Unfortunately, in America, those without digital dashboards have the k/ph text in a much smaller font and on a much smaller scale making precision nearly impossible or, at best, difficult. Mandating the reverse would be a good idea but the number of old cars on the road means that's still a problem. It isn't an insurmountable problem but a problem nonetheless. I still, of course, support a complete switch to metric and (oddly enough, I am usually very opposed to any additional legislation with few exceptions, this being one of them) wouldn't mind it being federally mandated.
A part of me thinks it should be mandated just so I can hear the various sides howl like banshees at each other. Did I mention that I'm easily amused? My countrymen are straight up retarded for the most part and, unfortunately, that is bipartisan.
Anyhow, I think the simplest means of advocating the metric unit of measurement is this:
Using just your head, what is 16.2% of a meter? Using just your head, what is 16.2% of a yard?
Simpler means fewer chances to have errors. As an American I can say, with complete certainty, that we need simplicity here.
Wasn't there some sort of lawsuit in the works (I have no idea of its success, failure, or whatnot) that had the goal of suing to be able to resell used eBooks? I could have sworn there was an article on Slashdot a number of years ago concerning this. I am not sure but I think the person/people were attempting to use the First Sale Doctrine as a way to ensure that they could sell their "used" digital versions after they were done with them just like you can sell your dead tree copies of books?
With the bullshit about them "licensing" the content I didn't think they had much of a chance but I seem to recall this having popped up on my radar in the past. Hmm... A search of Slashdot (I'm not so sure that the search does a good job) doesn't show anything though so it may just be a figment of my imagination.
Interesting thoughts but they made me think... I think the price of media has gone down, not up, when adjusted for inflation.
VHS cassettes used to be anywhere from $60 to $120. Amazing, I know. These days it is $10 for a DVD.
CD prices have remained much the same, they appear to have gone down a bit actually, which definitely means a lower price when it's adjusted for inflation.
Books have gone up a bit more than inflation but part of that is likely due to the increased cost of paper. Paper has gotten more expensive, we're now expecting mills and timber harvesting operations to be good stewards of the environment which adds significant costs. (I dare say the price is worth it.)
eBooks are what the market can bear or is willing to pay (except in conditions of collusion, like this suit points out) and I think that, from a publisher's view, they are selling you a license to the content or a physical copy of the content. The content, for the most part, is the same - they're selling you an experience of reading the content. Thus, to them (I'm guessing here - I'm not one of them), the idea is the same and thus the price should be the same. Their goal is price maximization and profit, they'll sell it at whatever they want to sell it at. (What that leads to is a whole other subject but it is the way things are.)
In all of these cases they're really not selling you anything except a distribution platform (a DVD, a CD, or a dead tree printed book) but, rather, they're licensing it to you. You own the physical media but your rights to the content within are limited so to them (again, I'm guessing - I am not one of them) it is pretty much the same thing regardless.
Don't get me wrong, I pretty much agree with you on everything except that the price is actually lower than it used to be in many areas. Books are an exception though I still see some priced at around $5.00 (they were much cheaper when I was a wee lad by the way). I can only imagine that's because the price of paper has increased (and it has, see the increase in printer paper pricing for example).
Actually, let me be more specific, see the increase in printer paper pricing for printer paper that is made in the United States. A lot of the paper comes from other countries that do not have the environmental laws that we have. (The debate over the value of such laws is another topic entirely, I'm personally in favor of them and consider the price increase to be worth it.)
Like I said, I agree with you. It is only logical that the price for digitally delivered material to be less than the physical copies of that same material. There are very few benefits to getting a digital copy in my experiences though there have been some nice technical manuals that included links to online content that made a difference.
However, to them, I see little incentive to price them differently. Why should they? You're going to pay so they may as well make a greater percentage of profits on the digital forms. I suppose they have bean counters who also factor in the cost of the increased personnel to maintain the digital infrastructure, the cost of servers, the cost of power, the initial setup costs to also offer digital forms, and things like that. I doubt that, spread over a bunch of purchases, it adds up to a great deal more but that too must be considered and, still, they have no incentive to offer lower prices.
