The US government caused the drug industry in south america, by sending tons of wheat to places like columbia as "aid" thus running all the wheat farmers out of business (wheat was columbias main export up to the 1950's).
Gigantic megacorps that run farms like factories can ride out yearly dips and rises in the commodity price of staple crops, but some peasant trying to grow wheat cant say to his kids "wheat is worthless this year, but we can eat next year"; so the peasant farmers of colombia have to find a crop that has constant demand no matter what the US government is subsidising, embargoing or shipping out as aid, and that crop is coca and cannabis.
or better still, why not do those things in real life and earn some real money. i find it silly that people are happy to "grind" in a computer game for hours a day to build up some imaginary wealth, when they could be spending that time doing something real with a real reward.
not that i'm criticising, it just seems daft when you look at it objectively.
the problem was the video footage - its all analogue and the masters are stored of some archaic tape format that no one at the BBC knows how to read anymore.
extracting the text data is a doddle, but the video is fast degrading and the only copyable copys are not 1st generation.
the other thing will be that MS will claim Vista is spyware-proof (or heavily insinuate it) and the PHBs will be clamouring to increase security and productivity by wiping over XP with a shiny new bulletproof vista install.
that's really funny, also the "by thePowerOfGrayskull" thing is the funniest nick related thing i've seen on slashdot since the guy called Haxx0r Jim Duggan.
this would require "trusted computing" in order for MS to avoid having people hack out or block the ads with some 3rd party apps.
i dont think MS needs this to carry on getting revenue from windows. on a new computer the price of windows is included so its like its "free" anyway in most people's minds.
it's not the colloquialisms that are the problem for me, its the accent. i live in the UK and speak BBC english when i'm trying to be polite or clear (i'm a rustic oo-ar type at heart). unless the indian call centre people speak REALLY slowly i can barely follow what they're saying. this isnt a problem becuase i dont ring helplines much so my only exposure to it is unsolicited sales calls which i hang up on. this may cause a problem one day when someone with an indian accent phones me for some legitamate purpose, but for now when i hear an indecipherable indian accent on the other end of the phone i just say no thanks and hang up.
as much as it disgusts me to suggest this but apparently AOL are giving away wireless routers and not levying any fair use policies or transfer limits.
this is just what me freind told me you might want to make sure first, as AOL are a bunch of cowboys.
yes but all those libraries are shared, thus eliminating redundancy. the real acid test would be to add up the size of all programs using all of those libraries, then add up the size of all windows apps required to provide the same functionality and see which is bigger.
no, he's suggesting that anyone waving their laptop around looking for an open wireless network to popup in thier network config GUI wont bother trying to connect to yours because it requires a key they dont have.
download and burn the ubuntu live cd (http://mirror.cs.umn.edu/ubuntu-releases/6.06/ubu ntu-6.06-desktop-i386.iso) and boot your pc and/or laptop with that. you'll soon see whether your hardware is detected. chances are it will all just automagically work. you'd be suprised to find that linux drivers (when available, which is more often than not) are way more plug and play then windows drivers. you dont have to install drivers, they are part of the kernel. (except when they're non GPL).
if you are a home user that is a total newbie to linux i would say anyone you ask will tell you to try Ubuntu. its the most advanced distro in terms of integration, polish and ease of use.
give it a try, it can't hurt. (you probably want 512mbs to run the live cd or it'll be painful).
yeah cos that's what happened in nazi germany; the soldiers all had a crisis of concience and stopped obeying hitler.
you're ignoring the way goverment uses PR to manipulate the populace into thinking they are doing the right thing when they obey orders. which is why no one seems bothered that george bush should be in jail right now for defrauding the entire nation over and over again to get into power and pursue the agendas of his oil baron buddies.
but its ok becuase "jews and communists burnt down the reichstag" / "arabs knocked down the world trade center".
and yes i know i've done the old chestnut of involving hitler in a discussion about george bush, but hitler is the handiest analogy becuase everyone knows about him.
