...but the scientific community needs an enormous dose of humility; and that's not something I see a lot of these days.
I hear this sometimes, but the truth is, technology works. It works well. Your life depends on it every day. We may not know everything, and I don't think anyone has ever made that claim, but we DO have a lot of the stuff right, because we put our knowledge of it to work for us every single day. I don't think scientists need humility, I think they need a big pat on the back. People need to trust them more. Because even if they're not right, they're probably more right than anyone else who's peddling "answers".
Because if you love your children, you'll of course stone them the minute they transgress. The book is hateful and evil. Through and through. Even the new testament. You're cherry-picking if you don't see it.
He only used WMI in that demo for the very last example, which was to disable a service. There's also a command line tool to do it. Just type sc at the command prompt and see for yourself. In Windows, there's usually a command line way to do things (legacy) and a robust way to do things (WSH/WMI). I almost always opt to write a little perl script to hit WMI when I have the option to do it either way. I also tend to use a FileSystemObject to manipulate files, instead of a command line script. You just have so much more control over what happens. I don't see that as a bad thing at all. If anything, I think it's a testament to how great WMI is.
Don't get me wrong. Linux is better at all things command line. But I think the comparison most people make isn't fair, because they don't know just what all you can do from the windows command line, or with a little WSH script in your favorite language. The difference is that every decent *nix admin knows the command line like the back of his hand. The same is, unfortunately, not true of windows admins.
If god wasn't necessarily created, then neither are we. There's no way to reason he simply evolved, or came into being, and we had to be created. By whatever process god exists, we too could have found existence. This is why intelligent design is meaningless.
There was a post on slashdot just a couple of days ago about this. With less stuff for our immune systems to fight, autoimmune diseases are more common.
Here's a link to check out, just for one reference.
I don't know if it's been proven and tested yet, but it's definitely a thought at least some medical professionals are having.
Your solution is probably very workable, but try ROBOCOPY instead of XCOPY. It will only copy the files that have changed. I backup 100's of gigabytes of data, and it only takes a few minutes using ROBOCOPY, because most of the data hasn't changed any since the day before. You could also add it on a shutdown script, and tell them to worry about waiting for the computer to actually power off. It could copy files while they're driving home, and would automatically power down when it was done.
Maybe they should just come off their profits a bit, and let their shareholders settle for two new jaguars this year, instead of three. There's no promise that a business will be as profitable tomorrow as it is today. No one seems to be willing to just accept an honest to goodness loss in profitability. It all turns ugly. Just diversify or something old fashioned to bring your numbers back up. If you can't, tough. I don't see why anyone needs to be getting absurdly rich off stuff.
The problem is a little over half the voting population won't vote for her under any circumstance.
Or a little over half, depending on who you ask.
But as we saw in 2000, a little over/under half doesn't matter. It's which states you carry, and how the electoral votes pan out that matters. You say gore "wasn't a good candidate", but he still got a little over half the votes if you split between the two parties.
I was simply saying that if IP isn't property, because it isn't excludable and rivalrous, I don't think it qualifies for legal protections needed to "maintain individual liberty, peace, security, and property rights." IP is nothing like deeds, titles, or contracts. Those clearly fall into the domain of "property rights".
"It is generally understood to be a doctrine that maintains that private initiative and production are best allowed to roam free, opposing economic interventionism and taxation by the state beyond that which is perceived to be necessary to maintain individual liberty, peace, security, and property rights."
Huh? You just conceded that IP isn't property, then did a 180 and said that it should still get all the befits of "property rights".
Saying you can't build a widget you know how to build would be exactly the sort of "economic interventionism" capitalism opposes.
I don't think "use rights" falls under "property rights". Use isn't property. IP isn't property. IP laws are a form of regulation, and in pure capitalism, we'd have to do away with such regulation and let the market work it out. If Johnny makes a new widget, but Sally immediately finds a way to improve on it or make it cheaper, Sally should be raking in the dough, not Johnny. After all, without IP, Johnny probably didn't spend a lot of money researching a novel way to make his widget. He just saw something someone else was doing, and improved upon it. So he didn't HAVE to spend tons of money and time on research.
