Personally I think the install program is one of the best around. The best feature is that is records your installation choices to a file so that it can be used later for a kickstart install. Using PZE and kickstart is a dream. Just reboot a machine, PXE boot it over the network. Tell the pxeloader which distro you want and walk away.
Does it not have something to do with Postgres becoming PostgreSQL? Back in the day, say, 1995, people still thought that Postgres didn't support standard SQL commands. In 1995 Postgres' SQL support was pretty new. Along came MySQL and it was so much faster than Postgres at the time. It was so much better than mSQL. So people started using it. No one cared at the time that you couldn't select volumes (as in boxes and cylinders) in MySQL like you could in Postgres.
For me, Postgres will always be the true open source DBMS.
You can bring out the cars, but until there are compelling reasons for a consumer to shell out their hard earned cash on them, they will not sell. Hydrogen is a great idea, but it's just an idea. Why not take baby steps and use methanol and ethanol? Organisms that produce hydrocarbons sound like a promising idea.
I suppose it is all about how a person looks at things. If their primary goal it to make a zero emission car, they are totally focused on hydrogen. If the goal is to stop pumping money to unstable parts of the world or to simply improve energy independence, then methanol and ethanol is an obvious option.
It's not only that, hydrogen simply does not have the energy density of gasoline. Barring some miracle breakthrough, gasoline will have the best combination of easy transportation, energy density and price for some time to come. Why waste our time on hydrogen when we know how to deal with methonal or ethonal?
... and 341 miles on gasoline. Wow! I can see why everyone is on the edge of their seats waiting for hydrogen cars!
Can anyone give me a link to some technology on the horizon that shows that hydrogen is really an alternative to gasoline? How is the energy density problem going to be solved for hydrogen?
In the mean time, hydrocarbons are going to be the primary solution to propelling cars.
What do you call a person within the boarders of a country, not a citizen of the country, during the time of war, without any sort of uniform, receiving communication from the enemy? This is the type of person that 150 years ago would not be arrested by the police, and not tried by citizen courts. If you look at things this way, it is very easy to see why the administration went to Congress and informed them on what they were doing, and nothing was done. It would also explain why the administration believes they are doing the right thing, within the law.
From what I've read, there isn't much real knowledge of the NSA program. There is quite a bit of speculation though. We do not know if it was US Citizens, it may only be US Persons, or people simply living in the US and are not citizens. We do no know if it is real taps, or simple data mining. Data mining as in connecting the dots between known enemy phone numbers and connected calls inside the US. Since the administration apparently still used the FISA court in some cases, some have speculated that once enough dots were connected FISA would have to get involved so that calls could be monitored and recorded. Then again, why would it be illegal for the Commander in Chief to order taps on known enemies on the battlefield (the US is part of the battlefield)?
For a history of how the US government dealt with communication during wars, read up on Ben Franklin on the NSA web site. Interesting reading.
The difference is that many Americans think that they personally can be more compassionate than the government. Americans are very compassionate, they give a lot of their time and money to good causes. Unfortunately as the government takes more and more of this role, people become less sensitive to the true needs of people and just figure the government will take care of the problem. To me, this is morally wrong. This is why I contribe personally to organizations that I think are worth contributing to.
Your logic is flawed. ID says that the *physical* world could not have naturally developed. God is outside the physical world. We can only know God by what He has chosen to reveal to us, making it very difficult for us, constrained to the physical world, to put any soft of scientific test on God.
To me, trying to figure out how life originated it outside the realm of science. So far science has been unable to reproduce the phenomena. Stick to what we do know. We know that external forces can cause changes in *living* organisms. This is otherwise known as natural selection. Anything beyond that is speculation.
On of the questions I have is where the tap was. If the tap was on a foreign phone number, does the CIA need FISA approval? The CIA obviously needs approval for tapping domestic phones. If they tapped the foreign number of a known bad guy that was just arrested, then it would stand to reason that if a US number called that number then the caller should be looked into. Now that certain provisions of the PATRIOT Act are expiring, it sounds like if the CIA found out that a US citizen called that bad guy's number, they could not share that information with the FBI.
