This might explain why pubs are so popular and many main-line churches are not. People in pubs tend to laugh together. In some church communities, people rarely seem to laugh.
This could be the smartest thing AOL has ever done, if they have plans to re-brand as an online new provider. Especially if they work to become a primary source provider, rather than just another we-spit-out-AP-content provider. As much as I grew to despise AOL (I was with them as a user from some of their earliest days through their 3.0 release for which I was a beta tester), it would be nice to see them go a different direction and become something that people could learn to value.
All the historical AOL-hate aside, this is likely a good move for them.
I've had success using Trend Micro's RUBotted. It monitors for some typical bot behaviors, like making phone-home connections. It was handy around the office when I was trying to track down a bot that wasn't caught by our AV/Firewall product. Once the machines were identified by RUBotted, I was able to remediate them (one I had to nuke, but was able to recover one of the machines).
Or, as seems to be the business plan du jour, file a blatantly obvious patent, trust that the patent office won't find prior art, and then send out letters demanding payment from everyone who is 'infringing' on your patent.
Hmmm...maybe I can package that as a work-at-home opportunity. Or, better yet, a pyramid scheme. I'll combine the best [worst] from all three and then perhaps Pinky and I will finally RULE THE WORLD!!!! mmmmuuuuuuhahahahahahahahahaha {SNAP - MOUSETRAP RELEASE - ROOM GOES SILENT}
I loved GeoWorks. It did everything I wanted and more. It was my software darlin until I found AmiPro, and I'd still take early versions of AmiPro over any version of Word any day. Perhaps it's just that first loves loom largest in the heart.
I think the program was called GeoWorks. It used a layout of icons very similar to what I saw in the screenshots. We've come full circle. The old is new again.
Get beyond the examples in the books. They may make references to watching football or other such sports references because a majority of readers will be able to relate to such topics. Try to figure out the underlying issues. My wife was and is thrilled that I don't get caught up in all of the sports mania that goes around, but boy can she get frustrated by my game-playing habits. Many of the examples try to get at basic, innate needs that are common to the vast majority of people of each gender. For him, it boils down to being respected. For her, it boils down to feeling loved. If he sits and watches TV all the time to the exclusion of activities she needs to feel loved (e.g., conversation, questions about her friends or her day, non-solicitive hugs), she feels unloved. If she nags him about housework or derides his interest in sports (or cars, cycles, games, his D&D group), he feels a lack of respect. When he does not feel respected, he respond to her in ways she perceives as unloving. When she perceives she is not loved, she responds less respectfully to him.
While your relationship may not fit the details of any given illustration, you can learn many lessons from some books, but you'll learn more lessons (and, imo, more significant ones) through your own experiences and through the experiences of others. Find a long-married couple and get to know them. Find out how they dealt with difficult situations. As them about what kept them together. Most will tell you that the warm fuzzy feelings can (and do) go away. They can come back, and some maintain them a long, long time, but they are not the feelings that preserve a marriage. What preserves it is the I'll-love-you-by-doing-what's-best-for-you-without-regard-for-myself kind of love that is most often viewed as commitment. It's the kind of love that says "I'll stick with you no matter what"--not because of what I get from the other person, but I'm committed to giving myself over to another.
When you have and practice that kind of love (and, yes, it takes much practice), it's hard to keep the other from loving you back. My wife and I have been married 16 years--a drop in the bucket by some standards--but that's what keeps us going. We're looking forward to the rest of our lives together, to the exclusion of all others. It's an adventure we've barely begun. Best regards as you set out on your journey!
I wonder how these will respond when temperatures may vary significantly. Will I need to adjust them going from an air-conditioned office out into a sweltering summer day? Similarly going from a heated house into a Minnesota winter? What about possible freezing? I take my glasses with me when I camp and some nights the temperatures are below freezing both inside and outside of my tent.
I guess I'll watch for this to hit the market, but am simply glad I don't need them yet.
This is intended as a replacement for bi-focals or tri-focals--corrective lens solutions with vision problems at different depths. I, for example, have been near-sighted since I was about 13. I can see things close to me clearly, but have trouble focusing on things that are further away. When my close-up vision starts to fail, I will either need to switch between two pairs of glasses or I will need bi-focal lenses (literally meaning "two focii" or "two focal points"). Many who use bi-focals and tri-focals complain about them because the eye will often shift to follow and object and bring their line of sight into the area that has different magnification or corrective properties. The proposed design disucssed here would mean only one set of glasses would be needed, and they would be adjustable depending on what the viewer wanted to see.
Why so quick to condemn the girl? Because, in my opinion, only someone stupid would assume that employment after a degree is something guaranteed.