I think "exclusive rights" to make or sell something is only the difference between filthy stinking rich and moderately rich. There's still a lot of money to be made, even if people can dupe your stuff. Because, well, you can dupe theirs, too. Hell, you could even work together on it, without fear of them stealing your ideas. That might lead to real innovation.
All that may be true, but it doesn't generate any new wealth. For everyone dollar you have, it's a dollar someone else doesn't have, and I'm not just referring to paper money. Everyone can't get just richer and richer. That would just lead to inflation, where the money might shift, but there still wouldn't be any "more" of it relatively. There's a definite balance to the economy, and for some people to get richer, other people have to get poorer.
You haven't "created" any wealth. It's simply been redistributed from someone else to you. When they give you $200, they have $200 less. You have $200 more. It's an even transaction. You didn't do something that turned $200 into $300. You just reallocated an existing $200 from someone else's pocket to your own. Maybe I'm missing something here?
No, you didn't "generate" money, in your example. You took the $200 you made from someone third party who bought your product. So value was only moved around. No new money came into existence. I think wealth is more like a long balloon. If you want one side of it to be fat and full, you have to squeeze the other end of it. And that's exactly what happens.
That's pretty much how any economy works. It's just usually so obfuscated that you have to look really hard to see it, and there are convenient excuses to dismiss it. That way the people on top don't have to feel bad about it.
I learned to how to write well by using online message boards, believe it or not. If nothing else, it's an outlet for exposition. Even if the kids aren't writing up to MLA standards, they're writing. That's better than the alternative of them not writing at all, except for when their class requires it. Teachers could step in here and offer extra credit for posting a blog that's written to certain standards, or for posting in online discussion. I see that as not only reasonable, but a good way to teach kids how what they're learning can help them in a real-life situation. That's something most of my teachers never did.
I think he's confused Wicca for the broader category of neopaganism. It happens a lot, but Wicca is a specific religion. It's not a "roll your own" sort of religion.
This was my objection to the article. PIE sucks a big one, but Opera is a damn good browser, and they only keep making it better. It might not be as "slick" as Safari, but it's still pretty slick, and definitely usable. But it's also a "desktop browser", too, and has all the features you'd expect from one.
Slashdot Mirror
Because if you love your children, you'll of course stone them the minute they transgress. The book is hateful and evil. Through and through. Even the new testament. You're cherry-picking if you don't see it.
He only used WMI in that demo for the very last example, which was to disable a service. There's also a command line tool to do it. Just type sc at the command prompt and see for yourself. In Windows, there's usually a command line way to do things (legacy) and a robust way to do things (WSH/WMI). I almost always opt to write a little perl script to hit WMI when I have the option to do it either way. I also tend to use a FileSystemObject to manipulate files, instead of a command line script. You just have so much more control over what happens. I don't see that as a bad thing at all. If anything, I think it's a testament to how great WMI is.
Don't get me wrong. Linux is better at all things command line. But I think the comparison most people make isn't fair, because they don't know just what all you can do from the windows command line, or with a little WSH script in your favorite language. The difference is that every decent *nix admin knows the command line like the back of his hand. The same is, unfortunately, not true of windows admins.
I saw a C7 laptop for sale at Wal-Mart for cheap.
If god wasn't necessarily created, then neither are we. There's no way to reason he simply evolved, or came into being, and we had to be created. By whatever process god exists, we too could have found existence. This is why intelligent design is meaningless.
There was a post on slashdot just a couple of days ago about this. With less stuff for our immune systems to fight, autoimmune diseases are more common. Here's a link to check out, just for one reference.
I don't know if it's been proven and tested yet, but it's definitely a thought at least some medical professionals are having.
But that doesn't tell you what's in the cave. :p
Here's a link, for those who haven't heard it.