There is a current investigation going on right now on how Clinton used the IRS to harass political enemies. This isn't a violation of some right?? Stop drinking the punch!
As far as I can tell, this was not made legal by the PATRIOT ACT... maybe by FISA. But the CIA monitoring calls coming into a foreign country is exactly what they do as an agency. It just so happened that people connected with these known bad guys were calling from the United States. It sounds like they were doing proper investigative work!
Hello people... the article mentions that the CIA and the Executive branch informed the Legislative branch this was happening. They were informed that phone number and email addresses collected during an arrest could be used to find ties to others. According to the article the information had to be acted on quickly. It worked. Others were ferreted out and arrested.
Anyone ever hear of FISA? Since the calls and email were international communications, it is within the purview of the CIA to intercept them.
The article also mentions that the government still has to get warrants for domestic taps.
Yeah, it not like scientists believing in evolution came up with crazy theories about medicine. Things like removing organs because they were not needed anymore only to learn years later that the organs did have a function in a human body (even if only as an infant). A Christian scientist would presume the body is designed and that an organ probably does have a purpose. I think I would much rather have Christians in medicine than an anti-religious person. I think both side have made their mistakes. Maybe we can evolve beyond mistakes.;)
There are plenty of European/Western scientists, that most would consider some of the greatest scientists in the world, believed in a Christian view of God. The two are not mutually exclusive. It seems to me that people that believe as you do are as ignorant as you believe Christians are. That is pretty sad.
Here is an article about a chemical engineer/scientist that happened to be a Christian. Do you think he would have been more accomplished if he took on an atheistic view of the world? If so, why?
I think we actually agree. Neither is science! So if they're going to speculate to students about how life came into being, might as well mention that God could be as good a reason as comet (which just moves the problem off planet). But maybe I'm missing the point about the whole school controversy.
1. Please examine the definition of "scientific method". Since no one can observe, prove false the notion of, or quantify God, God is excluded from the theory. That's how science works.
But I can presume that I can explore the world in a rational way because an intelligent logical creator made it all and bestowed logical reasoning to us. All of it works in a logical way (with the rare exception of things called miracles. This does not change the methods of discovery, it just gives one basis or motivation for discovery.
2. Science does not pretend to address via a formal theory the questions of how life started in the first place. There are many theories, but none that can provide enough empirical evidence to graduate any of them to the status of a formal theory. If you're confused about the difference between the two grades of "theory", I will refer you once again to a definition of scientific method.
I was simply pointing out that there is plenty of speculation on how life came into being. Simply replacing God (not fully knowable) with a comet (not fully knowable) does not automatically make better science.
3. Your various questions are certainly interesting, and postulate theories that are reasonable given the available facts. So why won't science embrace them? Simple. Science relies on the idea of "falsification", which means very simply that any notion that wishes to advance to the status of a formal theory and not remain a "belief" must be able to be proven false. This is where religion and science can and must part ways, as religious viewpoints, by their very nature, cannot admit the possibility of fallability.
Origin science, just like God, is not fully knowable and will never be unless we can go back in time and verify it. The rest of science is science with or without a God. With the exception of origin science to say that Christians are anti-science doesn't makes since because the rules of science are the same whether you believe in the Great Comet (or some other mechanism) or God.
It's called context. Genesis defines a day by saying the morning and evening form a day.
Gen 5:5 (NASB) (using earlier, pre-KJV, documents) God called the light day, and the darkness He called night And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
Gen 5:5 (KJV) (translated from newer documents) And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Hard to understand, eh? Is an evening an eon to? How about morning?
Since when does science equal evolution? If God exists, then science is just the methodical discovery of God's creation. In that case a Bible thumper could be just as good a scientist as anyone else as long as logical scientific methodologies are used for discovery.
