I was thinking the same thing. Stet means to let material stay that would otherwise be removed, sic means that the quoted material contains mistakes from the quotee and not the quoter. In conclusion, Ms. Heffernan has more immediate concerns than whether or not to paraphrase the retarded children she sees fit to quote.
I can go along with your definition. I just leave more room for wiggle. But that just means that your definition leaves even less of a reason for the OP to complain that Apple doesn't sell a headless machine with a better GPU, which is where this whole discussion began.:)
Yes. All artists from all genres of music would sound better if they took a few pointers from me.
"How about you replace that turntable guy with Eddie Van Halen?"
"Those lyrics are really good... I just think you should space them out more so they have greater effect. Here's a perfect example: Right now, you say 'fuck you' thirty-five times in the chorus with no other words to frame them. Try adding a few, to make it 'Who the fuck are you?' Then get Pete Townshend to add a guitar track and you're set."
"I really like what you've done here. Let's do this, though. Set aside a track on your Pro Tools for a saxophone. We'll get a small live room set up with a really warm tube condenser mic, bring in Kenny G, and have him beat you to death with his sax in the live room."
I think we agreed from the start. And yeah, an SGI machine's GPU is actually a graphics processing unit, not just a chip on a video card, so that's different. Most of this thread has been me trying to guess what the OP meant by "headless" (my conclusion was that he means a machine without a built-in monitor, given the models of Macs that he was discussing) and other people thinking that I was adopting his definition as my own.
What is your must succinct definition of 'headless', anyhow? Mine is just "a machine that is always or virtually always (allowing for installing an OS from the local console) operated without a keyboard and monitor."
An integrated monitor is also not what I consider "headless." I consider a machine headless if it is used without a monitor, etc. Therefore, a headless machine's GPU is irrelevant. The OP asked for a headless Mac with a better GPU. That sparked the confusion, which I later attributed to the possibility that he meant "headless" in a way different than I did, that is, he meant it to mean a machine without an integrated monitor.
I don't know where your confusion is still coming from. I was initially questioning the OP's motives in wanting a headless machine with a better GPU and, later, his definition of what it means for a machine to be headless. And now you seem to think that I have adopted the latter definition of headless, whereas in reality I was simply suggesting the possibility that the OP meant to use the word that way, which I believe is an incorrect use of the term. I also have no problem with wanting a computer to be supplied with a good GPU but without a monitor. However, I would not call that a headless machine.
Are you clear yet? I really don't know how to say this any more obviously.
That was my point. Why am I, according to an AC below, ignorant or a complete idiot for thinking that it is nonsensical to ask for a headless machine with a better GPU, as the OP did? I don't feel I am. I feel that it's ignorant or completely idiotic to want a headless machine with a good GPU. I was suggesting the lack of integrated video (which I meant to refer to the display but posted in a haze so I apologize to all for the lack of clarity) as the definition the OP was using because I can't think of another way to interpret his use of "headless" that doesn't make him sound like a moron.
You can't demand a headless computer and bitch about the GPU in the next sentence. You just can't. Your complaint about the drive may be valid, but it was Apple's choice to make it small as a compromise in favor of aesthetics. There definitely ought to be something in between the Mini and the Pro, in my opinion, but I don't make the decisions.
And this is exactly the point I was making in my original comment regarding libertarian vs. Libertarian. I believe in liberty. For lack of a better term, I'm a libertarian. I am not a Libertarian. And having to make that separation pisses me off. Just like Democrats aren't into democracy and Republicans aren't into a republic. Of course, the Constitution Party hasn't read the Constitution, and I could go on. Capitalize a word and add "Party" at the end and it suddenly means the opposite.
You have to click on the score to get the moderation history. It was moderated "underrated" and the poster has a karma bonus. Why "underrated" was an appropriate choice here and why it doesn't get listed next to the score, however, I can't answer.
Do you remember the last politician who was successfully elected to anything higher than the local school board on a campaign that didn't utilize that technique? Neither do I.
The problem is that the Fingerlicans' ten-cent titanium tax doesn't go too far enough.
The sad part is that the Libertarian Party really has built a reputation as being the Dudes For The Legalation Of Hemp party. If not for that, people wouldn't be afraid to be libertarian because they wouldn't have to always be saying "I'm libertarian with a lowercase ell" to people.
Slashdot Mirror
By "segregated water areas," do you mean the Dead Sea?
I was thinking the same thing. Stet means to let material stay that would otherwise be removed, sic means that the quoted material contains mistakes from the quotee and not the quoter. In conclusion, Ms. Heffernan has more immediate concerns than whether or not to paraphrase the retarded children she sees fit to quote.
