"Altamont Pass wind turbines are causing extremely high levels of bird mortality along a major raptor migration route and are likely depleting eagle, hawk, and owl populations not only locally but throughout the western U. S.," said Jeff Miller, spokesperson for CBD. "We absolutely support wind power, but it is past time for the primary turbine owners, FPL Energy and NEG Micon, to address this problem."
Yeah, that never happens in other computing environments. Every desktop needs to have apache and mysql and spamassassin and clamav and sendmail and latex and postgresql and terminal definitions for every output device since the smoke signal.
Just because a statement is an ad hominem does not necessarily mean it is fallacious. An ad hominem attack can be based in fact, and those facts may serve to impeach the person's credibility.
We can map the human genome to DNS and give every base pair its own domain name. Then, when we want to find a cure to disease, you can just type it into your browser.
Speaking as a software engineer I can honestly say that I despise writing these things as much as most users do reading them. However, they are unfortunately very necessary in the often litigious society in which we live if for no other reason than to protect the author from frivolous litigation.
Let's see about that. An EULA that says the customer cannot sue. The customer disagrees with this provision and sues. How did the EULA protect against a suit? Looks like it instead provides grounds to sue.
Let's see, Microsoft made its fortune with a computer UI based on a windowing metaphor. But with Aero, that metaphor has mutated. Instead of programs displaying in a "window" they display in little miniature flat-panel displays within the real display. no doubt also a flat panel. The new UI metaphor is a parody of itself. No wonder it isn't really usable. It's truly a joke.
Think of "priority" as a commodity to be divided up among all the processes, and the amount of priority a particular process gets is its nice value divided into priority. The smaller the divisor assigned to a process, the more CPU time it gets.
The market has no mechanism for punishing them. It is completely helpless to deal with this. It takes a sysadmin from a left-socialist country to deal with the things the market cannot.
And yet, that's exactly what biology does when it refers to random mutation- pretends that order comes out of a hard to understand phenomena.
You're being dishonest again, or simply showing your lack of knowledge. Nobody but the creationist talk about random mutaion in this way. It is because they misunderstand what biologists are actually saying. Mutations are not random. The nucleotides in DNA combine in specific ways that are anything but random. How they combine is well understood, and how those combinations affect the phenotype of the organism is a vast area of study that we are only beginning to make headway into. But it is a strawman to proclaim that random mutation creates order. Biologists don't make this claim.
ID can take the complexity of life and the structure of the universe itself and explain it in terms anybody who has ever been to church can understand. Biology can't. Which is sad.
I agree it is sad that people shy away from learning difficult topics. But ID explains nothing. The universe is what it is, whether you can wrap your church-going brain around it or not. Pretending it is something other than it is - a hard to understand phenomena - is not science, and is not wise. It is foolishness. It is dishonest.
As such, it is entirely possible that the reason for the SSHRC denying this grant would be because the grant application was simply incomplete.
Not really. The reason given for the rejection was that the author of the application didn't establish that evolution was correct before applying for a grant to see how ID has affected the study of evolution in Canada. No one from SSHRC said anything about the completeness of the application. So although it is logically possible that the grant application was rejected for the reasons you mention, the evidence does not support this conclusion.
Obviously, he got his answer to the question "Are American ID fanboys affecting the conduct of science in Canada." It's a resounding YES. And he didn't spend any government grant money to find out.
Very nice review, and I can hardly disagree with any of it. However....
Oblivion is a game that forces you to make decisions with real consequences, a game that plays out those consequences on the world, and teaches you as the player to think fast and play for keeps.
That would be so if save games were disabled. But they are not. You don't have to play for keeps.
I know some aspies want better communications with the NT world, but knowing when the person is bored would, at least for me, be worse because I still wouldn't know what words to speak to make it better.
Usually you don't need to say anything, but just politely end the conversation for now.
"I see you're busy, let's talk about this some other time."