Could some intelligent creator have set evolution in motion? Maybe, but can't really know that. Could some intelligent creator have created everything instantly? Maybe, but we can't know that either. Neither one can be observed. It's all faith. If scientists could assemble non-living material into a living organism it would certainly help the theory of evolution. Saying it came here on a comet is total faith.
I don't think the ATI is supported unless underneath it's accually using an off the shelf chip. I guess that's possible, but I didn't see that card mentioned on the Wiki.
I have an Athlon 3200+ and I can watch live 1080i TV using a simple 'mplayer dvb://stationname' command. Myth seems to put a little overhead on it and the picture breaks up a little. My understanding is if I recompile with PREEMPT this should help clean up things.
It strange that it requires a MPEG *de*coder. Decoding doesn't seem to require that much power as long as I'm using XvMC (Motion compensation support in hardware).......So it seems that "soft" DVR's with support for HD is still a little behind in the Windows world. My only complaint is that the Linux software doesn't support all the extended programming information that is carried in the TS. Not too big a deal though since the PVR software holds redundant information except for closed caption data.
I've never used MCE, but does it support HD cards? I know that Windows HD cards come with their own software, but I've never used it.
I like Mythtv or VDR because they both have very good digital TV support. Mythtv will even record via Firewire, though I've never tried that. Personally I just record off-air HD using the HD-3000 card from www.pchdtv.com. The commercial detection in Mythtv works well.
One of the nice things about recording HD content is that it archives to DVD's nicely. I can de-res the picture to 720x480 and copy the AC-3 audio (no conversion) and the finished DVD looks almost professional quality. Though, this doesn't seem worth it anymore since many popular TV programs are released to DVD shortly after each season. It's nice to save current events this way (political speeches, etc).
I know one person that doesn't own a TV and just uses Bittorrent for the programs he likes. He lets others figure out the capture problems.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally I think the install program is one of the best around. The best feature is that is records your installation choices to a file so that it can be used later for a kickstart install. Using PZE and kickstart is a dream. Just reboot a machine, PXE boot it over the network. Tell the pxeloader which distro you want and walk away.
Does it not have something to do with Postgres becoming PostgreSQL? Back in the day, say, 1995, people still thought that Postgres didn't support standard SQL commands. In 1995 Postgres' SQL support was pretty new. Along came MySQL and it was so much faster than Postgres at the time. It was so much better than mSQL. So people started using it. No one cared at the time that you couldn't select volumes (as in boxes and cylinders) in MySQL like you could in Postgres.
For me, Postgres will always be the true open source DBMS.
You can bring out the cars, but until there are compelling reasons for a consumer to shell out their hard earned cash on them, they will not sell. Hydrogen is a great idea, but it's just an idea. Why not take baby steps and use methanol and ethanol? Organisms that produce hydrocarbons sound like a promising idea.
I suppose it is all about how a person looks at things. If their primary goal it to make a zero emission car, they are totally focused on hydrogen. If the goal is to stop pumping money to unstable parts of the world or to simply improve energy independence, then methanol and ethanol is an obvious option.
It's not only that, hydrogen simply does not have the energy density of gasoline. Barring some miracle breakthrough, gasoline will have the best combination of easy transportation, energy density and price for some time to come. Why waste our time on hydrogen when we know how to deal with methonal or ethonal?
... and 341 miles on gasoline. Wow! I can see why everyone is on the edge of their seats waiting for hydrogen cars!
Can anyone give me a link to some technology on the horizon that shows that hydrogen is really an alternative to gasoline? How is the energy density problem going to be solved for hydrogen?
In the mean time, hydrocarbons are going to be the primary solution to propelling cars.
Nice! Will it also be able to take advantage of gnome-vfs so file->open also work just like it does in Gnome?
What do you call a person within the boarders of a country, not a citizen of the country, during the time of war, without any sort of uniform, receiving communication from the enemy? This is the type of person that 150 years ago would not be arrested by the police, and not tried by citizen courts. If you look at things this way, it is very easy to see why the administration went to Congress and informed them on what they were doing, and nothing was done. It would also explain why the administration believes they are doing the right thing, within the law.