When I finished my B.S. degree in business management and network administration, I didn't have companies knocking down my door to hire me. I stayed with the job I was in for a while, interviewed for (and got) a different position in the company a year or two later later, and eventually left that company to take a position that I felt was a good match for my interests and my degree.
I'm currently in a M.A. program. I know there's no guarantee of a better job. I believe every reasonable person realizes this, and that's why I'm convinced this student's lawsuit will fail. Any reasonable judge will throw this one out before it gets to trial. She paid for an education, and she received an education. BTW--the amount of her student loan debt has much to do with her choice of institutions. I carry less than half that much debt between my B.S. and M.A. programs (I have four courses left).
The only way her suit stands a chance is if the institution published a guarantee of job placement, and I don't know of any institution that will make such a promise. That said, most will tell you their job placement rates. It sounds wonderful when they tell you that they have a 95% job placement rate. Many people forget to consider that such a figure reflects only a small subset of students (those who use the job placement services) and is based on their placement history, not their anticipated success rate (in other words, those placement rates are likely going to be high if they reflect placements during a boom period, but past results are no guarantee of future success).
If anything, this lawsuit--only three months after her graduation--is going to brand her as a whiner with an entitlement attitude. This story is bound to get picked up by other news sites and blogs, and her name will soon be synonymous with what's wrong with some college-educated job seekers. Her story is likely to become part of future management symposiums, hiring seminars, and college case studies. She's seen to it that she will be branded for life as "that girl", and I think it will only harm her employment prospects over the next five to ten years.
Time can heal many wounds, so she may be able to rise above this in time, but this is definately not the way to start a career.
Even if their "mainstay" of physical media continues to tank, this just goes to show that they'll make it up elsewhere. They'll likely continue to increase the price of concert tickets to offset the revenue loss (and to continue the modest increase reported this year), but that will only be sustainable for a limited time. Music remains an overpriced product through most outlets.
I find myself buying a lot of Amazon MP3s when I see album specials for $3 (USD) or less. Sure, I'm not picking up the newest artists or releases this way, but, because of those deals, I've purchased more music in the past year than I did in the preceding decade.
Well, this might have prevented by pre-school son from shoulder surfing my passwords when he wanted because he wanted to get up at night to play Spooky Castle. He knew he needed my passwords to get logged on (a BIOS password and my logon password), but he figured he should get them all in case he needed them.
I found them on a sheet of paper under his mattress when changing his bedding. I guess I should be a bit more worried now that he is older and has taken a liking to the various "spy gear" toys on the market...
Also, the article claims that the cloned sniffer dogs had better performance that naturally-born sniffer dogs.
From the context, I would assume that the performance comparision would be between the clones and the other non-cloned dogs in the training program. It could have been stated plainly, but then I would have had no reason to post this comment.
Yes. I'm aware of this, but the technology to which I'm referring is designed to be self-contained, requiring less (zero) administration and something that could be swapped in and out of ships as they are depleted. I wish I could remember where I saw the article on those nuclear batteries...
I am aware of the use of reactors in the Navy, but am specifically wondering about some of the prototype reactor units (called "nuclear batteries" if my memory serves me correctly) that would be self-contained--simply plug in to connect to the local electrical service circuitry. I'm just surprised that they'll be looking into hybrid technology without revisiting the nuclear option (of course, I'm assuming they've not reassessed nuclear lately).
I just barely old enough to remember nuke drills at school. There's likely something to your comment, but our technology has so improved that safety is far less of a concern today (in terms of risks of normal operation).
I read some years ago about self-contained nuclear batteries that could be set up in communities without direct connections to the broader electrical grid. Don't we have the ability to leverage similar technologies on our ships? I'm talking about preconfigured reactors with constant power output and finite life (based on fuel rods encapsulated inside the power generation unit). Why not nuclear?
There's the aspect of announcing the decommissioning so early that may have a psychological impact both on the taxpayer and the legislators who fund the programs. Let's hope a private venture may step up to the plate. The ISS has significant symbolic value.
My point is that most taxpayers will likely have been under the same impression as was I--that this was supposed to be the permanent space station discussed in our Weekly Readers, science classes, and mainstream media since we were kids. The taxpayer will only see the outlay to date, and the fact that the project is being decommissioned. To the average citizen, it would be like watching a neighbor build a kit car, only for them to have it towed to the scrap yard a few years after finishing it. It will look like a complete waste of money. They won't be thinking about the cost to maintain it, or the fact that it is not in an ideal orbit for a permanent station.
Slashdot Mirror
This might explain why pubs are so popular and many main-line churches are not. People in pubs tend to laugh together. In some church communities, people rarely seem to laugh.
