How sad, so where did those rights come from? Was there a finite supply at the begining and now it's leaking and evaporating away?
Read the US Constitution (since we are discussing the American concept of what rights are) sometime. It's laid out in black and white. The People are sovereign entities, same as any monarchs. We grant powers to our government, but tell it specifically what rights to avoid messing with. In theory, we possess unlimited rights, as sovereign individuals. Just because a right isn't listed in the Bill of Rights, do not think it doesn't exist. All powers not granted specifically to the Federal government belong to the States, and the People....and all powers not granted to the State or Federal governments belong to the People.
Amendments are added to the constitution when we feel the need to protect more rights from government interference. Do not think those rights are established then. Merely protected.
There may or may not be many fine reasons for allowing citizens to carry guns, but the idea that it allows 'the people' to keep their (or anyone else's) astonishingly well-armed goverment in check is hilariously deluded.
In the USA I wouldn't think that's true....after all there are a lot more gun owners than people in the military. And a decent number of them own military grade hardware, quite legally. If the fit hits the shan (whether a domestic issue, or an invasion by foreign powers)....I'm pretty sure that The People can do what they need to.
A young cousin of mine once begged me to play it. I told her, "Ok, we'll go and ask your mother." Cousin says, "Ok I'll go ask her." I told her that I'd have to hear it from her mother so I should go with. She starts with the "No, no you don't have to." Then I promptly tell her that if she wants to play the game we both will talk to her mother. She shut up, pouted, and didn't bother me about that game ever again. I could have just said, "no, you are too young" since it was my game and all, but I knew if I did that it'd be a much longer argument.
And so, the game did not instantly "corrupt the youth" there because of....what a shock....a responsable adult. Exactly as it should be. And it'd be the same if she'd asked to watch an R rated movie too.
The most interesting thing about the whole issue though, is who is spearheading this "censor for the good of the children" stuff. It's not the "moral minority" of the Republican Party (come on, who really thinks ultra-religious rightwing powermongers really make up most of that party's membership?), but the Democrats, who are supposedly big on civil liberties and freedom....I guess it's freedom as they define it, and civil liberties as they only apply to Party members, and they define what those liberties are. Appairently it's freedom and liberty from anything offensive....as defined by an elite few.
Oh don't worry, people around the world will find some way to blame Bush for it. They blamed him for Katrina, some people (including politicians of other nations) even said we've "had it coming for a long time" which is a rather nasty remark, and kind of diminishes our respect for those nations even when they offer aid the next day.
Everything that happens is an excuse to hate America you know. If we get involved in a war somewhere....our fault. If we don't get involved....that's our fault too. We give aid to natural disasters around the world....and people complain that we're either late, or not providing enough. If we don't step in and help somewhere, even if nobody else is either we get fingers pointed at us and people demanding we do something. No matter what happens, anywhere in the world, people will find a way to blame the President, or America in general. Has been that way for as long as I can remember.
See, that's why we have the M rating. Anything rated MA really is for adults, just like NC-17....for both you have to be 17+. AO is the rating they traditionally only give to porn games, generally avaliable either only over the net or in...well, porn shops.
Now what I want to know, is how does two fully clothed, badly rendered characters engaging in what has been described as "sexual activity" get to be considered porn. Especially in a game where said content was locked away and likely included with the game only because they were too lazy to remove the code....and requires a patch to unlock...how is that a porn game? It's never really been explained properly to me.
And all this "protect the children" BS? The game was rated M...for Mature. With a very clear 17+ on the rating. The game never was intended for children, and around here they certainly couldn't buy a copy on their own, stores around here require proper ID to buy M rated games. If children play the game, it's the fault of the adult who bought it for them, likely their parents.
I still don't think that if they were to rebuild today from scratch New Orleans would become a metropolis just because there are tons of raw materials going through.
It is the human travel and small consumer goods like shaving cream, shoe shine, as well as food such as grains and meat that will have to pass through there _and_ have no better way to go but by river. That was the case, but it is not the case anymore.