If a person is bored, there really isn't anything you can say at the time to make it better. Maybe they are in a bad mood. Maybe their mind is preoccupied with something else. Who knows? Very skilled social persons sometimes are able to change a person's mood with words, but that's best left to professionals like comedians and psychologists.:)
Single letter tokens for command names and rulesets are a legacy of times when memory was expensive. You'll note that since memory has become cheap, sendmail supports human-readable names for commands and rulesets. And there is nothing wrong with using a pre-processor. Most every language uses one, most have several different types for different kinds of jobs. Ever heard of rpcgen? Makefile.pl? Even syslog uses m4 to pre-process its conf file (at least it does on SYSV).
No point to this post, except to voice how much I despise sendmail.:)
I have a Mac and it doesn't look like OS X. For one thing, the window controls are on the wrong side of the title bar. OS X has them all on the left, where they are easy to reach. Windows has always put them on the right, where they are hard to reach.
Second thing, Mac OS X apps put the application menus along the top of the screen, where Windows might have the task bar. Windows puts them inside the app window. Big difference. With Macs, you always know where things start - upper right corner. With Windows, you are all over the screen with your mouse trying to hit each app's menus and buttons, which are arranged uniquely for that app.
Still got the wrong side of the window, Bill! Put the controls on the left side, same side where the File menu for the app is placed. No one likes dragging the mouse all over the screen. No one likes fat borders. No one likes cute tricks for the cuteness of it.
Qmail is no longer maintained by any coherent group or person, and hasn't been maintained for going on 8 years now. Would you run Windows 98 on today's Internet? It's been maintained just as well as qmail. Well maybe more since Microsoft has released patches for Win98 since 1998. DJB has not. The only patches released for qmail since 1998 are user patches, which DJB explictly disclaims because he has no time or inclination to verify that they are secure. And no one else has done that with qmail user patches, either.
Slashdot Mirror
If the wind farm is sited badly, yes. And not some stupid sparrows. These are golden eagles and hawks. Center for Biological Diversity files lawsuit against windmill companies
I am tired of static applications with dull grey buttons.
And I am tired of learning a new UI for every program, because the developer thinks the standard buttons aren't good enough for his exalted app.
First they have random unneeded software...
Yeah, that never happens in other computing environments. Every desktop needs to have apache and mysql and spamassassin and clamav and sendmail and latex and postgresql and terminal definitions for every output device since the smoke signal.
Well I guess the company you work for doesn't draw 10,000 customers/second, does it?
If they did, they could afford an Oracle DBA.
Just because a statement is an ad hominem does not necessarily mean it is fallacious. An ad hominem attack can be based in fact, and those facts may serve to impeach the person's credibility.
We can map the human genome to DNS and give every base pair its own domain name. Then, when we want to find a cure to disease, you can just type it into your browser.
Speaking as a software engineer I can honestly say that I despise writing these things as much as most users do reading them. However, they are unfortunately very necessary in the often litigious society in which we live if for no other reason than to protect the author from frivolous litigation.
Let's see about that. An EULA that says the customer cannot sue. The customer disagrees with this provision and sues. How did the EULA protect against a suit? Looks like it instead provides grounds to sue.
Let's see, Microsoft made its fortune with a computer UI based on a windowing metaphor. But with Aero, that metaphor has mutated. Instead of programs displaying in a "window" they display in little miniature flat-panel displays within the real display. no doubt also a flat panel. The new UI metaphor is a parody of itself. No wonder it isn't really usable. It's truly a joke.
Think of "priority" as a commodity to be divided up among all the processes, and the amount of priority a particular process gets is its nice value divided into priority. The smaller the divisor assigned to a process, the more CPU time it gets.
priority / nice = amount of CPU time.
the market will punish them.
The market has no mechanism for punishing them. It is completely helpless to deal with this. It takes a sysadmin from a left-socialist country to deal with the things the market cannot.
And yet, that's exactly what biology does when it refers to random mutation- pretends that order comes out of a hard to understand phenomena.
You're being dishonest again, or simply showing your lack of knowledge. Nobody but the creationist talk about random mutaion in this way. It is because they misunderstand what biologists are actually saying. Mutations are not random. The nucleotides in DNA combine in specific ways that are anything but random. How they combine is well understood, and how those combinations affect the phenotype of the organism is a vast area of study that we are only beginning to make headway into. But it is a strawman to proclaim that random mutation creates order. Biologists don't make this claim.