I'm not saying that what they're doing is right but it is what I'd expect a business to do these days. If they have something you want then they're likely to price it at a point where it maximizes profit while still not dissuading MAJORITY of people from making the purchase. I guess that's kind of the point of businesses today. They don't really look towards long term profit or the good of society (a healthy society is more likely to be able to support that business for longer but they seem to ignore that part) these days. They seem to be all about maximizing quarterly profits at the expense of good will or good stewardship
That got a chuckle out of me. Thanks. I needed that.
I am, obviously, aware that this tragic event took place in the UK but, it seems, that the US led the UK to get involved so where the US goes I'd not be too surprised to see the UK follow. Following our lead hasn't been their best choice (in my humble opinion) but, well, nobody ever listens to a KGIII and the facts remain what they are. As much as we might like it to be different, that's the way it is.
Anyhow, as an interesting aside, though it is tangentially related... It seems that Obama is looking for a repeal of AUMF (Authorization to Use Military Force, the "war on terror") which is a good thing. This is what Wikipedia has to say on the subject:
The Authorization for Use of Military Force[1] (AUMF) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress on September 14, 2001, authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. The authorization granted the President the authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom he determined "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001.
“So I look forward to engaging Congress and the American people in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF's mandate. And I will not sign laws designed to expand this mandate further. Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue. But this war, like all wars, must end.”
I dare say that it's an excellent thing. Unfortunately I don't have much hope for that being repealed at this time and I'm also skeptical. Here's an interesting link concerning the announcement and is where the above quote is from:
Basically, I see there being a snowball's chance in hell of this being repealed at this time. It just doesn't seem likely. The citizenry of the United States seems to be hoping for an end to the war on terror. It seems that they're tired of having their friends and family being sent home in body bags. True, there aren't a whole lot of deaths these days but it really does appear that people are tired of the war on terror and they're tired of funding it.
Unfortunately, here's my issue, I don't think there's a very high chance of the AUMF being repealed. The politicians haven't actually passed a single law that I think the majority of citizens are happy with. I really can't think of a single thing to come out of this administration that pleases the majority of the populace. I don't really think the legislative branch is in touch with, or cares about, the citizenry that they're elected to represent.
I don't blame the politicians, I don't blame them at all. They're doing what they want to do. I blame the people who elected them. I hold my friends, my family, my neighbors, those who voted, and especially those who didn't vote accountable for the representation (or lack of representation) that we have. We've turned it into a sport where the sole purposes are scoring points of harm against one another, inciting anger, distraction from piss poor legislation being enacted, and a cash grab. We have nobody to blame but ourselves...
So, I suspect that Obama is a smart man. He certainly appears to be very smart and he appears to be a great politician. Just so you know, being a great politician doesn't mean that they're a good person or that they're interested in the well-being of the p
Thank you for that. You've given me an idea which will surely make my sibling happy. Much appreciated. I knew the resources were there for this sort of thing, I knew the costs were fairly trivial for my intents, and I know that she'll appreciate it. However, I hadn't thought of it. She's recently authored a novel, published it online, had some raving reviews and some 4000 or so "likes" where she published it. I'll have someone design a cover (or hack away at it until I manage something acceptable) and I'll get her a handful of copies of her book in paperback format.
Thank you for linking that which gave me the idea to do this. I, and I'm sure she, appreciate it a great deal though it may not have been your intent.