This could be the smartest thing AOL has ever done, if they have plans to re-brand as an online new provider. Especially if they work to become a primary source provider, rather than just another we-spit-out-AP-content provider. As much as I grew to despise AOL (I was with them as a user from some of their earliest days through their 3.0 release for which I was a beta tester), it would be nice to see them go a different direction and become something that people could learn to value.
All the historical AOL-hate aside, this is likely a good move for them.
I've had success using Trend Micro's RUBotted. It monitors for some typical bot behaviors, like making phone-home connections. It was handy around the office when I was trying to track down a bot that wasn't caught by our AV/Firewall product. Once the machines were identified by RUBotted, I was able to remediate them (one I had to nuke, but was able to recover one of the machines).
Or, as seems to be the business plan du jour, file a blatantly obvious patent, trust that the patent office won't find prior art, and then send out letters demanding payment from everyone who is 'infringing' on your patent.
Hmmm...maybe I can package that as a work-at-home opportunity. Or, better yet, a pyramid scheme. I'll combine the best [worst] from all three and then perhaps Pinky and I will finally RULE THE WORLD!!!! mmmmuuuuuuhahahahahahahahahaha {SNAP - MOUSETRAP RELEASE - ROOM GOES SILENT}
I loved GeoWorks. It did everything I wanted and more. It was my software darlin until I found AmiPro, and I'd still take early versions of AmiPro over any version of Word any day. Perhaps it's just that first loves loom largest in the heart.
I think the program was called GeoWorks. It used a layout of icons very similar to what I saw in the screenshots. We've come full circle. The old is new again.
Get beyond the examples in the books. They may make references to watching football or other such sports references because a majority of readers will be able to relate to such topics. Try to figure out the underlying issues. My wife was and is thrilled that I don't get caught up in all of the sports mania that goes around, but boy can she get frustrated by my game-playing habits. Many of the examples try to get at basic, innate needs that are common to the vast majority of people of each gender. For him, it boils down to being respected. For her, it boils down to feeling loved. If he sits and watches TV all the time to the exclusion of activities she needs to feel loved (e.g., conversation, questions about her friends or her day, non-solicitive hugs), she feels unloved. If she nags him about housework or derides his interest in sports (or cars, cycles, games, his D&D group), he feels a lack of respect. When he does not feel respected, he respond to her in ways she perceives as unloving. When she perceives she is not loved, she responds less respectfully to him.
While your relationship may not fit the details of any given illustration, you can learn many lessons from some books, but you'll learn more lessons (and, imo, more significant ones) through your own experiences and through the experiences of others. Find a long-married couple and get to know them. Find out how they dealt with difficult situations. As them about what kept them together. Most will tell you that the warm fuzzy feelings can (and do) go away. They can come back, and some maintain them a long, long time, but they are not the feelings that preserve a marriage. What preserves it is the I'll-love-you-by-doing-what's-best-for-you-without-regard-for-myself kind of love that is most often viewed as commitment. It's the kind of love that says "I'll stick with you no matter what"--not because of what I get from the other person, but I'm committed to giving myself over to another.
When you have and practice that kind of love (and, yes, it takes much practice), it's hard to keep the other from loving you back. My wife and I have been married 16 years--a drop in the bucket by some standards--but that's what keeps us going. We're looking forward to the rest of our lives together, to the exclusion of all others. It's an adventure we've barely begun. Best regards as you set out on your journey!
I wonder how these will respond when temperatures may vary significantly. Will I need to adjust them going from an air-conditioned office out into a sweltering summer day? Similarly going from a heated house into a Minnesota winter? What about possible freezing? I take my glasses with me when I camp and some nights the temperatures are below freezing both inside and outside of my tent.
I guess I'll watch for this to hit the market, but am simply glad I don't need them yet.
This is intended as a replacement for bi-focals or tri-focals--corrective lens solutions with vision problems at different depths. I, for example, have been near-sighted since I was about 13. I can see things close to me clearly, but have trouble focusing on things that are further away. When my close-up vision starts to fail, I will either need to switch between two pairs of glasses or I will need bi-focal lenses (literally meaning "two focii" or "two focal points"). Many who use bi-focals and tri-focals complain about them because the eye will often shift to follow and object and bring their line of sight into the area that has different magnification or corrective properties. The proposed design disucssed here would mean only one set of glasses would be needed, and they would be adjustable depending on what the viewer wanted to see.
Why so quick to condemn the girl? Because, in my opinion, only someone stupid would assume that employment after a degree is something guaranteed.
