Or could it be that, the number of people willing to brake the law, and circumvent(steal) reciprocation to the artists, are those who prefer Microsoft for use then those who prefer Apple.
Could the higher percentage of people willing to use a tool to crack Windows Media DRM, over those people who prefer to use software (itunes) made by Apple, actually relate to a higher percentage of people with lower moral standards are those who prefer Windows over Apple software????
I find it an interesting corelation. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.
of course you are forgetting about.org, that changes things. I maintain a number of non-profit.org domains. If the cost of these domains go up, I'll advise all my clients to switch to and only use.com or.net domains. . . Until this happens to them as well. So effectively, this will kill the.org,.info, and.biz TDLs.
Really not meaning to troll, but this got me thinking...
I must have gotten one of the lucky batteries, because my 17" powerbook is 3 years old, and the battery still holds a 3.5-4 hour charge with constant use. And not just websurfing either. Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Illustrator, InDesign, among others.
Is there a way to calculate average life of these batteries?
Machintosh/Apple makes a "car." A complete package. It comes bundled with pre-installed "tires" (OS X - to get you around in it, of course you can shoose to install something different.) It comes bundled with a stereo, headlight bulbs, mirrors, seats, carpet, you name it (ie: think software options.) All of which can be taken off of the car and something else replace it with ease.
Microsoft makes "tires," that "car" manufactures (Dell, HP, . ..) install on their cars. However the "car" manufactures where being strong armed by the "tire" company in also include a particular stereo, bulbs, mirrors, seats and carpet, that where required to also be bundled, without modification.
I know not a great analogy, but you get the idea. Let the critics eat me alive is they so choose. Karma-shmarma.
The difference is. . . . Try and get rid of explorer. It is one thing to offer/install/bundle an option for those services, that can be deleted if the user decides to use another service. It's another to integrate it so far into the OS that you are forced to use it. (Think beyond websurfing.)
Sorry your wrong here. There are many private loans available for students, that are not part of the federal student loan programs. And all these loans are protected against bankrupcty.
In case you really want to know. . . Been there, tried that, and still paying my private college loans, as well as a few federal loans.
If planet A is circling planet B, then planet B cannot circle Planet A, right?
Can someone explain to me how they can orbit each other at the same time???? Wouldn't it be more correct to say that they are polarized like 2 oppositly charged magnets?
I would say it the other way around. Men are OS X and Women are Linus. (Men are easier to understand, logical. Women on the other hand, require a lot of time massaging and learning just the right way to interact in order to get what you want out of them, and even then sometimes the outcome is unexpected, and requires more massaging.
I would say it is the battery issue. One the one hand you have a cord, that you plug in to use. On the other, you ahve to make sure that you have charged batteries on hand.
The Catholic Church does believe that there is nothing bigger them themselves. This still fits perfectly with my analogy. Catholicism is a religion, Christianity is a relationship. There are many different religions that profess Christianity, that doesn't make them all the same.
Just the parts of science that explain the diversification of species.
There again you prove that you don't know what you are talking about. Christianity in no way has anything to do with conridicting "an" explaination for the diversification of species. I have no problem with science and "an" explaination/theory of how species diversify, in fact I agree with it. Evolution within species is easy to "prove" and can be seen at many stages. This is very different from the broad ranging beliefs of the "origins of life," and not that of the, "origins of species." The difference lies in the belief that all things were created by natural selection, or wether or not some other force or forces can be involved directly or indirectly in the creation of life.
It's not exactly the pinnacle of humility to trace your lineage to a divine being, now is it? Ancient monarchs claimed to be of divine descent as well. Recent monarchs claimed to be ordained by a higher being. That's where you're coming from and no, there's nothing humble about it.
I think it is very humble to believe that there is something greater then yourself. Your talking about someone claiming supremacy to others because of a devine existance marking themselves as something greater. I'm doing nothing of the kind. The exact opposite.
please don't make generalizations about all creatists.
I believe that evolution will prove out God. Does my belief in something yet unknown scare you?
Those who espouse creationism do so out of a bond to a cult. "If it contradicts what is literally in my Bible, it is false." That is an aspect of a cult: to deny the evidence when faced with it.