Those "raw materials" you scoff at are pretty important. Coal and oil are major energy sources, steel is vital to a lot of industries, salt is important for a lot of reasons, timber is vital to construction and various industries that work in wood, and...oh wait, you didn't ignore grain...possibly the single largest trade good along the river. Closing down the cheapest trade route for these basic goods means that housing gets more expensive, electricity goes up in price (coal is the major source of electrical power, particularly in the USA)...not only people's homes would be disrupted but industry as well, gas prices skyrocket...which effects everything that is transported by truck around the country, including food, and consumer goods. Cost of steel would increase, meaning the cost of everything made from steel would increase...so everything from construction to the auto industry would take a hit.
You didn't really think out the economics of it did you?
Trade routes for what? Lumber and oil. Do you really need a metropolis at the intersection of such a trade route.
You forgot to add grain, coal, steel, fertilizer, and salt to your list of what the Mississippi is a trade route for. It's a vital trade link for every State on it, or rivers that connect to it. Every barge can carry a large amount of cargo, worth millions, with fewer workers than trains carrying an equal amount of goods (you'd need several trains to transport what is carried by a single barge in many cases). Every State connected on those rivers depends on that trade for a significant part of it's economic life, and the USA as a whole benefits from that trade as well.
And given that river barges can't traverse the open seas, and oceangoing vessels aren't exactly good for condusting trade on that river...we need a port where the river meets the ocean. A port facility needs workers, workers need homes, and workers need services nearby...provided by other workers and by merchants. So yes, we need a city there.
Memphis is the next major city on the Mississipi River, hundreds of miles before St. Louis, and I'm sure FedEx would LOVE to jump in on the extra shipping/warehousing of goods.
True, but Memphis is nowhere near the river port that St. Louis is.
Of course, I'm from Illinios - and Obama is way out there... (Of course, so was the competition - talk about lesser of two evils!)
Two? There were four candidates for that election. Two of which weren't Democrat or Republican. I voted for one of those two, the Libertarian candidate. I'm pretty sure my vote went to someone less evil than the either Obama or his extreme right-wing, imported from out of State, Republican competition.
"Far right" version? How exactly, are we "far right"? We may support the idea of truely free market capitalism and a minimal government, but that doesn't make us "far right." Not if you understand that these policies arise more out of a sense of "who the hell are you to tell me what to do if I'm not hurting anyone" than anything.
So, when you use Windows, do you often use software that isn't yet put out for release by the normal channels? Do you often use new, experimental software that has to be compiled? Sounds like a similar situation to what you are describing with Linux to me...
I was incredibly excited that I was getting all this cool stuff for free. Except... the stuff really wasn't all that cool. Every program that didn't come with the operating system was a pain to install, and almost all of them required compiling. Icons had to be created manually.
I never have to do this stuff. I just go to "install software", pick what I want out of the list, and click to download and install automatically. I can do this stuff from the command line too, actually, quicker if I know what I'm looking for, just using urpmi (the GUI system just uses urpmi as a frontend anyway).
Most distros these days have similar tools for downloading and installing software packages from the internet automatically. No compiling, no dependency problems, no trouble. So either you weren't properly using the tools that your distro came with, or you have a badly outdated distro, or you are using a distro that really isn't meant for desktop use...and complaining that Linux isn't ready for desktop use.
I can agree with this. OSX lacks a number of interface features that, quite frankly, I consider essential. And what it has as something comparable, is often poorly implimented. Take multiple virtual desktops for example, to me, these are simply a feature of a modern GUI. Neither Windows nor OSX comes with it by default, and their add-on (in Mac's case third-party I believe) implimentations are rather....poorly designed. Macs do have this eye-candyish animated thing which is supposed to help organise applications...but it's really nowhere near as good.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing the Mac. Mac people have their own complaints, some valid, some not, about Linux DEs. Differences are to be expected after all. But I just don't see the Mac as better implimented, or preferable to use.
1. Taiwan is a small and culturally and economically insignificant island off the coast of a massive country. Almost everyone of economic significance in Taiwan is forging commercial links with the mainland. The mainland see it of minor importance, gaining points purely in chest beating; 300 years ago Chinese were a minority on the island, Ploynesians were the majority. It has zero cultural or economic significance for Chine.
