After downloading the alpha of Firefox 3 a couple night ago, I don't think I'll bother. I couldn't see any worthwhile benefit from upgrading. If someone can tell me why two is better than three I might waste my dialup bandwidth. I RTFA'ed but nothing stands out.
In addition, regardless of the efficiency, I would point to the social gains to be made by such a system. This could be very valuable, even if inefficient, in small communities and poor communities, even individuals homes. It would provide a more accessible fuel for less developed countries.
On a serious note, something funny came up at work today. My wife and I wont have a TV for various reasons, which I was espousing to a co-worker.
During the early years of his marriage he did the same. Until, that is, his first child was in about grade two. By that stage she had been so teased and ostracized that they got one for her sake.
Probably wouldn't say it is bad as autism though - just there are other consequences to TV.
Yeah, I think you are right. Dr Simmon Adams writes about this in his book "All the worlds troubles". I think the folly nowadays is not to understand the Cold War mentality. People thought very differently then and it is hard for the younger generation to understand the modus operadi was set in the 50s to 80s.
A comparative qualitative assessment is one in which there is an assessment based not of a large body of evidence but instead select evidence. It is generally not considered, in scientific process, to be self vindicating. It is still used valuably in academia.
As for realists and realism, it helps to disassociate realist ideologies from ideaologues. I think all government officials have a burden and mandate to do what is right for the citizens of there country. I'm not excusing their actions, but at the end of the day, they are able to come back and say, "I did it for my country."
Is North Korea and America that different in this?
Actually, I believe I was correct. The original poster supplied:
On September 11th, 2006 a once peaceful nation is now run by violent religous extremists.
This is a clear inference that there has been a change. Whilst America may be run by violent religious extremists, in the course of his arguement implied it was a causative change. I posit there has been no change therefore the fact that America may, or may not, be run by violent extremists is irrelevant.
Actually, this is not so much about terrorists as residual cold war thinking. Most political scietists would treat this as either the fallout of superpower foriegn policy from the cold war, or indeed claim that the cold war is not in fact over.
America is acting no different from usual so it is not right to claim it is run by violent religious extremists. That's a comparative qualitative assessment. It is instead run by what would be known as 'realist' (not the dictionary def.) ideologists - those who would unilaterally further America's interest..
Actually, as for the law being fair and making sense I would have to object. The law, at least in common law countries is fundamentally founded on natural law. Finding roots in all Roman, Greek and christian law these laws should favour the little man. Law should always be in favour of the underdog. A true discussion on the meaning of 'fairness' would focus on the egality of application - not the progmatic application. As for making sense, the majority of law is taken up with civil rubbish that is, laws such as having to rive on a certain side of the road. These are arbitarily decided to enable society to fuction properly. If it were the case that it was meant to make sense and be fair then
a) people would realise it is a load of crap made up by well intentioned, but fundamentally floored people (eg the people who told us we should all be wearing seatbelts whilst failing to realise their introduction INCREASED MORTALITY RATES).
b) Many of them are unjust. We are trying to build a FAIR law that doesn't operate according to justice principals. There is no discussion about such things as natural law or liberalism. John Stuart Mill's idea of justice WOULD NOT ALLOW a law which made people were seat belts, or even sue a doctor because they were allowed (under the law) to see their bleeding child in hostpital. There would be discourse about such notions as the catagorical imperative.
These are the reason's I left law school during the final year. There are major problems and this is only a small tip of the iceberg. My personal belief is they cannot be rectified.
A lot of people will and have suggested learning ambdexterity at least, or right handedness in the extreme. Well I say that's crap. Cut off your hand. That's right, cut that lefty bitch off. You'll never have to hear or make complaints about left and right handedness again. In fact, most people will be too PC to mention hands at all and you'll be left (pardon the pun) with no other options.
Congratulations, you have successfully committed an etymological fallacy. It is obvious from the context that he was not indicating he thought anyone was a homosexual. Some would say that the transition of the definition of the word 'gay' would be subject to the same complaint you've just used of the word faggot. It's a crap argument. He was obviously using it as a simple pejorative.