From what I've read, there isn't much real knowledge of the NSA program. There is quite a bit of speculation though. We do not know if it was US Citizens, it may only be US Persons, or people simply living in the US and are not citizens. We do no know if it is real taps, or simple data mining. Data mining as in connecting the dots between known enemy phone numbers and connected calls inside the US. Since the administration apparently still used the FISA court in some cases, some have speculated that once enough dots were connected FISA would have to get involved so that calls could be monitored and recorded. Then again, why would it be illegal for the Commander in Chief to order taps on known enemies on the battlefield (the US is part of the battlefield)?
For a history of how the US government dealt with communication during wars, read up on Ben Franklin on the NSA web site. Interesting reading.
The difference is that many Americans think that they personally can be more compassionate than the government. Americans are very compassionate, they give a lot of their time and money to good causes. Unfortunately as the government takes more and more of this role, people become less sensitive to the true needs of people and just figure the government will take care of the problem. To me, this is morally wrong. This is why I contribe personally to organizations that I think are worth contributing to.
Your logic is flawed. ID says that the *physical* world could not have naturally developed. God is outside the physical world. We can only know God by what He has chosen to reveal to us, making it very difficult for us, constrained to the physical world, to put any soft of scientific test on God.
To me, trying to figure out how life originated it outside the realm of science. So far science has been unable to reproduce the phenomena. Stick to what we do know. We know that external forces can cause changes in *living* organisms. This is otherwise known as natural selection. Anything beyond that is speculation.
On of the questions I have is where the tap was. If the tap was on a foreign phone number, does the CIA need FISA approval? The CIA obviously needs approval for tapping domestic phones. If they tapped the foreign number of a known bad guy that was just arrested, then it would stand to reason that if a US number called that number then the caller should be looked into. Now that certain provisions of the PATRIOT Act are expiring, it sounds like if the CIA found out that a US citizen called that bad guy's number, they could not share that information with the FBI.
... and what about the Barrett report? Domestic spying at it's finest! Clinton was such a constitutional angel!
There is a current investigation going on right now on how Clinton used the IRS to harass political enemies. This isn't a violation of some right?? Stop drinking the punch!
As far as I can tell, this was not made legal by the PATRIOT ACT... maybe by FISA. But the CIA monitoring calls coming into a foreign country is exactly what they do as an agency. It just so happened that people connected with these known bad guys were calling from the United States. It sounds like they were doing proper investigative work!
Hello people... the article mentions that the CIA and the Executive branch informed the Legislative branch this was happening. They were informed that phone number and email addresses collected during an arrest could be used to find ties to others. According to the article the information had to be acted on quickly. It worked. Others were ferreted out and arrested.
Anyone ever hear of FISA? Since the calls and email were international communications, it is within the purview of the CIA to intercept them.
The article also mentions that the government still has to get warrants for domestic taps.
If you don't like it... get FISA repealed!
Yeah, it not like scientists believing in evolution came up with crazy theories about medicine. Things like removing organs because they were not needed anymore only to learn years later that the organs did have a function in a human body (even if only as an infant). A Christian scientist would presume the body is designed and that an organ probably does have a purpose. I think I would much rather have Christians in medicine than an anti-religious person. I think both side have made their mistakes. Maybe we can evolve beyond mistakes. ;)
Pretty good summary.... though as a person that believes in God I, of course, don't believe it's BS. ;)
So, in the mean time, science rolls on while on the perimeters people argue philosophy.
There are plenty of European/Western scientists, that most would consider some of the greatest scientists in the world, believed in a Christian view of God. The two are not mutually exclusive. It seems to me that people that believe as you do are as ignorant as you believe Christians are. That is pretty sad.
Here is an article about a
chemical engineer/scientist that happened to be a Christian. Do you think he would have been more accomplished if he took on an atheistic view of the world? If so, why?
I think we actually agree. Neither is science! So if they're going to speculate to students about how life came into being, might as well mention that God could be as good a reason as comet (which just moves the problem off planet). But maybe I'm missing the point about the whole school controversy.