Actually, Taiwan is fairly economically significant, regardless of it's small size. It has a GDP of $576.2 billion, and a per capita income of $25,300 (not great, but not exactly horrible either). It's an important international trade center as well.
2. China, unlike the US, has huge coal resources, which can provide the bulk of national power requirements for the next 30 years (providing the power plants and lines get put up).
Where do you get the idea that the US doesn't have lots of coal? Most of our electrical power comes from coal, and it's not imported, it's mined here. There are parts of this country where the entire economy depends on coal mining, as it's the major industry (certain areas of my own State for example) and a huge source of jobs. Heck, we export coal to other countries.
Give me a break. People were using GNU utilities on their proprietary Unixen all the time. If you look at a contemporary proprietary Unix system, you will probably find GNU software there. Often, the GNU utilities are more usable than the vendor supplied ones; if the vendor even supplies them. If you look at a BSD system, they invariably use the GNU C compiler. And what utilities do you think are used to build the Linux kernel?
True, there were and are plenty of Unix systems using GNU utilities. And how many were virtually all GNU except for the kernel? How many were the entire package, the entire "almost an OS", but with their own kernel? I wasn't talking about GNU the organization or GNU the "loose group of utilities that this or that Unix might incorporate piecemeal." I was talking about GNU being built around as a total package to create an OS. That was going nowhere without the Linux kernel.
You're spot on about the brand name, but it really is true that Linux is just a kernel in a technical sense. Linux needed GNU to be competitive with the free BSDs, which provide both a kernel and a userland. That's what the statement "Linux is just a kernel" really means.
And as has been pointed out elsewhere, Linux could just as easily have been completed as an OS using posix components as GNU components. GNU wasn't strictly necessary, Linus would have gotten his own Unix-clone regardless. It was simply fortunate that GNU was avaliable and needed a kernel. The Linux kernel may be built today with GNU utilities, but they aren't necessary to do so. Something to remember.
Richard Stallman is just whining and being an attention starved brat, it's what he does. Linux moves to protect his big fat asset, namely....the Linux trademark, and here comes Stallman with his, "Hey, news people, the issue isn't the Linux trademark! It's that it's not called GNU to give me credit!" The only real news is how Stallman can possibly get so much attention with that whining he does.
The fact is, GNU was going nowhere without Linus' kernel. And it was, in fact, made complete with it. HURD (the intended GNU OS) is still a pipe dream because Stallman couldn't write a kernel if you paid him. Without the Linux kernel, that nice juicy GNU core is....well...pretty much nothing.
The facts are, that Linux was a kernel project without the rest of the OS, and GNU was....an incomplete OS. The two coming together didn't put one over another. Didn't make the OS GNU and not Linux, nor the OS Linux and not GNU, it made GNU/Linux which everyone just calls Linux for short. Which is no big deal. Except to Stallman, who feels he must take credit for everything.
A common statement is that "Linux is just the kernel" but that's not quite true. It's also a "brand name" that companies slap on their products, and it's also a shorthand term used by users of GNU/Linux (who do know there's plenty of GNU in there). And personally, I don't care if Stallman doesn't like it.
Well, now you're stuck in the middle of nowhere and will probably have to move again because your new little podunk town isn't where all the jobs are - just your current one.
You've obviously never set foot outside of a city in your life. I'm a rural geek. I live in a rural area away from the big cities, in Southern Illinois. I live near a small town that has so many manufacturing jobs that people come from other towns to work at the factories...on top of all the local businesses of course. And it is a small town, around 5,000 people. Some of the factories are even the result of outsourcing....other countries outsourcing their industry to the United States.
Near this "litte podunk town", within 45 minutes drive, are two "small cities." With lots of industrial and transportation jobs...including a regional commercial jet airport with flights out to major cities in the region, and a train station. There are malls within driving distance, and a lot of major stores. One "small city" has a Nike store, a Gamestop, and a number of other stores that really you don't expect to find in a "rural" region. There are numerous small museums within driving distance, including one art gallery that I am aware of. There are a number of fine, international award winning wineries within driving distance. And the region is noted for a major art and wine festival as well. Is this sufficient "culture" for you "city folk" or does "rural areas with industry" still mean podunk to you?