So here's the name calling: if you believe in Intelligent Design, you are part of a cult. Ignoring overwhelming evidence simply because it does not support your worldview is a symptom of self-delision. You cannot simply say, "But you can't explain this particular thing, so God must've done it." That's just stupid, plain and simple. We are a long way from knowing many things about our universe. That doesn't mean these things are unknowable, and it certainly doesn't mean God did it.
You are speaking of a limited sect. of creationists when you bring in the literal Bible premise. You also assume that is the only avenue of debate or understanding. It is you who have put things into a box.
I contend that we are also a long way from knowing many things about our universe, and more. And that doesn't mean these things are unknowable, and it certainly doesn't mean that there isn't or can't be a high being then ourselves such as "God" and it also doesn't mean that such a higher being could not have created us as lower lifeforms then themselves.
It is "Humanists" such as yourself who limit the universe around us, by limiting everything as under humanity itself in the chain of existance and intellectual strength.
It is people like you, hundreds of years ago that thought the Earth was the center of the universe, because they believed nothing could be bigger them themselves either.
I believe in creationism and evolution. But I do not make statements as fact that are mere theory. I state that my beliefs are such. A belief. I however contend that the author of the article states his belief as a plausible origin of humans is fact instead of more correctly stating it as factual. There is a difference between stating you believe something, and stating that something is the end all defacto.
I'm not calling anyone delusional, but you do find interesting ways to make labels yourself. S I'll leave you to that.
Thank you for the continued sweeping generalizations about Christianity when you obviously know little about it, and instead rant based on your pre-consieved ideas of Christianity instead.
Christianity does not seeek to discredit science, in fact many of us, who believe in God, and a Christ who came to earth as man and died for our sins (genericly put, Christians) believe that evolution works hand in hand with a supreme being, and that science in no way contradicts the plausible existance of such a creator. I believe that one day Science will prove out God as a high being that we may not be able to prove exists as of yet with our current level of evolution and knowledge. That doesn't make the belief in such a thing any less plausible. Why can you not see that distiction?
Slashdot Mirror
Or could it be that, the number of people willing to brake the law, and circumvent(steal) reciprocation to the artists, are those who prefer Microsoft for use then those who prefer Apple.
Could the higher percentage of people willing to use a tool to crack Windows Media DRM, over those people who prefer to use software (itunes) made by Apple, actually relate to a higher percentage of people with lower moral standards are those who prefer Windows over Apple software????
I find it an interesting corelation. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.
Maybe you stumbled onto the theme for the next mac ad. . .
Crashes IE or FF, but Just works on a Mac.
nothing like guilty until proven innocent, and then still guilty if the "media" says so, right?
of course you are forgetting about .org, that changes things. I maintain a number of non-profit .org domains. If the cost of these domains go up, I'll advise all my clients to switch to and only use .com or .net domains. . . Until this happens to them as well. So effectively, this will kill the .org, .info, and .biz TDLs.
Really not meaning to troll, but this got me thinking...
I must have gotten one of the lucky batteries, because my 17" powerbook is 3 years old, and the battery still holds a 3.5-4 hour charge with constant use. And not just websurfing either. Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Illustrator, InDesign, among others.
Is there a way to calculate average life of these batteries?
Machintosh/Apple makes a "car." A complete package. It comes bundled with pre-installed "tires" (OS X - to get you around in it, of course you can shoose to install something different.) It comes bundled with a stereo, headlight bulbs, mirrors, seats, carpet, you name it (ie: think software options.) All of which can be taken off of the car and something else replace it with ease.
.) install on their cars. However the "car" manufactures where being strong armed by the "tire" company in also include a particular stereo, bulbs, mirrors, seats and carpet, that where required to also be bundled, without modification.
Microsoft makes "tires," that "car" manufactures (Dell, HP, . .
I know not a great analogy, but you get the idea. Let the critics eat me alive is they so choose. Karma-shmarma.
to be honest I would go after OS X. Why? Because no one else is. Those who get known are those who, "think different."