I can go along with your definition. I just leave more room for wiggle. But that just means that your definition leaves even less of a reason for the OP to complain that Apple doesn't sell a headless machine with a better GPU, which is where this whole discussion began. :)
Constructive criticism FTW.
I think we agreed from the start. And yeah, an SGI machine's GPU is actually a graphics processing unit, not just a chip on a video card, so that's different. Most of this thread has been me trying to guess what the OP meant by "headless" (my conclusion was that he means a machine without a built-in monitor, given the models of Macs that he was discussing) and other people thinking that I was adopting his definition as my own.
What is your must succinct definition of 'headless', anyhow? Mine is just "a machine that is always or virtually always (allowing for installing an OS from the local console) operated without a keyboard and monitor."
An integrated monitor is also not what I consider "headless." I consider a machine headless if it is used without a monitor, etc. Therefore, a headless machine's GPU is irrelevant. The OP asked for a headless Mac with a better GPU. That sparked the confusion, which I later attributed to the possibility that he meant "headless" in a way different than I did, that is, he meant it to mean a machine without an integrated monitor.
I don't know where your confusion is still coming from. I was initially questioning the OP's motives in wanting a headless machine with a better GPU and, later, his definition of what it means for a machine to be headless. And now you seem to think that I have adopted the latter definition of headless, whereas in reality I was simply suggesting the possibility that the OP meant to use the word that way, which I believe is an incorrect use of the term. I also have no problem with wanting a computer to be supplied with a good GPU but without a monitor. However, I would not call that a headless machine.
Are you clear yet? I really don't know how to say this any more obviously.
What purpose does the GPU serve on a headless machine? You shouldn't call people names like that - it makes the other AC's look stupid by association.
That was my point. Why am I, according to an AC below, ignorant or a complete idiot for thinking that it is nonsensical to ask for a headless machine with a better GPU, as the OP did? I don't feel I am. I feel that it's ignorant or completely idiotic to want a headless machine with a good GPU. I was suggesting the lack of integrated video (which I meant to refer to the display but posted in a haze so I apologize to all for the lack of clarity) as the definition the OP was using because I can't think of another way to interpret his use of "headless" that doesn't make him sound like a moron.
That'd still be headless. Maybe he and you both meant "without integrated video."
You can't demand a headless computer and bitch about the GPU in the next sentence. You just can't. Your complaint about the drive may be valid, but it was Apple's choice to make it small as a compromise in favor of aesthetics. There definitely ought to be something in between the Mini and the Pro, in my opinion, but I don't make the decisions.
Moderators: Moderate all the elder siblings of this comment insightful. Or maybe underrated. Silly Slashdot.
And this is exactly the point I was making in my original comment regarding libertarian vs. Libertarian. I believe in liberty. For lack of a better term, I'm a libertarian. I am not a Libertarian. And having to make that separation pisses me off. Just like Democrats aren't into democracy and Republicans aren't into a republic. Of course, the Constitution Party hasn't read the Constitution, and I could go on. Capitalize a word and add "Party" at the end and it suddenly means the opposite.
You have to click on the score to get the moderation history. It was moderated "underrated" and the poster has a karma bonus. Why "underrated" was an appropriate choice here and why it doesn't get listed next to the score, however, I can't answer.
Do you remember the last politician who was successfully elected to anything higher than the local school board on a campaign that didn't utilize that technique? Neither do I.
The problem is that the Fingerlicans' ten-cent titanium tax doesn't go too far enough.
The sad part is that the Libertarian Party really has built a reputation as being the Dudes For The Legalation Of Hemp party. If not for that, people wouldn't be afraid to be libertarian because they wouldn't have to always be saying "I'm libertarian with a lowercase ell" to people.
Have you read Vonnegut's stuff? I'm not always convinced that the napkins maintained their order - or that they should have.
The problem is keeping all 131 napkins in order and intact.
I'm very comforted to know that the military is just as far behind as NASA, actually. Of course, that's what they want me to think. ;)
What gang are you in that gets to say "jalopy" without getting shot for it? I want to join.
In this tribe, anything less than a fivesome is equivalent to masturbation.
It was, but the gophers ate it.
My answer to all of your questions: kdawson. Well, okay, there have been others, but he's the current one. The reign of terror is dynastic.
Jeff Carlson is a freakin' genius! This is amazing! Oh wait, no, that other thing: mundane.
I got one: "Teen girls want you!" If only they had told me that when I was a teenager. I had no idea!
Loser,[Chris]~~~~, is that you?