Just do like I do, write slowly focusing on getting the characters properly formated and even. Sure it takes some time, but there's really no reason to blame pens for that problem. A decent ball point pen is going to do a better job than a fountain pen ever did. Try getting a consistent 0.7mm line with a ballpoint pen. I don't think I could write anything in the size I prefer with the older technology.
It's not confusing if you properly use it. Manuscript is written by hand, there is no distinction made between the type of lettering system one uses. It's perfectly valid to point to a beautifully rendered book which features calligraphy as print as block letters as cursive. Hence the lack of confusion.
Manuscripts are just notable for not being produced via press, printer or other mechanical means.
If it works it works, but that's definitely overkill. In college when I was taking a journalism course, the instructor insisted that we print out a copy and read it out loud making notes on the copy of what was problematic. What you're doing isn't going to really allow you to skip that step and probably just slows things down further.
It really depends, one can print or use cursive. And it depends far more on how much time you dedicate to it, my writing tends to take a long time, but it's just as legible as what a computer is going to print.
As sacrilegious as it is for me to say, the fact is that one needs to be able to write in handwriting, cursive is quite useful at times when for one reason or another one can't use or doesn't want to trust a computer. Sure you can lose the notes or destroy them, but it's somewhat more difficult than with computer files.
We don't do that because the likelihood of somebody abusing the weapons to kill us is substantially higher than the risk of being killed by an impact. Further more you're assuming that we'd get it right, and let's face it we tend to be kind of hit or miss on things like that. We were able to more or less successfully fight the ozone layer problem, but pretty much completely refuse to do anything about global climate change.
I'm not sure what makes you so sure that there'll be much left by the time a space object becomes a risk or that we'll be able to spot it in the first place. Many of those meteors move pretty damn fast.
Clearly you're not an evil genius. The best way for one to demonstrate ones genius is to have an overly complex and convoluted scheme to get what you could've gotten 6 scenes ago via a simple handgun.
There's a significant distinction to be made there. First off, these agencies aren't the NSA and secondly it is currently perfectly legal to use cookies. The two aren't really connect at all.
There is a significant amount of justified mistrust in the government right now, but the thing is that if they were up to something nefarious, I'd assume they'd use a method that was much less easily dodged by people
Seriously, the voice calls are prioritized first in the networks, and it's practically indifferent to the network operators what the rest of all that already built bandwidth is doing. There shouldn't be lack either, unless if the operator really grossly undersized their networks. The impact around where I live at is zero but the customers get a pretty nice service.
That tends to be a serious problem in the US, we don't require various communications companies to have the necessary bandwidth to handle things. I'm more familiar with ISPs and their tendency to oversell their capacity, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit if cell networks were in a similar state.
But then again, it could just be greed and corruption, the same thing which leads the free to provide text messaging service to be so ungodly expensive. Yeah, I realize it costs them something, but it's basically just slipped into messages that are going out already and costs basically nothing to provide.
I like the reusable zip ties for smaller cables, they don't last forever, but it seems to take a fair number of reattachments before they break. For larger ones and for bundles of smaller cables, I like to use cable clamps. Or for real temporary managment, you can always use some masking tape, it's not as environmentally friendly, but it does work pretty effectively.
Personally the bigger issue I have is having the interest to redo the work every time I've shuffled things about.
Perhaps, but Dungeons & Dragons is probably the most likely game ever devised to become a quality picture, and it pretty well sucked. It's nice to know that people around here care enough about Michael Bay to mod me troll for pointing out that he sucks.
Now if only he could have figured out that the film named "Transformers" ought to be about "Transformers" we might all have been spared a boring film lead up to a half hour of awesome.
Not really, I think it's more likely that their fans are old enough not to want anything to do with this. I mean I'm probably younger than most of them and I'm in my late 20s. Yes they have had a few hits since then, but most of their real classics are well over a decade and half old for the newer ones.