ID can take the complexity of life and the structure of the universe itself and explain it in terms anybody who has ever been to church can understand. Biology can't. Which is sad.
I agree it is sad that people shy away from learning difficult topics. But ID explains nothing. The universe is what it is, whether you can wrap your church-going brain around it or not. Pretending it is something other than it is - a hard to understand phenomena - is not science, and is not wise. It is foolishness. It is dishonest.
Dare I say? It is sinful.
ID predicts that any new species or any new fossil will "look designed."
Not a very difficult hurdle to overcome, especially for someone who is predisposed to see design.
I understand your argument just fine. It's total hogwash.
As such, it is entirely possible that the reason for the SSHRC denying this grant would be because the grant application was simply incomplete.
Not really. The reason given for the rejection was that the author of the application didn't establish that evolution was correct before applying for a grant to see how ID has affected the study of evolution in Canada. No one from SSHRC said anything about the completeness of the application. So although it is logically possible that the grant application was rejected for the reasons you mention, the evidence does not support this conclusion.
Obviously, he got his answer to the question "Are American ID fanboys affecting the conduct of science in Canada." It's a resounding YES. And he didn't spend any government grant money to find out.
I hate to use caps, but I must stress this: WITHOUT PATENTS, THERE IS LESS INVENTION THAN THERE SHOULD BE.
I have a patent on using caps for emphasis. Pay up.
Very nice review, and I can hardly disagree with any of it. However....
Oblivion is a game that forces you to make decisions with real consequences, a game that plays out those consequences on the world, and teaches you as the player to think fast and play for keeps.
That would be so if save games were disabled. But they are not. You don't have to play for keeps.
I know some aspies want better communications with the NT world, but knowing when the person is bored would, at least for me, be worse because I still wouldn't know what words to speak to make it better.
:)
Usually you don't need to say anything, but just politely end the conversation for now.
"I see you're busy, let's talk about this some other time."
If a person is bored, there really isn't anything you can say at the time to make it better. Maybe they are in a bad mood. Maybe their mind is preoccupied with something else. Who knows? Very skilled social persons sometimes are able to change a person's mood with words, but that's best left to professionals like comedians and psychologists.
The iPods have a little lock switch to prevent any controls from being accidentally activated. On my Nano, it's on the top edge.
Single letter tokens for command names and rulesets are a legacy of times when memory was expensive. You'll note that since memory has become cheap, sendmail supports human-readable names for commands and rulesets. And there is nothing wrong with using a pre-processor. Most every language uses one, most have several different types for different kinds of jobs. Ever heard of rpcgen? Makefile.pl? Even syslog uses m4 to pre-process its conf file (at least it does on SYSV).
:)
No point to this post, except to voice how much I despise sendmail.
Can't argue with that.
I have a Mac and it doesn't look like OS X. For one thing, the window controls are on the wrong side of the title bar. OS X has them all on the left, where they are easy to reach. Windows has always put them on the right, where they are hard to reach.
Second thing, Mac OS X apps put the application menus along the top of the screen, where Windows might have the task bar. Windows puts them inside the app window. Big difference. With Macs, you always know where things start - upper right corner. With Windows, you are all over the screen with your mouse trying to hit each app's menus and buttons, which are arranged uniquely for that app.
Vista isn't like OS X in any way that matters.
Still got the wrong side of the window, Bill! Put the controls on the left side, same side where the File menu for the app is placed. No one likes dragging the mouse all over the screen. No one likes fat borders. No one likes cute tricks for the cuteness of it.
Qmail is no longer maintained by any coherent group or person, and hasn't been maintained for going on 8 years now. Would you run Windows 98 on today's Internet? It's been maintained just as well as qmail. Well maybe more since Microsoft has released patches for Win98 since 1998. DJB has not. The only patches released for qmail since 1998 are user patches, which DJB explictly disclaims because he has no time or inclination to verify that they are secure. And no one else has done that with qmail user patches, either.
Unlike sendmail, it was designed to be secure. I'll take the one for which security was not an afterthought, thankyouverymuch.
So you're getting rid of Unix too? It was designed the same way as sendmail.