Oh, and there are less "cultured" entertainments as well of course, like race tracks, bars and clubs (nothing on the scale of nightclubs in the city I'm sure...), places to gamble, fantastic lakes and wilderness areas...tons of these to enjoy. Hunting is a major sport around here, even a professional sport around here. With big prize events being held in the region. Some of this I'm sure you can enjoy in the city, but I'm sure most of it you cannot (hunting, fishing, hiking out in a real natural environment).
And yes, the housing prices are much less than in the big city. Although locally they've been inflated some, it's still much cheaper to live here. And it's not just housing prices, prices in the stores are often lower as well. I've had relatives from the city mention that many times when they visit.
Oh, and yes, there are cybercafes, ISPs, and even DSL and Cable Internet around here...although I'm stuck on sucky dialup for the moment.
On a Mac, floating toolbars instead of a "proper window" is standard interface design. Mac applications are supposed to be document-centric, not application-centric like Windows. For many people (myself included) this seems like a much better way to handle things, and better fits the original desktop metaphor introduced with the Mac.
Of course I agree that the GIMP needs some improvement in the UI department, but the floating toolbars are good, at least in the Mac version.
I'm no Mac user. I use Mandrake (I still can't bring myself to say I use Mandriva) Linux, and GNOME. And I certainly see nothing wrong with floating toolbars (maybe it's because GNOME is the most mac-like of the Unix/Linux DEs so there's similar point of view...). In fact, it can be argued that this particular design element is superior to Photoshop with regards to usability for certain tasks. GIMP may need some work on it's interface, but I don't think this is one area it needs it in.
Besides, if anyone wants a Photoshop-like interface for GIMP, let them use and support GIMPshop and stop complaining about GIMP.
Windows ME sold only because it was the ONLY consumer OS available at the time.
It may have been the only consumer OS pre-installed on PCs avaliable in your average stores but it was certainly not the only consumer OS that existed. Or was I smoking something really strong when I thought I was using Linux at the time? Oh and I seem to recall that another platform....something called a Macintosh, that also had a consumer OS. Boy, I guess I have to stop smoking that funny looking plant in the back yard! It's making me imagine entire Operating Systems!
Sadly this is true. People don't choose Windows, they choose a computer and Windows happens to come with it. Windows is "thrust upon them" as it were. At least this is the case for the majority. I'm sure some people choose Windows. Sad, pathetic people.
Me, I chose Linux years ago (Mandrake, then SuSE, now Mandrake/Mandriva again), and use it as my day to day OS. I never have been able to understand these folks who say it "isn't ready for the desktop" simply because it doesn't have some specific brand name application, when it does have valid replacement apps of it's own. I don't understand the people who harpo about ease of install and compiling, when installing applications is pretty simple to me, just going to "Install software" and clicking on the apps I want...or using urpmi on the command line, which is just urpmi and the name of the application. I don't know what people are talking about when they say there are no games either. Maybe some fewer, but plenty of commercial games...lots that don't even need WINE or Cedega. And lots of decent Open Source games.
I think the people who say these thing are just afraid of going outside of what's comfortable for them, what they are used to and trying something new. I mean hell, if my grandfather can use Linux as his day to day OS (and he does), then surely anyone can.
My mom was talking to another mother, both my brother and the other woman's daughter were in the honor's program, but the other mother told my mom "my daughter is smart, but I told her not to act too smart because guys won't want to go out with her if she's too smart."
And damnit, everyone knows that's not right....geek girls are hot.
Part of me is tired of this whole "search for life on Mars" saga. What type of life are they talking about? An Amoeba? Oh boy, goodie goodie...Yay!
Actually, if we could prove, beyond any doubt, that life, even simple life, can form in multiple places within our own star system...this would be of major importance. After all, there are a great many star systems out there, and it would strongly suggest that the universe abounds with living things. It would say, "hey....life is a simple process....it likely occurs just about anywhere it's remotely feasable for it (which is what many scientists think anyway...)." And that would be a big deal, even if all we find is something like an amoeba.