Your solution is probably very workable, but try ROBOCOPY instead of XCOPY. It will only copy the files that have changed. I backup 100's of gigabytes of data, and it only takes a few minutes using ROBOCOPY, because most of the data hasn't changed any since the day before. You could also add it on a shutdown script, and tell them to worry about waiting for the computer to actually power off. It could copy files while they're driving home, and would automatically power down when it was done.
Maybe they should just come off their profits a bit, and let their shareholders settle for two new jaguars this year, instead of three. There's no promise that a business will be as profitable tomorrow as it is today. No one seems to be willing to just accept an honest to goodness loss in profitability. It all turns ugly. Just diversify or something old fashioned to bring your numbers back up. If you can't, tough. I don't see why anyone needs to be getting absurdly rich off stuff.
Maybe with Mono?
Sorry, read that either "a little under half" or "a little over half WOULD vote for her". Didn't proof that one so well.
But as we saw in 2000, a little over/under half doesn't matter. It's which states you carry, and how the electoral votes pan out that matters. You say gore "wasn't a good candidate", but he still got a little over half the votes if you split between the two parties.
I was simply saying that if IP isn't property, because it isn't excludable and rivalrous, I don't think it qualifies for legal protections needed to "maintain individual liberty, peace, security, and property rights." IP is nothing like deeds, titles, or contracts. Those clearly fall into the domain of "property rights".
Saying you can't build a widget you know how to build would be exactly the sort of "economic interventionism" capitalism opposes.
I don't think "use rights" falls under "property rights". Use isn't property. IP isn't property. IP laws are a form of regulation, and in pure capitalism, we'd have to do away with such regulation and let the market work it out. If Johnny makes a new widget, but Sally immediately finds a way to improve on it or make it cheaper, Sally should be raking in the dough, not Johnny. After all, without IP, Johnny probably didn't spend a lot of money researching a novel way to make his widget. He just saw something someone else was doing, and improved upon it. So he didn't HAVE to spend tons of money and time on research.
I think "exclusive rights" to make or sell something is only the difference between filthy stinking rich and moderately rich. There's still a lot of money to be made, even if people can dupe your stuff. Because, well, you can dupe theirs, too. Hell, you could even work together on it, without fear of them stealing your ideas. That might lead to real innovation.
All that may be true, but it doesn't generate any new wealth. For everyone dollar you have, it's a dollar someone else doesn't have, and I'm not just referring to paper money. Everyone can't get just richer and richer. That would just lead to inflation, where the money might shift, but there still wouldn't be any "more" of it relatively. There's a definite balance to the economy, and for some people to get richer, other people have to get poorer.
You haven't "created" any wealth. It's simply been redistributed from someone else to you. When they give you $200, they have $200 less. You have $200 more. It's an even transaction. You didn't do something that turned $200 into $300. You just reallocated an existing $200 from someone else's pocket to your own. Maybe I'm missing something here?
I say fuck the ARC. They're just a bunch of queer-haters. I hope J&J wins.
No, you didn't "generate" money, in your example. You took the $200 you made from someone third party who bought your product. So value was only moved around. No new money came into existence. I think wealth is more like a long balloon. If you want one side of it to be fat and full, you have to squeeze the other end of it. And that's exactly what happens.
You have to have kids of your own to be a teacher nowadays? *mumble mumble* Well good! At least it keeps the gays away from our kids!
I learned to how to write well by using online message boards, believe it or not. If nothing else, it's an outlet for exposition. Even if the kids aren't writing up to MLA standards, they're writing. That's better than the alternative of them not writing at all, except for when their class requires it. Teachers could step in here and offer extra credit for posting a blog that's written to certain standards, or for posting in online discussion. I see that as not only reasonable, but a good way to teach kids how what they're learning can help them in a real-life situation. That's something most of my teachers never did.
I think he's confused Wicca for the broader category of neopaganism. It happens a lot, but Wicca is a specific religion. It's not a "roll your own" sort of religion.
This was my objection to the article. PIE sucks a big one, but Opera is a damn good browser, and they only keep making it better. It might not be as "slick" as Safari, but it's still pretty slick, and definitely usable. But it's also a "desktop browser", too, and has all the features you'd expect from one.