Plus Guitar Hero is really not worth the $20 when you can just do the air guitar work that you were doing previously for free.
Really what it shoes more than anything else is that it's a genre of games that's inherently limited. Unless somebody decides to go way out there and use the guitar for some other sort of game entirely it'll die off eventually like all fads do.
Or Michael Bay for that matter, at list with Sam Raimi there's the possibility that it'll be worth watching. That being said, it's WoW, who cares? We've got a game that's popular but is that really justification for making a film about it?
Personally I loved Doom and it was a popular game, but well, we all know how that turned out.
35 USC 101 is the key to what can and cannot be patented in the US, and it starts: "Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful..." so, yeah "discoveries" can be patented. If you "discover" a new rock mineral that cures cancer, you are entitled to a patent on the mineral itself (given you can prove it's "usefulness", i.e. actually curing cancer).
That reminds me of something a Spaniard once said, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Discovering the rock would not entitle you to a patent, using the rock to cure cancer is also not likely to qualify. Conveniently you chopped off that sentence right before a set of significant qualifiers. It's sort of like defining rape and neglecting the portion of that statute that defines what consent is. You'll not the portion of the sentence that says "composition of matter" that doesn't mean a rock, that means something that you've put together sort of like a chemical patent. Or more specifically because one did not create the rock, one would not be eligible to obtain a patent for it.
You might be able to sneak it through as a process patent, but not for discovering the rock itself.
I'm personally curious as to how many draft-N routers and other hardware devices are going to actually get updated firmware to handle the final spec. Considering that Nintendo for instance doesn't care enough to be fully compliant with the relevant specs, I'm curious as to how well other devices are going to work.
What we really need is some sort of a law that says that you can't claim to support a spec unless it's tested with relevant exceptions for small scale hardware producers and hobbyists.
Perhaps you should go back and revise, I think you missed a "T".
Re:Postal addresses identify houses!I
on
P.I.I. In the Sky
·
· Score: 1
That's not in any way shape or form analogous. If I have your IP, I don't have the ability to go over there and kick the shit out of you. Even in the worst case all I'd be able to do is destroy your computer and take the information on it.
On top of that, IP addresses aren't personally identifying information, we've all been through that with the RIAA and MPAA suits, it at best identifies the computer and often times doesn't even do that successfully.
Not to mention that anybody that has to work with radios for a living knows to leave it silent as much as possible. You never know when a legitimate life or death emergency might demand the airwaves.
And when you can put forward a suggestion as to how the deaths can be restricted to those that are making the calls in transit, then we can talk about repealing the laws.
It never ceases to amaze me how this sort of analysis conveniently neglects the part where other, presumably, prudent people are killed by iditiotic jackasses. It also neglects to point out that perhaps we should also factor in for the additional stress, and missed days from people being injured doing something they weren't supposed to be doing.
Personally, I choose to be prudent and it's completely unacceptable to me to have to put up with the risk because somebody else doesn't feel like behaving in a responsible fashion. If they want to risk their life or limb in a way that doesn't cost me fine, but until it doesn't effect me, they should be compelled to act in a responsible fashion.
It's not any better, I think subsequent research demonstrated that it's a questionable assertion. Really at this point, the prudent thing is to turn off all audio devices and anything that isn't really necessary so that one can more easily concentrate.
These sorts of laws aren't terribly useful until they ban it for all drivers and make it a primary offense.
And what about developers that are "duplicating" features that Apple provides? Or that access the web and could be theoretically used for accessing adult content? Sure in this case you might be right, but Apple's hardly above setting up an abusive system.
If the iPhone were properly designed it shouldn't be possible to brick via just a software installation. Childporn is a straw man argument, they've been banning things which could be used to access content that doesn't go with Apple's wholesome image whether or not that was the purpose of the app. As for the description being accurate, there are ways that they could handle that without reviewing it formally chances are the reviewers have different standards than what an individual has..