As I understand it the third working design in the series was always intended to be an orbital craft. First an X-Prize winner, then a larger passenger version for sub-orbital tourism, and then an orbital design. I've been hearing this pretty much from the beginning. So how is this in any way recent?
Slashdot Mirror
Read the US Constitution (since we are discussing the American concept of what rights are) sometime. It's laid out in black and white. The People are sovereign entities, same as any monarchs. We grant powers to our government, but tell it specifically what rights to avoid messing with. In theory, we possess unlimited rights, as sovereign individuals. Just because a right isn't listed in the Bill of Rights, do not think it doesn't exist. All powers not granted specifically to the Federal government belong to the States, and the People....and all powers not granted to the State or Federal governments belong to the People.
Amendments are added to the constitution when we feel the need to protect more rights from government interference. Do not think those rights are established then. Merely protected.A young cousin of mine once begged me to play it. I told her, "Ok, we'll go and ask your mother." Cousin says, "Ok I'll go ask her." I told her that I'd have to hear it from her mother so I should go with. She starts with the "No, no you don't have to." Then I promptly tell her that if she wants to play the game we both will talk to her mother. She shut up, pouted, and didn't bother me about that game ever again. I could have just said, "no, you are too young" since it was my game and all, but I knew if I did that it'd be a much longer argument.
And so, the game did not instantly "corrupt the youth" there because of....what a shock....a responsable adult. Exactly as it should be. And it'd be the same if she'd asked to watch an R rated movie too.
The most interesting thing about the whole issue though, is who is spearheading this "censor for the good of the children" stuff. It's not the "moral minority" of the Republican Party (come on, who really thinks ultra-religious rightwing powermongers really make up most of that party's membership?), but the Democrats, who are supposedly big on civil liberties and freedom....I guess it's freedom as they define it, and civil liberties as they only apply to Party members, and they define what those liberties are. Appairently it's freedom and liberty from anything offensive....as defined by an elite few.Oh don't worry, people around the world will find some way to blame Bush for it. They blamed him for Katrina, some people (including politicians of other nations) even said we've "had it coming for a long time" which is a rather nasty remark, and kind of diminishes our respect for those nations even when they offer aid the next day.
Everything that happens is an excuse to hate America you know. If we get involved in a war somewhere....our fault. If we don't get involved....that's our fault too. We give aid to natural disasters around the world....and people complain that we're either late, or not providing enough. If we don't step in and help somewhere, even if nobody else is either we get fingers pointed at us and people demanding we do something. No matter what happens, anywhere in the world, people will find a way to blame the President, or America in general. Has been that way for as long as I can remember.See, that's why we have the M rating. Anything rated MA really is for adults, just like NC-17....for both you have to be 17+. AO is the rating they traditionally only give to porn games, generally avaliable either only over the net or in...well, porn shops.
Now what I want to know, is how does two fully clothed, badly rendered characters engaging in what has been described as "sexual activity" get to be considered porn. Especially in a game where said content was locked away and likely included with the game only because they were too lazy to remove the code....and requires a patch to unlock...how is that a porn game? It's never really been explained properly to me.
And all this "protect the children" BS? The game was rated M...for Mature. With a very clear 17+ on the rating. The game never was intended for children, and around here they certainly couldn't buy a copy on their own, stores around here require proper ID to buy M rated games. If children play the game, it's the fault of the adult who bought it for them, likely their parents.Those "raw materials" you scoff at are pretty important. Coal and oil are major energy sources, steel is vital to a lot of industries, salt is important for a lot of reasons, timber is vital to construction and various industries that work in wood, and...oh wait, you didn't ignore grain...possibly the single largest trade good along the river. Closing down the cheapest trade route for these basic goods means that housing gets more expensive, electricity goes up in price (coal is the major source of electrical power, particularly in the USA)...not only people's homes would be disrupted but industry as well, gas prices skyrocket...which effects everything that is transported by truck around the country, including food, and consumer goods. Cost of steel would increase, meaning the cost of everything made from steel would increase...so everything from construction to the auto industry would take a hit.
