God! Don't let an MS'er send you Segoe documents! They embed the bloody font, and then use Rights-Management to keep you from changing it!
You have to PRINT the thing to read it.
Is a DISASTER on screen - anti-aliased or not. I'm not kidding. If I could include screen caps I would. Unreadable to the point of physical injury.
SegoeUI was created at MS to use in Titlebars and Menus. This is OK with ClearType enabled. It is still unreadable in Vista's tilebars -which arbitrarily use transparency under AeroGlass. It's not like the OS X transparency - which many people don't even notice. It does nothing to distinguish the active window in a meaningful way - and actually impairs the ability to read any title on the screen.
Talk about "not getting it". If you rip off the right things, without the right understanding, you will always fu*k them up.
We can debate wheather Harper's conservatives are the same as the old Tories. There has been a considerable restructuring of the party - some would say a coup...
This is because the Lords have been traditional conservatives, in regards to the administration of government in Britain. That is, they have been a barrier to the kind of radical moves by "New Labour" that characterize the revolutionary and unrepresentative executives of Bush in the US, Howard in Australia and Harper in Canada.
They wish to preserve the legacy of representation and rule of law that are initiated with the Magna Carta, and succeeding 800 years of parliamentary rule. In fact, many of the Lords see this as a part of their personal heritage. It is a definition of "conservative" that has been sadly neglected in much of the English-speaking world over the last half-century. As an old Whig of the Fox/Hobhouse school, I applaud the credibility and veracity of Ancien Regieme Tories in this principled position.
It seems to me that one way of approaching the real dominant economic mode of our time is not, properly, Capitalism - but Propertarianism.
All value is derived from private and exclusive ownership as property.
Who privately owns what?
That which cannot be privately owned must be sold off to a private owner or outlawed.
Of course in extremis, this outlaws thoughts that infringe on the absolute measure of property. You can also be a violator for having thoughts you do not own, and have not paid for the privilege of having. What a narrow ond short-sighted way to manage in the world.
You know this boogie is for real
on
Learning to DJ?
·
· Score: 1
I used to put my faith in worship But then my chance to get to Heaven slipped
I used to worry about the future But then I threw my caution to the wind
I had no reason to be care free, no no no Until I took a trip to the other side of town
Yeah yeah yeah, you know I heard that boogie rhythm Hey - I had no choice but to get down down down down
Dance, nothing left for me to do but dance Off these bad times I'm going through just dance
I have had to accept Local Admin for their WS. This is done by machine GPOs, with a machine startup script that add them for the duration of the session: NET LOCALGROUP/ADD Administrators INTERACTIVE
They are local admin, until logoff. This doesn't extend the privilege to any kind of Remote Auth (unless you count terminal services), and the user can't access C$ across the net to another host where they may also be logged in.
It's a compromise, and I noted the risks in my report.
This was someone who'd been at the customer over a year ago.
Whacking bad problem! All c$ shares and remote registry available to everyone, everywhere on a flat network! Even PT security guards in the middle of the night.
I don't mean really to be obscure, or provocative.
Just think about what these things mean. Assume the real believer's position. Swearing on the Bible is a promise to God, by God, before God. You don't make that promise lightly, nor if you do not intend to carry it out. If you find an inherent contradiction in the promise you are making - do not lie to God, and make it anyway.
The Bible has many strange and contradictory injunctions - especially if these are read as literal - or approached merely intellectually. Literally, intellectually, the Bible does NOT say "marriage" is between a man and a woman. The biblical position of Abraham and others is that marriage is between a man and two or more women. Also, eating shellfish is an abomination in the eyes of the Lord - equal in approbation to homosexuality.
A true christian believer, who takes the statements of Jesus to heart, will have little or nothing to do with the "Old Testament". The laws of Deuteronomy and Leviticus were written by the very Temple priests that Jesus decried and vilified. The covenant of Moses was superceded by the revelation of Jesus.
Matthew 26:28: This is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
Forgiveness of sins. Not the license to condemn others, by old religious law.
So. With discursion these are some points, that ought to be of concern to a beleiver, who constantly interrogates their own sincerity.
I am not a christian believer - but I do try to interrogate myself over my own sincerity. This is the way to the truth. Seeking this is the true aim of any religion in its enlightened form.
Slashdot Mirror
Tried! :-)
Those "smart students" run into trouble, blasting off so quickly!
:-)
Women adore the 'delayed but prolonged' spurt.
About "first posters", versus "slow starters"?
God! Don't let an MS'er send you Segoe documents! They embed the bloody font, and then use Rights-Management to keep you from changing it!
You have to PRINT the thing to read it.
Is a DISASTER on screen - anti-aliased or not. I'm not kidding. If I could include screen caps I would. Unreadable to the point of physical injury.