Slashdot Mirror
Just do like I do, write slowly focusing on getting the characters properly formated and even. Sure it takes some time, but there's really no reason to blame pens for that problem. A decent ball point pen is going to do a better job than a fountain pen ever did. Try getting a consistent 0.7mm line with a ballpoint pen. I don't think I could write anything in the size I prefer with the older technology.
It's not confusing if you properly use it. Manuscript is written by hand, there is no distinction made between the type of lettering system one uses. It's perfectly valid to point to a beautifully rendered book which features calligraphy as print as block letters as cursive. Hence the lack of confusion.
Manuscripts are just notable for not being produced via press, printer or other mechanical means.
If it works it works, but that's definitely overkill. In college when I was taking a journalism course, the instructor insisted that we print out a copy and read it out loud making notes on the copy of what was problematic. What you're doing isn't going to really allow you to skip that step and probably just slows things down further.
It really depends, one can print or use cursive. And it depends far more on how much time you dedicate to it, my writing tends to take a long time, but it's just as legible as what a computer is going to print.
As sacrilegious as it is for me to say, the fact is that one needs to be able to write in handwriting, cursive is quite useful at times when for one reason or another one can't use or doesn't want to trust a computer. Sure you can lose the notes or destroy them, but it's somewhat more difficult than with computer files.
As opposed to the system we have now where they all do what various law enforcement agencies want?
Tea bagging?
We don't do that because the likelihood of somebody abusing the weapons to kill us is substantially higher than the risk of being killed by an impact. Further more you're assuming that we'd get it right, and let's face it we tend to be kind of hit or miss on things like that. We were able to more or less successfully fight the ozone layer problem, but pretty much completely refuse to do anything about global climate change.
I'm not sure what makes you so sure that there'll be much left by the time a space object becomes a risk or that we'll be able to spot it in the first place. Many of those meteors move pretty damn fast.
Clearly you're not an evil genius. The best way for one to demonstrate ones genius is to have an overly complex and convoluted scheme to get what you could've gotten 6 scenes ago via a simple handgun.
There's a significant distinction to be made there. First off, these agencies aren't the NSA and secondly it is currently perfectly legal to use cookies. The two aren't really connect at all.
There is a significant amount of justified mistrust in the government right now, but the thing is that if they were up to something nefarious, I'd assume they'd use a method that was much less easily dodged by people
Seriously, the voice calls are prioritized first in the networks, and it's practically indifferent to the network operators what the rest of all that already built bandwidth is doing. There shouldn't be lack either, unless if the operator really grossly undersized their networks. The impact around where I live at is zero but the customers get a pretty nice service.
That tends to be a serious problem in the US, we don't require various communications companies to have the necessary bandwidth to handle things. I'm more familiar with ISPs and their tendency to oversell their capacity, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit if cell networks were in a similar state.
But then again, it could just be greed and corruption, the same thing which leads the free to provide text messaging service to be so ungodly expensive. Yeah, I realize it costs them something, but it's basically just slipped into messages that are going out already and costs basically nothing to provide.
I like the reusable zip ties for smaller cables, they don't last forever, but it seems to take a fair number of reattachments before they break. For larger ones and for bundles of smaller cables, I like to use cable clamps. Or for real temporary managment, you can always use some masking tape, it's not as environmentally friendly, but it does work pretty effectively.
Personally the bigger issue I have is having the interest to redo the work every time I've shuffled things about.
Perhaps, but Dungeons & Dragons is probably the most likely game ever devised to become a quality picture, and it pretty well sucked. It's nice to know that people around here care enough about Michael Bay to mod me troll for pointing out that he sucks.
Now if only he could have figured out that the film named "Transformers" ought to be about "Transformers" we might all have been spared a boring film lead up to a half hour of awesome.
Not really, I think it's more likely that their fans are old enough not to want anything to do with this. I mean I'm probably younger than most of them and I'm in my late 20s. Yes they have had a few hits since then, but most of their real classics are well over a decade and half old for the newer ones.
