The Democrats have been harrasing Ralph Nader pretty bad. What they've done is they've formed a separate group called the United Progressives for Victory, and they are suing him everywhere that they can. They sue him in battleground states in order to keep him off the ballot, and they'll sue him in non-battleground states simply to harass him and deplete his resources. By forming a separate group, the United Progressives for Victory can be counter-attacked and sued out of exisxtence without putting the Democratic Party, itself, on the line.
Ok, so the people subscribing to the mail list authorize the fee to be waived when they sign up.
The point being, there's a lot of creative solutions to spam out there that would probably work pretty well, but implementation is the biggest problem to overcome.
This is nothing more than a fancy white-list, from what I can tell (the TechWorld article is slashdotted.)
Yes, a closed system that has user authentication built-in from the start has been proposed many, many times. The problem is getting the rest of the world to adopt such a system.
Just like the idea of charging a fractional penny to send an email and collecting a fractional penny when you receive one, so that email costs and revenues are balanced for the average person, but costs are astronomical for the spammer. Interesting idea, now how do you convert the planet over?
The solution to spam seems easy enough; it's the implementation that's the problem.
Would that be the same Carville who suggested on TV that the Republicans drugged up Zell Miller before his speech at the Republican convention? And drugged him up again before his interview with Chris Matthews?
And yes, it's the same Zell Miller who officiated at Carville's wedding.
Miller produced a whole littany of topics to talk about in his speech... isn't it significant that a senior Democratic senator is offering a blistering commentary on the continually leftward push of his party? Yet Matthews tried to frame the speech as if Miller was merely a tool of the Republican party.
Miller's speech was an important speech that will transcend the 2004 election, but Matthews tried to spin it as just a bunch of hate rhetoric.
Why did Matthews keep coming back to the spitball comment? He was obviously trying to force Miller to back down. Why didn't Matthews want to talk about the extensive documentation on Kerry's record that Miller had brought with him?
Come on, Miller is no lightweight; he's spent his lifetime debating. He knew a spin job when he saw it, and he was ready for it.
So what, Rush is dating Kagan. That doesn't make her a conservative any more than marrying James Carville made Mary Matalin a liberal. When the Washington Post reported on the story, they described Kagan as "part of the liberal media axis and a feminist -- but, then again, opposites attract."
Chris Matthews, who was a former Carter speechwriter, seems to drop his neutrality from time to time in his unabashed support of Kerry. A month ago he brought Michelle Malkin on his show to promote her book, and then brow-beat her about claims in John O'Neill's book, Unfit for Command. It came out during the interview that Matthews hadn't even read O'Neill's book and didn't understand the charge he was attacking, but he bounced Malkin off the show, anyway, and Keith Olbermann said she made a fool of herself. He never gave her the chance to promote her book, the whole reason she agreed to the interview.
Then, right after Zell Miller's rousing speech at the Republican Convention, Matthews attempted to browbeat and filibuster Zell Miller. Fortunately, Miller the career politician didn't lie down and take Matthews's attempts to obfuscate the message.
I think the bigger problem of offering $1 million to the developer community, when the cost of development may be much more than that, will be if there are competing projects but only one winner. Somebody will have to eat the cost of that development time. Shrewd for CA, perhaps, but very risky for everyone else.
Actually, Apple DOESN'T sell lossless compression. According to this page, what they sell is AAC, which is a lossy format. Everything I've ever bought from them has been 128 kbit AAC.
Apple has a separate format that they call "Apple Lossless," and I see no indication that they sell anything in Apple Lossless format, nor is there a checkbox in the preferences for iTMS to switch between AAC and Apple Lossless. Apple Lossless is available purely for ripping your CD's.
The page you reference says that iTunes CAN convert files to AAC with lossless compression, but is that the way iTMS sells its music? Based on comparison stories I've seen on Slashdot, I was under the impression that Apple was selling AAC files with lossy compression.
Apple has yet to run into any serious competition. This is great news for consumers, because it means that prices will start moving downward and bit rates will start moving upward. I would buy a lot more music from iTunes if they would sell it uncompressed. The AAC compression clips the bass, so it's not a good value if you like songs with a lot of bass in them.
he didn't say that FireFox was his primary browser, he just said that he had to patch it because of a vulnerability.
I would hope that as a program manager he would have a copy of each of the competing browsers on his system, so that he can steal... ah, borrow, ideas from them.