that doesnt change the fact that one person holding a gun is capable of doing what it would take several people with blunt objects to do.
if i ran into a bar and started bludgenoning people with a baseball bat, i would get taken down very quickly after having injured (fatally or otherwise) at most a handful of people.
if i ran in there with an uzi, i could kill everybody quite easily. if the patrons of the bar were armed, i could still kill the vast majority of them before someone was able to shoot back, if anyone even gets the chance
a knife is a sharp object and you arent allowed to carry knives in the UK either.
fair enough about the bank thing, since the bank tellers have to cooperate no matter what you do, but the point i'm making is that it's inane to suggest that a gun is no more of a threat than a blunt object.
and what about the other half of the population that doesnt support him? should they allow him to rule them when he wasnt legally elected? quite frankly the half that do support him shouldnt' let him get away with cheating either.
in soviet russia, government bores YOU to death with the same inane "jokes" over and over again,
also i cant wait for the following tags to help me locate relevant articles:
fud, notfud, itsatrap, yes, no, maybe, stupid, duh, oldnews, slownewsday
of particular help with be the fact that searching for either "fud" or "notfud" will return exactly the same search results. (the same goes for yes/no/maybe)
the problem is this word "blame"; it's a bit overloaded with meanings.
there's a difference between determining cause, or asserting responsibility, or pouring scorn on a scapegoat.
in this case "blaming" social conditions is a different kind of "blame" to "blaming" the person who committed the crime, and they aren't mutually exclusive, so you can "blame" both.
there were less people living here 100 years ago, and i would think the crime statistics figures from that period would have questionable reliability so you cant really make a sweeping statement like that. also different things were illegal then, so saying there are more crimes being comitted today might not be an indication of a more confident criminal, but perhaps there are more laws to break.
plus, you can't hold up a bank with a blunt object, you cant kill people at (much of) a distance with a blunt object, and you cant take out a room full of unarmed people with a blunt object.
if the american gun lobby is so sure that giving the general population guns will stop the government misbehaving, why isnt anyone storming the whitehouse with uzis, taking out the unelected emperor that stole control of their country 7 years ago?
i wasnt really thinking of the polygraph test, more like them giving away the correct answers to some questions by telling you which ones you got wrong.
perhaps the testers just took the polygraph readings with a grain of salt; perhaps they used them purely to measure stress rather than to detect lies; perhaps they used the polygraph readings in conjunction with other lie detection measures such as body language and voice stress. the thing is they arent going to tell you what happened one way or the other, because that would release information that needs to be kept secret otherwise people can use it to try and cheat the testing procedure.
i think it's probably that they dont want to give away their analytical procedures, rather than their information gathering procedure, which as you point out you already knew, having gone through it.
think about it, if they told you why they rejected you, you could tell someone else what to do in order to pass that part of the test, thus jeopardising the validity of future tests.
Slashdot Mirror
Gigantic megacorps that run farms like factories can ride out yearly dips and rises in the commodity price of staple crops, but some peasant trying to grow wheat cant say to his kids "wheat is worthless this year, but we can eat next year"; so the peasant farmers of colombia have to find a crop that has constant demand no matter what the US government is subsidising, embargoing or shipping out as aid, and that crop is coca and cannabis.
then read this website. http://www.clavius.org/. Pretty straightforward isnt it? No hoax.
not that i'm criticising, it just seems daft when you look at it objectively.
no, its distributing unlicensed content that gets you in trouble. if you are licensed to distribute it, then you are fine.
extracting the text data is a doddle, but the video is fast degrading and the only copyable copys are not 1st generation.
gutted
the other thing will be that MS will claim Vista is spyware-proof (or heavily insinuate it) and the PHBs will be clamouring to increase security and productivity by wiping over XP with a shiny new bulletproof vista install.
i dont think MS needs this to carry on getting revenue from windows. on a new computer the price of windows is included so its like its "free" anyway in most people's minds.