Plus Guitar Hero is really not worth the $20 when you can just do the air guitar work that you were doing previously for free.
Really what it shoes more than anything else is that it's a genre of games that's inherently limited. Unless somebody decides to go way out there and use the guitar for some other sort of game entirely it'll die off eventually like all fads do.
Or Michael Bay for that matter, at list with Sam Raimi there's the possibility that it'll be worth watching. That being said, it's WoW, who cares? We've got a game that's popular but is that really justification for making a film about it?
Personally I loved Doom and it was a popular game, but well, we all know how that turned out.
35 USC 101 is the key to what can and cannot be patented in the US, and it starts: "Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful..." so, yeah "discoveries" can be patented. If you "discover" a new rock mineral that cures cancer, you are entitled to a patent on the mineral itself (given you can prove it's "usefulness", i.e. actually curing cancer).
That reminds me of something a Spaniard once said, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Discovering the rock would not entitle you to a patent, using the rock to cure cancer is also not likely to qualify. Conveniently you chopped off that sentence right before a set of significant qualifiers. It's sort of like defining rape and neglecting the portion of that statute that defines what consent is. You'll not the portion of the sentence that says "composition of matter" that doesn't mean a rock, that means something that you've put together sort of like a chemical patent. Or more specifically because one did not create the rock, one would not be eligible to obtain a patent for it.
You might be able to sneak it through as a process patent, but not for discovering the rock itself.
Nothing suggests a desire for privacy quite like posting your personals all over the net.
Well, perhaps we should, it would save alot of time pointing out when things aren't typos.
I'm personally curious as to how many draft-N routers and other hardware devices are going to actually get updated firmware to handle the final spec. Considering that Nintendo for instance doesn't care enough to be fully compliant with the relevant specs, I'm curious as to how well other devices are going to work.
What we really need is some sort of a law that says that you can't claim to support a spec unless it's tested with relevant exceptions for small scale hardware producers and hobbyists.
Perhaps you should go back and revise, I think you missed a "T".
That's not in any way shape or form analogous. If I have your IP, I don't have the ability to go over there and kick the shit out of you. Even in the worst case all I'd be able to do is destroy your computer and take the information on it.
On top of that, IP addresses aren't personally identifying information, we've all been through that with the RIAA and MPAA suits, it at best identifies the computer and often times doesn't even do that successfully.
Not to mention that anybody that has to work with radios for a living knows to leave it silent as much as possible. You never know when a legitimate life or death emergency might demand the airwaves.
And when you can put forward a suggestion as to how the deaths can be restricted to those that are making the calls in transit, then we can talk about repealing the laws.
It never ceases to amaze me how this sort of analysis conveniently neglects the part where other, presumably, prudent people are killed by iditiotic jackasses. It also neglects to point out that perhaps we should also factor in for the additional stress, and missed days from people being injured doing something they weren't supposed to be doing.
Personally, I choose to be prudent and it's completely unacceptable to me to have to put up with the risk because somebody else doesn't feel like behaving in a responsible fashion. If they want to risk their life or limb in a way that doesn't cost me fine, but until it doesn't effect me, they should be compelled to act in a responsible fashion.
It's not any better, I think subsequent research demonstrated that it's a questionable assertion. Really at this point, the prudent thing is to turn off all audio devices and anything that isn't really necessary so that one can more easily concentrate.
These sorts of laws aren't terribly useful until they ban it for all drivers and make it a primary offense.
And what about developers that are "duplicating" features that Apple provides? Or that access the web and could be theoretically used for accessing adult content? Sure in this case you might be right, but Apple's hardly above setting up an abusive system.
If the iPhone were properly designed it shouldn't be possible to brick via just a software installation. Childporn is a straw man argument, they've been banning things which could be used to access content that doesn't go with Apple's wholesome image whether or not that was the purpose of the app. As for the description being accurate, there are ways that they could handle that without reviewing it formally chances are the reviewers have different standards than what an individual has..