I'd also like to get the book edited but the book would be a surprise. I'm not sure that I'd want to get it edited behind her back, without her input, or without her knowledge. That may be going too far and may not be appreciated as much and could be seen as tampering with her art as she'd have no input. What I'll probably end up doing is getting a small order of paperbacks printed up in the current format and then, when I gift them to her, present her with a coupon, voucher, or log-in credentials to a prepaid account with an online editor. When they've resolved that and settled on a final version I can just get another small order printed up that she can share with friends and family. Perhaps the initial order will be just a single copy so that she can actually hold it in paperback form - it's inexpensive and all that but it is still something that she'd enjoy. Spending less on the initial order would mean I could spend more on the fully edited copy and get her more copies of her work.
So, yeah, thank you. You're probably thinking that it isn't much of a gift (well, the editing is likely to be expensive) but it is really a "thought that counts" type of situation where it really is the thought that counts. It is something that will make her immensely pleased and will be the highlight of her year (or perhaps longer, knowing her) and will be seen as something quite valuable to her. I realize that your intent wasn't this but I'm pleased and grateful that your link triggered the thought and the results should be quite emotional.
It is also smaller than my gift to her last year. It will require less food though I suspect this one will cost me more and will cost her less. Last year I bought her an Arabian horse. It was on sale and she'd wanted an Arabian since she was a child. It had been a lifelong dream for her so it was rewarding to be able to fulfill that dream for her. Given her love for books I also suspect that the books will last longer than the horse will although I don't actually know anything about the longevity of horses.
And so, thanks again. Butterflies flapping wings causing hurricanes and all that. Much appreciated and surely much appreciated by her.
Chuck Verrill is his Literary Agent's name and that's his firm. Contact information is on the site. You can submit your recommendations to Stephen King through his agent.
Why? I was really bored and wanted to see how complicated it was to find that information. It wasn't all that difficult really. I'd say that it took maybe five minutes to find and confirm it through multiple sources (in case you're curious). I figured, as well, that if I was going to go through the effort that I should probably share it with you seeing as you indicated a willingness to give your suggestions to him. He's a nice enough fellow, King - not his agent (I've never met his agent), and genuinely easy to talk to. We've met a half dozen times or so and he frequented a writer's group that I used to attend at the Bangor Public Library.
Uh, no. You think there's an editor who tells Stephen King to rewrite his story?
Of course he has an editor. Don't be silly. See Wikipedia for example, they mention his editor by name at least once. A simple Google search would have revealed to you that he uses an editor. I don't think any professional author doesn't use an editor. They'd be crazy not to.
Do you have a citation for that $50 figure? My sister has written a novel and I lack the time or interest to even read it but I want to support her. My question is not because I doubt you but because I'd like to gift her a line edit or a base edit and I'd like to know what the costs should be while I comparison shop. It appears that there are a number of sites that are out there that offer this service and that a good number of them charge by the word. When they charge by the word, somewhere around $0.002 to $0.0085 seems to be in the normal range from my initial research. I do not know what the average editing word rate per hour (ewr/h? I'm just making phrase up.) would be.
Isn't that what the notice inside the jacket is about? "If you bought this book without a cover it has been stripped and the publisher has not been paid for this work." (Or something akin to that.) I figured that that meant that bookstores, as opposed to paying to ship the books back to the publisher, would sometimes have the retailer "destroy" the work by cutting off the front cover.
I never looked into it but that's what the text implied to my reading. It is in a lot of books and those books are from various publishers which also leads me to believe that this is (was? There aren't a lot of new book stores left.) an industry standard. I know I've seen coverless* books at various flea market type places (usually romance type stuff) and always assumed they'd received their ill-gotten goods via the dumpster or a shady bookstore employee. Being the apathetic person that I am I have, of course, never bothered to report them as the notice indicated they would like me to do.
* **A quick Google, M-W, and a "hacked" OED account indicate that "coverless" is not, in fact, a word. I'm disturbed by that. **Slashdot ate my superscript 1 which was input using the International Keyboard Layout - how odd.