SegoeUI was created at MS to use in Titlebars and Menus. This is OK with ClearType enabled. It is still unreadable in Vista's tilebars -which arbitrarily use transparency under AeroGlass. It's not like the OS X transparency - which many people don't even notice. It does nothing to distinguish the active window in a meaningful way - and actually impairs the ability to read any title on the screen.
Talk about "not getting it". If you rip off the right things, without the right understanding, you will always fu*k them up.
What is LOOONNnnggg overdue is the use of "GNU"-style recursive names in government.
:-)
How about naming the country USANUS - "the United States Are Not United States"?
to fund terrorist organizations, does that mean no income taxes on April 15?
And Allen is himself, how do you say? "A piece of work."
Whatever. Let me take this opportunity to promote my JEs!
Meta-"Godwinning." :-)
Last time I went to the box office, I wouldn't call it "piracy". Somewhere between fraud, misrepresentation and highway robbery.
Why would I "pirate" something, you couldn't PAY me to see!
Those be some hard cocoanuts, Matey!
We can debate wheather Harper's conservatives are the same as the old Tories. There has been a considerable restructuring of the party - some would say a coup...
We'll see if he is effective at muzzling the "subordinate" ministers. So far, he has 180'd everything on the platform he presented to be elected.
This is because the Lords have been traditional conservatives, in regards to the administration of government in Britain. That is, they have been a barrier to the kind of radical moves by "New Labour" that characterize the revolutionary and unrepresentative executives of Bush in the US, Howard in Australia and Harper in Canada.
They wish to preserve the legacy of representation and rule of law that are initiated with the Magna Carta, and succeeding 800 years of parliamentary rule. In fact, many of the Lords see this as a part of their personal heritage. It is a definition of "conservative" that has been sadly neglected in much of the English-speaking world over the last half-century. As an old Whig of the Fox/Hobhouse school, I applaud the credibility and veracity of Ancien Regieme Tories in this principled position.
In SOVIET BRITAIN, Britannia waives the rules!
No! I drive Rincoln-Continentar!
It's not the low-spark of high-heeled boys...
It's the rustling of Jim Allchin's pink slip.
Build a man a fire, you will warm him for a day.
Set a man on fire, and you warm him the rest of his life.
It seems to me that one way of approaching the real dominant economic mode of our time is not, properly, Capitalism - but Propertarianism.
Of course in extremis, this outlaws thoughts that infringe on the absolute measure of property. You can also be a violator for having thoughts you do not own, and have not paid for the privilege of having.
What a narrow ond short-sighted way to manage in the world.
I used to put my faith in worship
But then my chance to get to Heaven slipped
I used to worry about the future
But then I threw my caution to the wind
I had no reason to be care free, no no no
Until I took a trip to the other side of town
Yeah yeah yeah, you know I heard that boogie rhythm
Hey - I had no choice but to get down down down down
Dance, nothing left for me to do but dance
Off these bad times I'm going through just dance
I got canned heat in my heels tonight, baby!
I have had to accept Local Admin for their WS. This is done by machine GPOs, with a machine startup script that add them for the duration of the session: /ADD Administrators INTERACTIVE
NET LOCALGROUP
They are local admin, until logoff. This doesn't extend the privilege to any kind of Remote Auth (unless you count terminal services), and the user can't access C$ across the net to another host where they may also be logged in.
It's a compromise, and I noted the risks in my report.
"I've always been a bit confused as to how religious Christians pick which parts of the old testament are still valid."
Ususally, the parts endowing one's predjudices and fears with devine authority.
This was someone who'd been at the customer over a year ago.
Whacking bad problem! All c$ shares and remote registry available to everyone, everywhere on a flat network! Even PT security guards in the middle of the night.
I don't know how they missed a worm infestation.
World writable files in System and System32? For ordinary users? That's still a problem.
I don't mean really to be obscure, or provocative.
Just think about what these things mean. Assume the real believer's position. Swearing on the Bible is a promise to God, by God, before God. You don't make that promise lightly, nor if you do not intend to carry it out. If you find an inherent contradiction in the promise you are making - do not lie to God, and make it anyway.
The Bible has many strange and contradictory injunctions - especially if these are read as literal - or approached merely intellectually. Literally, intellectually, the Bible does NOT say "marriage" is between a man and a woman. The biblical position of Abraham and others is that marriage is between a man and two or more women. Also, eating shellfish is an abomination in the eyes of the Lord - equal in approbation to homosexuality.
A true christian believer, who takes the statements of Jesus to heart, will have little or nothing to do with the "Old Testament". The laws of Deuteronomy and Leviticus were written by the very Temple priests that Jesus decried and vilified. The covenant of Moses was superceded by the revelation of Jesus.
Matthew 26:28:
This is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
Forgiveness of sins. Not the license to condemn others, by old religious law.
So. With discursion these are some points, that ought to be of concern to a beleiver, who constantly interrogates their own sincerity.
I am not a christian believer - but I do try to interrogate myself over my own sincerity. This is the way to the truth. Seeking this is the true aim of any religion in its enlightened form.