analysis of the cause of the great depression
another explanation of how the US recovered from the depression
abandon capitalism and adopt a system that isnt so anachronistic and inappropriate to the modern world.
it's not the colloquialisms that are the problem for me, its the accent. i live in the UK and speak BBC english when i'm trying to be polite or clear (i'm a rustic oo-ar type at heart). unless the indian call centre people speak REALLY slowly i can barely follow what they're saying. this isnt a problem becuase i dont ring helplines much so my only exposure to it is unsolicited sales calls which i hang up on. this may cause a problem one day when someone with an indian accent phones me for some legitamate purpose, but for now when i hear an indecipherable indian accent on the other end of the phone i just say no thanks and hang up.
this is just what me freind told me you might want to make sure first, as AOL are a bunch of cowboys.
yes but all those libraries are shared, thus eliminating redundancy. the real acid test would be to add up the size of all programs using all of those libraries, then add up the size of all windows apps required to provide the same functionality and see which is bigger.
no, he's suggesting that anyone waving their laptop around looking for an open wireless network to popup in thier network config GUI wont bother trying to connect to yours because it requires a key they dont have.
if you are a home user that is a total newbie to linux i would say anyone you ask will tell you to try Ubuntu. its the most advanced distro in terms of integration, polish and ease of use.
give it a try, it can't hurt. (you probably want 512mbs to run the live cd or it'll be painful).
you're ignoring the way goverment uses PR to manipulate the populace into thinking they are doing the right thing when they obey orders. which is why no one seems bothered that george bush should be in jail right now for defrauding the entire nation over and over again to get into power and pursue the agendas of his oil baron buddies.
but its ok becuase "jews and communists burnt down the reichstag" / "arabs knocked down the world trade center".
and yes i know i've done the old chestnut of involving hitler in a discussion about george bush, but hitler is the handiest analogy becuase everyone knows about him.
if i ran into a bar and started bludgenoning people with a baseball bat, i would get taken down very quickly after having injured (fatally or otherwise) at most a handful of people.
if i ran in there with an uzi, i could kill everybody quite easily. if the patrons of the bar were armed, i could still kill the vast majority of them before someone was able to shoot back, if anyone even gets the chance
fair enough about the bank thing, since the bank tellers have to cooperate no matter what you do, but the point i'm making is that it's inane to suggest that a gun is no more of a threat than a blunt object.
and what about the other half of the population that doesnt support him? should they allow him to rule them when he wasnt legally elected? quite frankly the half that do support him shouldnt' let him get away with cheating either.
"something obvious"...film at 11.
and
xxxxx fanboys mod me down
and anything that end with "in 3..2..1"
also i cant wait for the following tags to help me locate relevant articles:
fud, notfud, itsatrap, yes, no, maybe, stupid, duh, oldnews, slownewsday
of particular help with be the fact that searching for either "fud" or "notfud" will return exactly the same search results. (the same goes for yes/no/maybe)
there's a difference between determining cause, or asserting responsibility, or pouring scorn on a scapegoat.
in this case "blaming" social conditions is a different kind of "blame" to "blaming" the person who committed the crime, and they aren't mutually exclusive, so you can "blame" both.
plus, you can't hold up a bank with a blunt object, you cant kill people at (much of) a distance with a blunt object, and you cant take out a room full of unarmed people with a blunt object.
if the american gun lobby is so sure that giving the general population guns will stop the government misbehaving, why isnt anyone storming the whitehouse with uzis, taking out the unelected emperor that stole control of their country 7 years ago?
perhaps the testers just took the polygraph readings with a grain of salt; perhaps they used them purely to measure stress rather than to detect lies; perhaps they used the polygraph readings in conjunction with other lie detection measures such as body language and voice stress. the thing is they arent going to tell you what happened one way or the other, because that would release information that needs to be kept secret otherwise people can use it to try and cheat the testing procedure.
think about it, if they told you why they rejected you, you could tell someone else what to do in order to pass that part of the test, thus jeopardising the validity of future tests.