-----
€¼½¾‘üúí It allows those characters but not superscript 1, 2, or 3 it seems. It doesn't appear to allow 'sup' as markup either. Oh well. I haven't been a paid subscriber for years so I don't think they'll offer me a refund.;)
Enable spell check in your browser and type a lot. It has helped me immensely. I was a horrific speller and decided that I'd spell check everything before posting it. I hate wasting time so it turns out that I simply learned to spell better instead of having to go back, delete words, and retype them.
I understand that the hallucinations are perception overload, that you're simply perceiving more than your brain can handle and thus hallucinations are the result.
I've done a lot of acid (and other hallucinogens) and have read quite a bit about the subject but I don't know the truth to the above. *gasp* I'm not an expert and I admit it. I'm not even sure where I got that from though I think it was a book about drugs.
Oh, I know that. I was just commenting on the parent's mention of DEC. Sort of going off on a tangent, if you will. I was also a bit high as I recall. They made me think of DEC back in the day and I was responding to that.;)
Cite? Not that I doubt you but, rather, that I think that the reading would be interesting. I did try the mighty Google with the terms "original spec ethernet wireless" and skimmed a couple of pages (including the history section at Wikipedia) and didn't find anything.
Again, it is not that I doubt you or the likes - I'm just curious and would like to read.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm...
By their definition a conservative wants things to stay the same and a liberal wants change.
Which, as an aside, has always made me wonder what a liberal becomes once they've finally achieved their goals.
That's funny. Also, don't forget drugs. Drugs have been teaching our kids the metric scale for quite some time.
Unfortunately, in America, those without digital dashboards have the k/ph text in a much smaller font and on a much smaller scale making precision nearly impossible or, at best, difficult. Mandating the reverse would be a good idea but the number of old cars on the road means that's still a problem. It isn't an insurmountable problem but a problem nonetheless. I still, of course, support a complete switch to metric and (oddly enough, I am usually very opposed to any additional legislation with few exceptions, this being one of them) wouldn't mind it being federally mandated.
A part of me thinks it should be mandated just so I can hear the various sides howl like banshees at each other. Did I mention that I'm easily amused? My countrymen are straight up retarded for the most part and, unfortunately, that is bipartisan.
Anyhow, I think the simplest means of advocating the metric unit of measurement is this:
Using just your head, what is 16.2% of a meter?
Using just your head, what is 16.2% of a yard?
Simpler means fewer chances to have errors. As an American I can say, with complete certainty, that we need simplicity here.
Wasn't there some sort of lawsuit in the works (I have no idea of its success, failure, or whatnot) that had the goal of suing to be able to resell used eBooks? I could have sworn there was an article on Slashdot a number of years ago concerning this. I am not sure but I think the person/people were attempting to use the First Sale Doctrine as a way to ensure that they could sell their "used" digital versions after they were done with them just like you can sell your dead tree copies of books?
With the bullshit about them "licensing" the content I didn't think they had much of a chance but I seem to recall this having popped up on my radar in the past. Hmm... A search of Slashdot (I'm not so sure that the search does a good job) doesn't show anything though so it may just be a figment of my imagination.
Interesting thoughts but they made me think... I think the price of media has gone down, not up, when adjusted for inflation.
VHS cassettes used to be anywhere from $60 to $120. Amazing, I know. These days it is $10 for a DVD.
CD prices have remained much the same, they appear to have gone down a bit actually, which definitely means a lower price when it's adjusted for inflation.
Books have gone up a bit more than inflation but part of that is likely due to the increased cost of paper. Paper has gotten more expensive, we're now expecting mills and timber harvesting operations to be good stewards of the environment which adds significant costs. (I dare say the price is worth it.)
eBooks are what the market can bear or is willing to pay (except in conditions of collusion, like this suit points out) and I think that, from a publisher's view, they are selling you a license to the content or a physical copy of the content. The content, for the most part, is the same - they're selling you an experience of reading the content. Thus, to them (I'm guessing here - I'm not one of them), the idea is the same and thus the price should be the same. Their goal is price maximization and profit, they'll sell it at whatever they want to sell it at. (What that leads to is a whole other subject but it is the way things are.)