Considering that their Airport Extreme is geared towards wirelessly serving up music from your computer to your stereo system, making the iPod wireless is just a natural evolution.
It takes years for browsers to fully support any new standard, so APNG will be more obsolete than it already is by the time IE has full support.
We already have Flash, which is capable of far more than the APNG format will be.
If you don't have Flash, then you can animate PNG's (or JPG's) by using a javascript. Doing it this way means you don't have to worry about incompatibility with the APNG format.
Yeah, the W3 needs to implement a decent animated bitmap format, but the implementation process takes way too long.
The dream of building the Jetson's Skypad Apartment may come to true because technology designed for space could become the basis of the new German Antarctic station.
Does that mean they're going to stick them on top of a mile-high pole?
Because you're not simply moving on a two-dimensional plane anymore; you're travelling in three dimensions. Therefore, important buildings that have constructed elaborate concrete barriers will be completely vulnerable once more.
A single vehicle might not do significant damage, but multiple vehicles hitting a single target would be enough to take out any building.
Really, I don't think that the government can completely stop the adoption of this, but I do think that they will slow it significantly.
It's not simply the fact that it's a flying vehicle; it's the fact that traffic in the sky will multiply by a factor of 10,000, making it impossible to track any single vehicle in the sky. Terrorists won't need to plot an elaborate plan to fly a vehicle into a building, they'll just need to blend into rush hour traffic. How do you defend against that? You can't, except to ban all aerial commuter vehicles from metropolitan areas.
It would be great if I could live in a world where some asshole wasn't trying to blow me up in the name of Allah, right?
Slashdot Mirror
The Democrats have been harrasing Ralph Nader pretty bad. What they've done is they've formed a separate group called the United Progressives for Victory, and they are suing him everywhere that they can. They sue him in battleground states in order to keep him off the ballot, and they'll sue him in non-battleground states simply to harass him and deplete his resources. By forming a separate group, the United Progressives for Victory can be counter-attacked and sued out of exisxtence without putting the Democratic Party, itself, on the line.
Ok, so the people subscribing to the mail list authorize the fee to be waived when they sign up.
The point being, there's a lot of creative solutions to spam out there that would probably work pretty well, but implementation is the biggest problem to overcome.
This is nothing more than a fancy white-list, from what I can tell (the TechWorld article is slashdotted.)
Yes, a closed system that has user authentication built-in from the start has been proposed many, many times. The problem is getting the rest of the world to adopt such a system.
Just like the idea of charging a fractional penny to send an email and collecting a fractional penny when you receive one, so that email costs and revenues are balanced for the average person, but costs are astronomical for the spammer. Interesting idea, now how do you convert the planet over?
The solution to spam seems easy enough; it's the implementation that's the problem.
Would that be the same Carville who suggested on TV that the Republicans drugged up Zell Miller before his speech at the Republican convention? And drugged him up again before his interview with Chris Matthews?
And yes, it's the same Zell Miller who officiated at Carville's wedding.
At least Greedo and Han shooting at the same time is slightly more preferable to Greedo shooting first.
Although, you have to wonder how a killer like Greedo could miss at three feet away. Having Greedo shoot at all totally ruins the scene.
He's been persona non grata with the Democrats for a while now, and really shouldn't be called one.
So much for the "party of inclusion".
He didn't leave the Democrats, the Democrats left him.
Miller produced a whole littany of topics to talk about in his speech... isn't it significant that a senior Democratic senator is offering a blistering commentary on the continually leftward push of his party? Yet Matthews tried to frame the speech as if Miller was merely a tool of the Republican party.
Miller's speech was an important speech that will transcend the 2004 election, but Matthews tried to spin it as just a bunch of hate rhetoric.
Why did Matthews keep coming back to the spitball comment? He was obviously trying to force Miller to back down. Why didn't Matthews want to talk about the extensive documentation on Kerry's record that Miller had brought with him?
Come on, Miller is no lightweight; he's spent his lifetime debating. He knew a spin job when he saw it, and he was ready for it.
So what, Rush is dating Kagan. That doesn't make her a conservative any more than marrying James Carville made Mary Matalin a liberal. When the Washington Post reported on the story, they described Kagan as "part of the liberal media axis and a feminist -- but, then again, opposites attract."
And Pat Buchannan, who worked at CNN, casts Judy Woodruff as a liberal.