If you want a suggestion for making your life happier, don't use your politics to interpret other people's meanings. Take them as they come.
Yeah. I'm with this guy. What we need is some sort of advocacy program. What I propose is this. We all log in as ACs and bitch about how people whine when celebrities die and bout how many other people are dying. We could do this with our costly internet connection. Then we could tell people that money could've been spent of anti-malarial vaccines. We can do this instead of actually going out and fundraising. Then we could bitch about how people like us, exactly like us, aren't doing anything about it.
I think the only righteous person here is you mister AC. Shut the fuck up.
(I just added that very last bit coz everyones doing it today).
Dear Slashot Editors,
The work force reduction notification is currently in progress.
Unfortunately your position is one that has been eliminated.
Enjoy the rest of your day,
Management.
(I jest, I jest.)
I'm a graphic designer. Most places I've worked with Apples use linux servers. I hope this trend continues because it is a beautiful fusion of what the two technologies excel at.
Sure, but the whole point of Apple controlling which hardware is supported is so they may support it effectively. For example, a harddrive in the order of 80gig formated in Fat32 (LHV) is going to experience a hell of a lot more traffic than one using ext3, which will in turn experience less than one using ext2. The stock standard screens ARE higher quality (ask web designers, not to mention print publishers and graphic artists).
Another experience that you probably haven't had is trying to put cheap ram into a G4/G5 and have it not boot.
Here's another, try plugging a supermac monitor (the PCs superior counterpart) into a PC made graphics card.
I find, as long as you stay in the adobe line from beginning to press things should be alright. It's not the best, but at least it is standard forom one end to the other - illustrator/photoshop to indesign/incopy.
Slashdot Mirror
After downloading the alpha of Firefox 3 a couple night ago, I don't think I'll bother. I couldn't see any worthwhile benefit from upgrading. If someone can tell me why two is better than three I might waste my dialup bandwidth. I RTFA'ed but nothing stands out.
In addition, regardless of the efficiency, I would point to the social gains to be made by such a system. This could be very valuable, even if inefficient, in small communities and poor communities, even individuals homes. It would provide a more accessible fuel for less developed countries.
On a serious note, something funny came up at work today. My wife and I wont have a TV for various reasons, which I was espousing to a co-worker.
During the early years of his marriage he did the same. Until, that is, his first child was in about grade two. By that stage she had been so teased and ostracized that they got one for her sake.
Probably wouldn't say it is bad as autism though - just there are other consequences to TV.
Yeah, I think you are right. Dr Simmon Adams writes about this in his book "All the worlds troubles". I think the folly nowadays is not to understand the Cold War mentality. People thought very differently then and it is hard for the younger generation to understand the modus operadi was set in the 50s to 80s.
A comparative qualitative assessment is one in which there is an assessment based not of a large body of evidence but instead select evidence. It is generally not considered, in scientific process, to be self vindicating. It is still used valuably in academia.
As for realists and realism, it helps to disassociate realist ideologies from ideaologues. I think all government officials have a burden and mandate to do what is right for the citizens of there country. I'm not excusing their actions, but at the end of the day, they are able to come back and say, "I did it for my country."
Is North Korea and America that different in this?
Actually, I believe I was correct. The original poster supplied:
On September 11th, 2006 a once peaceful nation is now run by violent religous extremists.
This is a clear inference that there has been a change. Whilst America may be run by violent religious extremists, in the course of his arguement implied it was a causative change. I posit there has been no change therefore the fact that America may, or may not, be run by violent extremists is irrelevant.
Actually, this is not so much about terrorists as residual cold war thinking. Most political scietists would treat this as either the fallout of superpower foriegn policy from the cold war, or indeed claim that the cold war is not in fact over.
America is acting no different from usual so it is not right to claim it is run by violent religious extremists. That's a comparative qualitative assessment. It is instead run by what would be known as 'realist' (not the dictionary def.) ideologists - those who would unilaterally further America's interest..
Actually, as for the law being fair and making sense I would have to object. The law, at least in common law countries is fundamentally founded on natural law. Finding roots in all Roman, Greek and christian law these laws should favour the little man. Law should always be in favour of the underdog. A true discussion on the meaning of 'fairness' would focus on the egality of application - not the progmatic application.