In all of these cases they're really not selling you anything except a distribution platform (a DVD, a CD, or a dead tree printed book) but, rather, they're licensing it to you. You own the physical media but your rights to the content within are limited so to them (again, I'm guessing - I am not one of them) it is pretty much the same thing regardless.
Don't get me wrong, I pretty much agree with you on everything except that the price is actually lower than it used to be in many areas. Books are an exception though I still see some priced at around $5.00 (they were much cheaper when I was a wee lad by the way). I can only imagine that's because the price of paper has increased (and it has, see the increase in printer paper pricing for example).
Actually, let me be more specific, see the increase in printer paper pricing for printer paper that is made in the United States. A lot of the paper comes from other countries that do not have the environmental laws that we have. (The debate over the value of such laws is another topic entirely, I'm personally in favor of them and consider the price increase to be worth it.)
Like I said, I agree with you. It is only logical that the price for digitally delivered material to be less than the physical copies of that same material. There are very few benefits to getting a digital copy in my experiences though there have been some nice technical manuals that included links to online content that made a difference.
However, to them, I see little incentive to price them differently. Why should they? You're going to pay so they may as well make a greater percentage of profits on the digital forms. I suppose they have bean counters who also factor in the cost of the increased personnel to maintain the digital infrastructure, the cost of servers, the cost of power, the initial setup costs to also offer digital forms, and things like that. I doubt that, spread over a bunch of purchases, it adds up to a great deal more but that too must be considered and, still, they have no incentive to offer lower prices.
I'm not saying that what they're doing is right but it is what I'd expect a business to do these days. If they have something you want then they're likely to price it at a point where it maximizes profit while still not dissuading MAJORITY of people from making the purchase. I guess that's kind of the point of businesses today. They don't really look towards long term profit or the good of society (a healthy society is more likely to be able to support that business for longer but they seem to ignore that part) these days. They seem to be all about maximizing quarterly profits at the expense of good will or good stewardship
Colluding together to
Colluding to... "Together" is redundant. See? I'm Mr. Big Helper today. I'm hoping for a gold star to put on the refrigerator.
That got a chuckle out of me. Thanks. I needed that.
I am, obviously, aware that this tragic event took place in the UK but, it seems, that the US led the UK to get involved so where the US goes I'd not be too surprised to see the UK follow. Following our lead hasn't been their best choice (in my humble opinion) but, well, nobody ever listens to a KGIII and the facts remain what they are. As much as we might like it to be different, that's the way it is.
Anyhow, as an interesting aside, though it is tangentially related... It seems that Obama is looking for a repeal of AUMF (Authorization to Use Military Force, the "war on terror") which is a good thing. This is what Wikipedia has to say on the subject:
The Authorization for Use of Military Force[1] (AUMF) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress on September 14, 2001, authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. The authorization granted the President the authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom he determined "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists
In a recent speech he had this to say:
“So I look forward to engaging Congress and the American people in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF's mandate. And I will not sign laws designed to expand this mandate further. Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue. But this war, like all wars, must end.”
I dare say that it's an excellent thing. Unfortunately I don't have much hope for that being repealed at this time and I'm also skeptical. Here's an interesting link concerning the announcement and is where the above quote is from:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/44327/aumf-repeal-obama-once-again-stands-up-for-democracy
Basically, I see there being a snowball's chance in hell of this being repealed at this time. It just doesn't seem likely. The citizenry of the United States seems to be hoping for an end to the war on terror. It seems that they're tired of having their friends and family being sent home in body bags. True, there aren't a whole lot of deaths these days but it really does appear that people are tired of the war on terror and they're tired of funding it.
Unfortunately, here's my issue, I don't think there's a very high chance of the AUMF being repealed. The politicians haven't actually passed a single law that I think the majority of citizens are happy with. I really can't think of a single thing to come out of this administration that pleases the majority of the populace. I don't really think the legislative branch is in touch with, or cares about, the citizenry that they're elected to represent.