The difference is. . . . Try and get rid of explorer. It is one thing to offer/install/bundle an option for those services, that can be deleted if the user decides to use another service. It's another to integrate it so far into the OS that you are forced to use it. (Think beyond websurfing.)
Sorry your wrong here. There are many private loans available for students, that are not part of the federal student loan programs. And all these loans are protected against bankrupcty.
In case you really want to know. . . Been there, tried that, and still paying my private college loans, as well as a few federal loans.
It wasn't about looking it up, you idiot. It was about defining it for the likes of you.
Joke:
1. Something said or done to evoke laughter or amusement, especially an amusing story with a punch line.
2. A mischievous trick; a prank.
Contrary to parent's belief, there was not joke.
Probably to get a pay check like the rest of us. Leave the guy alone.
ok, thanks. . . . So they don't circle each other as much as they both circle the same center of mass.
Very informative.
Help me out here. . . .
If planet A is circling planet B, then planet B cannot circle Planet A, right?
Can someone explain to me how they can orbit each other at the same time???? Wouldn't it be more correct to say that they are polarized like 2 oppositly charged magnets?
Ok nevermind.
I would say it the other way around. Men are OS X and Women are Linus. (Men are easier to understand, logical. Women on the other hand, require a lot of time massaging and learning just the right way to interact in order to get what you want out of them, and even then sometimes the outcome is unexpected, and requires more massaging.
people who also complain about people who post AC are no better then those they post about.
I would say it is the battery issue. One the one hand you have a cord, that you plug in to use. On the other, you ahve to make sure that you have charged batteries on hand.
Is that why we have to crash once a day, and it takes 6-8 hours to reboot?
The Catholic Church does believe that there is nothing bigger them themselves. This still fits perfectly with my analogy. Catholicism is a religion, Christianity is a relationship. There are many different religions that profess Christianity, that doesn't make them all the same.
I was at toys-r-us about a month ago, and I saw a Hydrogen powered "UFO" for sale for $29.99, big deal.
There again you prove that you don't know what you are talking about. Christianity in no way has anything to do with conridicting "an" explaination for the diversification of species. I have no problem with science and "an" explaination/theory of how species diversify, in fact I agree with it. Evolution within species is easy to "prove" and can be seen at many stages. This is very different from the broad ranging beliefs of the "origins of life," and not that of the, "origins of species." The difference lies in the belief that all things were created by natural selection, or wether or not some other force or forces can be involved directly or indirectly in the creation of life.
Please understand the difference.
I believe that evolution will prove out God. Does my belief in something yet unknown scare you?
You are speaking of a limited sect. of creationists when you bring in the literal Bible premise. You also assume that is the only avenue of debate or understanding. It is you who have put things into a box.
I contend that we are also a long way from knowing many things about our universe, and more. And that doesn't mean these things are unknowable, and it certainly doesn't mean that there isn't or can't be a high being then ourselves such as "God" and it also doesn't mean that such a higher being could not have created us as lower lifeforms then themselves.
It is "Humanists" such as yourself who limit the universe around us, by limiting everything as under humanity itself in the chain of existance and intellectual strength.
It is people like you, hundreds of years ago that thought the Earth was the center of the universe, because they believed nothing could be bigger them themselves either.
I believe in creationism and evolution. But I do not make statements as fact that are mere theory. I state that my beliefs are such. A belief. I however contend that the author of the article states his belief as a plausible origin of humans is fact instead of more correctly stating it as factual. There is a difference between stating you believe something, and stating that something is the end all defacto.
I'm not calling anyone delusional, but you do find interesting ways to make labels yourself. S I'll leave you to that.
Thank you for the continued sweeping generalizations about Christianity when you obviously know little about it, and instead rant based on your pre-consieved ideas of Christianity instead.
Christianity does not seeek to discredit science, in fact many of us, who believe in God, and a Christ who came to earth as man and died for our sins (genericly put, Christians) believe that evolution works hand in hand with a supreme being, and that science in no way contradicts the plausible existance of such a creator. I believe that one day Science will prove out God as a high being that we may not be able to prove exists as of yet with our current level of evolution and knowledge. That doesn't make the belief in such a thing any less plausible. Why can you not see that distiction?