As for making sense, the majority of law is taken up with civil rubbish that is, laws such as having to rive on a certain side of the road. These are arbitarily decided to enable society to fuction properly. If it were the case that it was meant to make sense and be fair then
a) people would realise it is a load of crap made up by well intentioned, but fundamentally floored people (eg the people who told us we should all be wearing seatbelts whilst failing to realise their introduction INCREASED MORTALITY RATES).
b) Many of them are unjust. We are trying to build a FAIR law that doesn't operate according to justice principals. There is no discussion about such things as natural law or liberalism. John Stuart Mill's idea of justice WOULD NOT ALLOW a law which made people were seat belts, or even sue a doctor because they were allowed (under the law) to see their bleeding child in hostpital. There would be discourse about such notions as the catagorical imperative.
These are the reason's I left law school during the final year. There are major problems and this is only a small tip of the iceberg. My personal belief is they cannot be rectified.
Olds for nerds, stuff that matters. I for one remember reading this about a year ago. WTF.
A lot of people will and have suggested learning ambdexterity at least, or right handedness in the extreme. Well I say that's crap. Cut off your hand. That's right, cut that lefty bitch off. You'll never have to hear or make complaints about left and right handedness again. In fact, most people will be too PC to mention hands at all and you'll be left (pardon the pun) with no other options.
Aren't they at uni to learn their selected field? Why should we be testing their ability to attend lectures? Lectures are a tool.
Congratulations, you have successfully committed an etymological fallacy. It is obvious from the context that he was not indicating he thought anyone was a homosexual. Some would say that the transition of the definition of the word 'gay' would be subject to the same complaint you've just used of the word faggot. It's a crap argument. He was obviously using it as a simple pejorative.
If you want a suggestion for making your life happier, don't use your politics to interpret other people's meanings. Take them as they come.
I know what he did. He raised the profiles of both crocodiles and hunters alike.
Yeah. I'm with this guy. What we need is some sort of advocacy program. What I propose is this. We all log in as ACs and bitch about how people whine when celebrities die and bout how many other people are dying. We could do this with our costly internet connection. Then we could tell people that money could've been spent of anti-malarial vaccines. We can do this instead of actually going out and fundraising. Then we could bitch about how people like us, exactly like us, aren't doing anything about it.
I think the only righteous person here is you mister AC. Shut the fuck up.
(I just added that very last bit coz everyones doing it today).
I must say, it is an interesting read but I am struck by the humility and honesty of this guy.
Oops, you're right an I meant to say that. It was meant to be a sliding scale sort of thing. Fat32 at one end to ext2 at the other.
Dear Slashot Editors, The work force reduction notification is currently in progress. Unfortunately your position is one that has been eliminated. Enjoy the rest of your day, Management. (I jest, I jest.)
I'm a graphic designer. Most places I've worked with Apples use linux servers. I hope this trend continues because it is a beautiful fusion of what the two technologies excel at.
Sure, but the whole point of Apple controlling which hardware is supported is so they may support it effectively. For example, a harddrive in the order of 80gig formated in Fat32 (LHV) is going to experience a hell of a lot more traffic than one using ext3, which will in turn experience less than one using ext2. The stock standard screens ARE higher quality (ask web designers, not to mention print publishers and graphic artists).
Another experience that you probably haven't had is trying to put cheap ram into a G4/G5 and have it not boot.
Here's another, try plugging a supermac monitor (the PCs superior counterpart) into a PC made graphics card.
Yeah Apple aren't for multi processor servers. My workstation is of course a 4p. Yeah bitch! MY WORKSTATION!!!
PS I'm working on apples and adobe SVG viewer plugs into Safari.
I find, as long as you stay in the adobe line from beginning to press things should be alright. It's not the best, but at least it is standard forom one end to the other - illustrator/photoshop to indesign/incopy.
Yeah, I don't do spelling. Only grammer.
And the grammer is used with apostophes, not sentence stops. Thank you. Don't be a jerk!
This sounds like red propaganda to me.