Sorry, got crazy with my 5's! Should obviously be Gen 1:5.
1. Please examine the definition of "scientific method". Since no one can observe, prove false the notion of, or quantify God, God is excluded from the theory. That's how science works.
But I can presume that I can explore the world in a rational way because an intelligent logical creator made it all and bestowed logical reasoning to us. All of it works in a logical way (with the rare exception of things called miracles. This does not change the methods of discovery, it just gives one basis or motivation for discovery.
2. Science does not pretend to address via a formal theory the questions of how life started in the first place. There are many theories, but none that can provide enough empirical evidence to graduate any of them to the status of a formal theory. If you're confused about the difference between the two grades of "theory", I will refer you once again to a definition of scientific method.
I was simply pointing out that there is plenty of speculation on how life came into being. Simply replacing God (not fully knowable) with a comet (not fully knowable) does not automatically make better science.
3. Your various questions are certainly interesting, and postulate theories that are reasonable given the available facts. So why won't science embrace them? Simple. Science relies on the idea of "falsification", which means very simply that any notion that wishes to advance to the status of a formal theory and not remain a "belief" must be able to be proven false. This is where religion and science can and must part ways, as religious viewpoints, by their very nature, cannot admit the possibility of fallability.
Origin science, just like God, is not fully knowable and will never be unless we can go back in time and verify it. The rest of science is science with or without a God. With the exception of origin science to say that Christians are anti-science doesn't makes since because the rules of science are the same whether you believe in the Great Comet (or some other mechanism) or God.
It's called context. Genesis defines a day by saying the morning and evening form a day.
Gen 5:5 (NASB) (using earlier, pre-KJV, documents)
God called the light day, and the darkness He called night And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
Gen 5:5 (KJV) (translated from newer documents)
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Hard to understand, eh? Is an evening an eon to? How about morning?
Since when does science equal evolution? If God exists, then science is just the methodical discovery of God's creation. In that case a Bible thumper could be just as good a scientist as anyone else as long as logical scientific methodologies are used for discovery.
Could some intelligent creator have set evolution in motion? Maybe, but can't really know that. Could some intelligent creator have created everything instantly? Maybe, but we can't know that either. Neither one can be observed. It's all faith. If scientists could assemble non-living material into a living organism it would certainly help the theory of evolution. Saying it came here on a comet is total faith.
For supported cards under linux see http://www.linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/ATSC_cards
......So it seems that "soft" DVR's with support for HD is still a little behind in the Windows world. My only complaint is that the Linux software doesn't support all the extended programming information that is carried in the TS. Not too big a deal though since the PVR software holds redundant information except for closed caption data.
I don't think the ATI is supported unless underneath it's accually using an off the shelf chip. I guess that's possible, but I didn't see that card mentioned on the Wiki.
I have an Athlon 3200+ and I can watch live 1080i TV using a simple 'mplayer dvb://stationname' command. Myth seems to put a little overhead on it and the picture breaks up a little. My understanding is if I recompile with PREEMPT this should help clean up things.
It strange that it requires a MPEG *de*coder. Decoding doesn't seem to require that much power as long as I'm using XvMC (Motion compensation support in hardware).
I've never used MCE, but does it support HD cards? I know that Windows HD cards come with their own software, but I've never used it.
I like Mythtv or VDR because they both have very good digital TV support. Mythtv will even record via Firewire, though I've never tried that. Personally I just record off-air HD using the HD-3000 card from www.pchdtv.com. The commercial detection in Mythtv works well.
One of the nice things about recording HD content is that it archives to DVD's nicely. I can de-res the picture to 720x480 and copy the AC-3 audio (no conversion) and the finished DVD looks almost professional quality. Though, this doesn't seem worth it anymore since many popular TV programs are released to DVD shortly after each season. It's nice to save current events this way (political speeches, etc).
I know one person that doesn't own a TV and just uses Bittorrent for the programs he likes. He lets others figure out the capture problems.