Chris Matthews, who was a former Carter speechwriter, seems to drop his neutrality from time to time in his unabashed support of Kerry. A month ago he brought Michelle Malkin on his show to promote her book, and then brow-beat her about claims in John O'Neill's book, Unfit for Command. It came out during the interview that Matthews hadn't even read O'Neill's book and didn't understand the charge he was attacking, but he bounced Malkin off the show, anyway, and Keith Olbermann said she made a fool of herself. He never gave her the chance to promote her book, the whole reason she agreed to the interview.
Then, right after Zell Miller's rousing speech at the Republican Convention, Matthews attempted to browbeat and filibuster Zell Miller. Fortunately, Miller the career politician didn't lie down and take Matthews's attempts to obfuscate the message.
Mark Hamill as David Bowie!
I think the bigger problem of offering $1 million to the developer community, when the cost of development may be much more than that, will be if there are competing projects but only one winner. Somebody will have to eat the cost of that development time. Shrewd for CA, perhaps, but very risky for everyone else.
Actually, Apple DOESN'T sell lossless compression. According to this page, what they sell is AAC, which is a lossy format. Everything I've ever bought from them has been 128 kbit AAC.
Apple has a separate format that they call "Apple Lossless," and I see no indication that they sell anything in Apple Lossless format, nor is there a checkbox in the preferences for iTMS to switch between AAC and Apple Lossless. Apple Lossless is available purely for ripping your CD's.
Yes, I meant no lossy compression, obviously.
The page you reference says that iTunes CAN convert files to AAC with lossless compression, but is that the way iTMS sells its music? Based on comparison stories I've seen on Slashdot, I was under the impression that Apple was selling AAC files with lossy compression.
Apple has yet to run into any serious competition. This is great news for consumers, because it means that prices will start moving downward and bit rates will start moving upward. I would buy a lot more music from iTunes if they would sell it uncompressed. The AAC compression clips the bass, so it's not a good value if you like songs with a lot of bass in them.
he didn't say that FireFox was his primary browser, he just said that he had to patch it because of a vulnerability.
I would hope that as a program manager he would have a copy of each of the competing browsers on his system, so that he can steal... ah, borrow, ideas from them.
Considering that their Airport Extreme is geared towards wirelessly serving up music from your computer to your stereo system, making the iPod wireless is just a natural evolution.
The original picture is hosted on Mac.com... if htere was anything to this, Apple would have shut him down by now.
It takes years for browsers to fully support any new standard, so APNG will be more obsolete than it already is by the time IE has full support.
We already have Flash, which is capable of far more than the APNG format will be.
If you don't have Flash, then you can animate PNG's (or JPG's) by using a javascript. Doing it this way means you don't have to worry about incompatibility with the APNG format.
Yeah, the W3 needs to implement a decent animated bitmap format, but the implementation process takes way too long.
Conservatives, huh?
Then why is it that John Kerry is trying to ban a book that raises questions about him? And why did I get modded down from +2 to a -1, Flamebait, for mentioning it on Slashdot?
Liberals are not as tolerant of opposing views as you seem to think they are.
Just, just below the text entry area, there is a pop-up list that says "HTML Formatted"; just switch that to "Plain Old Text" and you'll be fine.
Unfit for Command
The dream of building the Jetson's Skypad Apartment may come to true because technology designed for space could become the basis of the new German Antarctic station.
Does that mean they're going to stick them on top of a mile-high pole?
Yes, isn't it amazing what you can do with Photoshop these days?
Because you're not simply moving on a two-dimensional plane anymore; you're travelling in three dimensions. Therefore, important buildings that have constructed elaborate concrete barriers will be completely vulnerable once more.
A single vehicle might not do significant damage, but multiple vehicles hitting a single target would be enough to take out any building.
Really, I don't think that the government can completely stop the adoption of this, but I do think that they will slow it significantly.
It's not simply the fact that it's a flying vehicle; it's the fact that traffic in the sky will multiply by a factor of 10,000, making it impossible to track any single vehicle in the sky. Terrorists won't need to plot an elaborate plan to fly a vehicle into a building, they'll just need to blend into rush hour traffic. How do you defend against that? You can't, except to ban all aerial commuter vehicles from metropolitan areas.
It would be great if I could live in a world where some asshole wasn't trying to blow me up in the name of Allah, right?