When I finished my B.S. degree in business management and network administration, I didn't have companies knocking down my door to hire me. I stayed with the job I was in for a while, interviewed for (and got) a different position in the company a year or two later later, and eventually left that company to take a position that I felt was a good match for my interests and my degree.
I'm currently in a M.A. program. I know there's no guarantee of a better job. I believe every reasonable person realizes this, and that's why I'm convinced this student's lawsuit will fail. Any reasonable judge will throw this one out before it gets to trial. She paid for an education, and she received an education. BTW--the amount of her student loan debt has much to do with her choice of institutions. I carry less than half that much debt between my B.S. and M.A. programs (I have four courses left).
The only way her suit stands a chance is if the institution published a guarantee of job placement, and I don't know of any institution that will make such a promise. That said, most will tell you their job placement rates. It sounds wonderful when they tell you that they have a 95% job placement rate. Many people forget to consider that such a figure reflects only a small subset of students (those who use the job placement services) and is based on their placement history, not their anticipated success rate (in other words, those placement rates are likely going to be high if they reflect placements during a boom period, but past results are no guarantee of future success).
If anything, this lawsuit--only three months after her graduation--is going to brand her as a whiner with an entitlement attitude. This story is bound to get picked up by other news sites and blogs, and her name will soon be synonymous with what's wrong with some college-educated job seekers. Her story is likely to become part of future management symposiums, hiring seminars, and college case studies. She's seen to it that she will be branded for life as "that girl", and I think it will only harm her employment prospects over the next five to ten years.
Time can heal many wounds, so she may be able to rise above this in time, but this is definately not the way to start a career.
Seeing as they are a bunch of snakes, I don't believe they had any feet with which to begin.
Even if their "mainstay" of physical media continues to tank, this just goes to show that they'll make it up elsewhere. They'll likely continue to increase the price of concert tickets to offset the revenue loss (and to continue the modest increase reported this year), but that will only be sustainable for a limited time. Music remains an overpriced product through most outlets.
I find myself buying a lot of Amazon MP3s when I see album specials for $3 (USD) or less. Sure, I'm not picking up the newest artists or releases this way, but, because of those deals, I've purchased more music in the past year than I did in the preceding decade.
I'm already planning my next career: career re-training!
I can't wait until these end up on Woot!
...this is going to work really well in the true desert regions. No fuel--no food. Now, quick! blow something up so the robot can refuel!
Well, this might have prevented by pre-school son from shoulder surfing my passwords when he wanted because he wanted to get up at night to play Spooky Castle. He knew he needed my passwords to get logged on (a BIOS password and my logon password), but he figured he should get them all in case he needed them.
I found them on a sheet of paper under his mattress when changing his bedding. I guess I should be a bit more worried now that he is older and has taken a liking to the various "spy gear" toys on the market...
From the context, I would assume that the performance comparision would be between the clones and the other non-cloned dogs in the training program. It could have been stated plainly, but then I would have had no reason to post this comment.
The only MUD I really remember was the MUD at Stacken.
Yes. I'm aware of this, but the technology to which I'm referring is designed to be self-contained, requiring less (zero) administration and something that could be swapped in and out of ships as they are depleted. I wish I could remember where I saw the article on those nuclear batteries...
I am aware of the use of reactors in the Navy, but am specifically wondering about some of the prototype reactor units (called "nuclear batteries" if my memory serves me correctly) that would be self-contained--simply plug in to connect to the local electrical service circuitry. I'm just surprised that they'll be looking into hybrid technology without revisiting the nuclear option (of course, I'm assuming they've not reassessed nuclear lately).
I just barely old enough to remember nuke drills at school. There's likely something to your comment, but our technology has so improved that safety is far less of a concern today (in terms of risks of normal operation).
I read some years ago about self-contained nuclear batteries that could be set up in communities without direct connections to the broader electrical grid. Don't we have the ability to leverage similar technologies on our ships? I'm talking about preconfigured reactors with constant power output and finite life (based on fuel rods encapsulated inside the power generation unit). Why not nuclear?
There's the aspect of announcing the decommissioning so early that may have a psychological impact both on the taxpayer and the legislators who fund the programs. Let's hope a private venture may step up to the plate. The ISS has significant symbolic value.
My point is that most taxpayers will likely have been under the same impression as was I--that this was supposed to be the permanent space station discussed in our Weekly Readers, science classes, and mainstream media since we were kids. The taxpayer will only see the outlay to date, and the fact that the project is being decommissioned. To the average citizen, it would be like watching a neighbor build a kit car, only for them to have it towed to the scrap yard a few years after finishing it. It will look like a complete waste of money. They won't be thinking about the cost to maintain it, or the fact that it is not in an ideal orbit for a permanent station.