You didn't really think out the economics of it did you?You forgot to add grain, coal, steel, fertilizer, and salt to your list of what the Mississippi is a trade route for. It's a vital trade link for every State on it, or rivers that connect to it. Every barge can carry a large amount of cargo, worth millions, with fewer workers than trains carrying an equal amount of goods (you'd need several trains to transport what is carried by a single barge in many cases). Every State connected on those rivers depends on that trade for a significant part of it's economic life, and the USA as a whole benefits from that trade as well.
And given that river barges can't traverse the open seas, and oceangoing vessels aren't exactly good for condusting trade on that river...we need a port where the river meets the ocean. A port facility needs workers, workers need homes, and workers need services nearby...provided by other workers and by merchants. So yes, we need a city there."Far right" version? How exactly, are we "far right"? We may support the idea of truely free market capitalism and a minimal government, but that doesn't make us "far right." Not if you understand that these policies arise more out of a sense of "who the hell are you to tell me what to do if I'm not hurting anyone" than anything.
So, when you use Windows, do you often use software that isn't yet put out for release by the normal channels? Do you often use new, experimental software that has to be compiled? Sounds like a similar situation to what you are describing with Linux to me...
I never have to do this stuff. I just go to "install software", pick what I want out of the list, and click to download and install automatically. I can do this stuff from the command line too, actually, quicker if I know what I'm looking for, just using urpmi (the GUI system just uses urpmi as a frontend anyway).
Most distros these days have similar tools for downloading and installing software packages from the internet automatically. No compiling, no dependency problems, no trouble. So either you weren't properly using the tools that your distro came with, or you have a badly outdated distro, or you are using a distro that really isn't meant for desktop use...and complaining that Linux isn't ready for desktop use.I can agree with this. OSX lacks a number of interface features that, quite frankly, I consider essential. And what it has as something comparable, is often poorly implimented. Take multiple virtual desktops for example, to me, these are simply a feature of a modern GUI. Neither Windows nor OSX comes with it by default, and their add-on (in Mac's case third-party I believe) implimentations are rather....poorly designed. Macs do have this eye-candyish animated thing which is supposed to help organise applications...but it's really nowhere near as good.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing the Mac. Mac people have their own complaints, some valid, some not, about Linux DEs. Differences are to be expected after all. But I just don't see the Mac as better implimented, or preferable to use.True, there were and are plenty of Unix systems using GNU utilities. And how many were virtually all GNU except for the kernel? How many were the entire package, the entire "almost an OS", but with their own kernel? I wasn't talking about GNU the organization or GNU the "loose group of utilities that this or that Unix might incorporate piecemeal." I was talking about GNU being built around as a total package to create an OS. That was going nowhere without the Linux kernel.
And as has been pointed out elsewhere, Linux could just as easily have been completed as an OS using posix components as GNU components. GNU wasn't strictly necessary, Linus would have gotten his own Unix-clone regardless. It was simply fortunate that GNU was avaliable and needed a kernel. The Linux kernel may be built today with GNU utilities, but they aren't necessary to do so. Something to remember.
Damnit, didn't notice the typo in the first paragraph. Should read, "Linus moves to protect his big fat asset" of course.
Richard Stallman is just whining and being an attention starved brat, it's what he does. Linux moves to protect his big fat asset, namely....the Linux trademark, and here comes Stallman with his, "Hey, news people, the issue isn't the Linux trademark! It's that it's not called GNU to give me credit!" The only real news is how Stallman can possibly get so much attention with that whining he does.
The fact is, GNU was going nowhere without Linus' kernel. And it was, in fact, made complete with it. HURD (the intended GNU OS) is still a pipe dream because Stallman couldn't write a kernel if you paid him. Without the Linux kernel, that nice juicy GNU core is....well...pretty much nothing.
