still run rings around some of the best trained troops in the world inside a closed network of caves.
SOmething smells like bullshit to me.
Thank goodness someone said it. I received the distinct impression that the nonsense over gay marriage was just bush pouncing on one area he could count on to divide the people up because he had unpopular resolutions at the time. Most people seem to think that if they support one contentious issue, they're going to have to just support the president overall.
ANd yet the US did veto an investigation into the slaughter in Nicaragua that it had committed. It didn't stop the declaration, but it does veto any investigations it cares to into how it has since contravened the declaration.
Well, yes, in the same way as the National Health Service in England isn't actually free, the cost of it is spread out over taxes over your lifetime. However, I'd still rather have it that way than have it the US way of pay everything up front as billed. You're definitely de facto correct that the fees are paid somewhere by someone, but not many students are aware that they have in fact purchased these licenses and are able to use them. So I wanted to ensure they were aware that there wouldn't be an up front charge. But I take your point.
If you're a student and your university is part of the Microsoft Academic Alliance, you can get a copy of any Microsoft OS from Win 98 on (including NOSes) for free. YOu can also get a bunch of other cool software for free. It's a useful service.
From one who works as a sys admin to one who evidently doesn't: every stupid fucking user under the fucking sun seems to work for MONTHS without making a backup of their files, and when one day their computer suddenly starts to "misbehave", they THEN want their data recovered. It's the same principle in both cases, the difference is like that between microevolution and macroevolution. This is why we take backups FOR you: because you're not going to do it for yourself until it's way too late.
If you check it now, it's posted.
According to the Macbook Pro page, this will be the URL that the new keynote will be posted at. If you keep refreshing (although that's apparently a felony now...) you can let everyone know when it goes live!
I for one would like to congratulate our Open Source Geek overlords. Yes, I mean you, you GNU/Linux running geeks you. This isn't the radical overhaul that the patent system needs, but it's something, and it's a clear sign that our commitment to ideas and ideals that we know make sense can have an effect if we keep with them and keep pushing the good word.
It's because they don't want you looking at Area 52, which is just up the road aways and is run by Centauri.
http://www.thetechzone.com.nyud.net:8090/?m=show&i d=479
I was thinking a very similar thing, namely that if mono manages to take care of all the new stuff, there's still going to be a shitload of old stuff that people want to use. The best that mono will achieve, from what I can tell of the project, will be to make the target APIs that WINE tries to recreate stand still instead of them having to keep up with every new version.
My frustration comes from the "unathorised reproduction prohibited" line apparently covering things like placing a copy of the music on a portable music player and having a copy on my computer because I don't want to carry the very scratchable CDs around. As I said, and you quoted me saying (and don't take my tone here as at all harsh because I'm quite a friendly guy and am glad to be able to offer the clarification) I want to do with the music "as I like". I don't like to fileshare music around, but I do want to be able to rip it to electronic format for personal use without having DRM forced upon me.
Seems to me that I don't buy software, I purchase a license to use it on a computer. So fair enough, I don't redistribute my software or my license key. But I never read the part on the music I bought that says "You are purchasing a license for one copy of this music." I was under the impression that I bought the CD and the copy of the music on the CD to do with as I like.
And given that that is the situation, I happily spend money on music so that I can use it as I want; I don't buy from Itunes because, like yourself, I don't like this notion that I'm "licensing" the music.
Thank god someone said this! I go into gnome or KDE and have things sensibly subset into various usability categories like "Office" (which stores word processors etc) or "Internet" (which stores messengers or file sharing programs or browsers), and there's a clear distinction between the administrative menu and the programs menu. I don't understand how this isn't a very clear, well organised system that anyone can use, as opposed to "let's dump EVERYTHING under weird names in the start menu!".
I installed Adobe CS2 the other day and had to spend five minutes working out how to reorganise everything into one folder. Because there's actually several subsets to the start menu: there's the global one and there's your personal one, and you have to learn how to navigate between the two within the filesystem to be able to reorganise the menu effectively. But there's no HINT of that being the case until you start to wonder "Huh, why does the start menu folder in the file browser only have four programs in it?"
I had problems getting anything to run properly on my new Dell XPS laptop until I tried Ubuntu. Download the live DVD and see if it works for you. It even set up wireless with DHCP for me if I broadcast the SSID and turned off security keys (which, when you think about it, is the same level of functionality as the competition).
Look at the figures here: four percent of yahoo users know what RSS is. Without the browser that has 88% of the marketshare not even supporting RSS, this means that we can completely discount almost 90% of the market as not knowing what RSS is because they can't access it. The remaining twelve or so percent ALL KNOW what RSS is, and four percent or around ONE THIRD of that amount use it regularly. This is actually a widely used technology amongst people who can access it.
Wait until IE7 comes out and people upgrade; I'll bet about a third to a half of people use RSS regularly then.
Bluetooth is a propietary technology; standardisation is being worked upon (IEEE 801.15). There are several patents involved on the technology, therefore companies that wish to use it sign a licensing agreement. I can't get a hand on the exact terms, though I read that it's royalty free.
I've thought about this a little, and think a system whereby your money was held in a 3rd party account after the auction until some specific steps had been followed. I don't know precisely what it should be, but maybe for every seller to have the package tracked and pass the tracking number to the overall auction site. That deals with one end of things.
God, the number of times I've thought this and told people this and it'd just be great to have it modded insightful or something.
Much as people are mocking this, it's entirely true that you should never ever believe what a user tells you the problem is. I had a user tell me she had tested EVERYTHING when a computer wouldn't display to the projector, that she was knowledgeable about this and had done this widdly thing and that super doodly, so I started looking at the cables thinking I'd have to test them. Before I wasted my time, though, I figured I'd try the most obvious thing: make sure the projector was set to "computer" as the input rather than "video player". And that solved that.
I agree that this will be interesting to watch.
I'm looking forward to seeing if a company that seems willing to go forward and take chances on open source development succeeds, and if it doesn't what lessons we can learn as a community from this.
Not in Kansas!
o n.debate.ap/
http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/11/08/evoluti
By the same reasoning, there is no such thing as a reasonable believer, only an agnostic.