The facts are, that Linux was a kernel project without the rest of the OS, and GNU was....an incomplete OS. The two coming together didn't put one over another. Didn't make the OS GNU and not Linux, nor the OS Linux and not GNU, it made GNU/Linux which everyone just calls Linux for short. Which is no big deal. Except to Stallman, who feels he must take credit for everything.
A common statement is that "Linux is just the kernel" but that's not quite true. It's also a "brand name" that companies slap on their products, and it's also a shorthand term used by users of GNU/Linux (who do know there's plenty of GNU in there). And personally, I don't care if Stallman doesn't like it.
You've obviously never set foot outside of a city in your life. I'm a rural geek. I live in a rural area away from the big cities, in Southern Illinois. I live near a small town that has so many manufacturing jobs that people come from other towns to work at the factories...on top of all the local businesses of course. And it is a small town, around 5,000 people. Some of the factories are even the result of outsourcing....other countries outsourcing their industry to the United States.
Near this "litte podunk town", within 45 minutes drive, are two "small cities." With lots of industrial and transportation jobs...including a regional commercial jet airport with flights out to major cities in the region, and a train station. There are malls within driving distance, and a lot of major stores. One "small city" has a Nike store, a Gamestop, and a number of other stores that really you don't expect to find in a "rural" region. There are numerous small museums within driving distance, including one art gallery that I am aware of. There are a number of fine, international award winning wineries within driving distance. And the region is noted for a major art and wine festival as well. Is this sufficient "culture" for you "city folk" or does "rural areas with industry" still mean podunk to you?
Oh, and there are less "cultured" entertainments as well of course, like race tracks, bars and clubs (nothing on the scale of nightclubs in the city I'm sure...), places to gamble, fantastic lakes and wilderness areas...tons of these to enjoy. Hunting is a major sport around here, even a professional sport around here. With big prize events being held in the region. Some of this I'm sure you can enjoy in the city, but I'm sure most of it you cannot (hunting, fishing, hiking out in a real natural environment).
And yes, the housing prices are much less than in the big city. Although locally they've been inflated some, it's still much cheaper to live here. And it's not just housing prices, prices in the stores are often lower as well. I've had relatives from the city mention that many times when they visit.
Oh, and yes, there are cybercafes, ISPs, and even DSL and Cable Internet around here...although I'm stuck on sucky dialup for the moment.
I'm no Mac user. I use Mandrake (I still can't bring myself to say I use Mandriva) Linux, and GNOME. And I certainly see nothing wrong with floating toolbars (maybe it's because GNOME is the most mac-like of the Unix/Linux DEs so there's similar point of view...). In fact, it can be argued that this particular design element is superior to Photoshop with regards to usability for certain tasks. GIMP may need some work on it's interface, but I don't think this is one area it needs it in.
Besides, if anyone wants a Photoshop-like interface for GIMP, let them use and support GIMPshop and stop complaining about GIMP.Sadly this is true. People don't choose Windows, they choose a computer and Windows happens to come with it. Windows is "thrust upon them" as it were. At least this is the case for the majority. I'm sure some people choose Windows. Sad, pathetic people.
Me, I chose Linux years ago (Mandrake, then SuSE, now Mandrake/Mandriva again), and use it as my day to day OS. I never have been able to understand these folks who say it "isn't ready for the desktop" simply because it doesn't have some specific brand name application, when it does have valid replacement apps of it's own. I don't understand the people who harpo about ease of install and compiling, when installing applications is pretty simple to me, just going to "Install software" and clicking on the apps I want...or using urpmi on the command line, which is just urpmi and the name of the application. I don't know what people are talking about when they say there are no games either. Maybe some fewer, but plenty of commercial games...lots that don't even need WINE or Cedega. And lots of decent Open Source games.
I think the people who say these thing are just afraid of going outside of what's comfortable for them, what they are used to and trying something new. I mean hell, if my grandfather can use Linux as his day to day OS (and he does), then surely anyone can.
As I understand it the third working design in the series was always intended to be an orbital craft. First an X-Prize winner, then a larger passenger version for sub-orbital tourism, and then an orbital design. I've been hearing this pretty much from the beginning. So how is this in any way recent?