I don't blame the politicians, I don't blame them at all. They're doing what they want to do. I blame the people who elected them. I hold my friends, my family, my neighbors, those who voted, and especially those who didn't vote accountable for the representation (or lack of representation) that we have. We've turned it into a sport where the sole purposes are scoring points of harm against one another, inciting anger, distraction from piss poor legislation being enacted, and a cash grab. We have nobody to blame but ourselves...
So, I suspect that Obama is a smart man. He certainly appears to be very smart and he appears to be a great politician. Just so you know, being a great politician doesn't mean that they're a good person or that they're interested in the well-being of the p
Thank you for that. You've given me an idea which will surely make my sibling happy. Much appreciated. I knew the resources were there for this sort of thing, I knew the costs were fairly trivial for my intents, and I know that she'll appreciate it. However, I hadn't thought of it. She's recently authored a novel, published it online, had some raving reviews and some 4000 or so "likes" where she published it. I'll have someone design a cover (or hack away at it until I manage something acceptable) and I'll get her a handful of copies of her book in paperback format.
Thank you for linking that which gave me the idea to do this. I, and I'm sure she, appreciate it a great deal though it may not have been your intent.
I'd also like to get the book edited but the book would be a surprise. I'm not sure that I'd want to get it edited behind her back, without her input, or without her knowledge. That may be going too far and may not be appreciated as much and could be seen as tampering with her art as she'd have no input. What I'll probably end up doing is getting a small order of paperbacks printed up in the current format and then, when I gift them to her, present her with a coupon, voucher, or log-in credentials to a prepaid account with an online editor. When they've resolved that and settled on a final version I can just get another small order printed up that she can share with friends and family. Perhaps the initial order will be just a single copy so that she can actually hold it in paperback form - it's inexpensive and all that but it is still something that she'd enjoy. Spending less on the initial order would mean I could spend more on the fully edited copy and get her more copies of her work.
So, yeah, thank you. You're probably thinking that it isn't much of a gift (well, the editing is likely to be expensive) but it is really a "thought that counts" type of situation where it really is the thought that counts. It is something that will make her immensely pleased and will be the highlight of her year (or perhaps longer, knowing her) and will be seen as something quite valuable to her. I realize that your intent wasn't this but I'm pleased and grateful that your link triggered the thought and the results should be quite emotional.
It is also smaller than my gift to her last year. It will require less food though I suspect this one will cost me more and will cost her less. Last year I bought her an Arabian horse. It was on sale and she'd wanted an Arabian since she was a child. It had been a lifelong dream for her so it was rewarding to be able to fulfill that dream for her. Given her love for books I also suspect that the books will last longer than the horse will although I don't actually know anything about the longevity of horses.
And so, thanks again. Butterflies flapping wings causing hurricanes and all that. Much appreciated and surely much appreciated by her.
http://dvagency.com/agents/
Chuck Verrill is his Literary Agent's name and that's his firm. Contact information is on the site. You can submit your recommendations to Stephen King through his agent.
Why? I was really bored and wanted to see how complicated it was to find that information. It wasn't all that difficult really. I'd say that it took maybe five minutes to find and confirm it through multiple sources (in case you're curious). I figured, as well, that if I was going to go through the effort that I should probably share it with you seeing as you indicated a willingness to give your suggestions to him. He's a nice enough fellow, King - not his agent (I've never met his agent), and genuinely easy to talk to. We've met a half dozen times or so and he frequented a writer's group that I used to attend at the Bangor Public Library.
Pardon my formatting. I should use an editor too.
Uh, no. You think there's an editor who tells Stephen King to rewrite his story?
Of course he has an editor. Don't be silly. See Wikipedia for example, they mention his editor by name at least once. A simple Google search would have revealed to you that he uses an editor. I don't think any professional author doesn't use an editor. They'd be crazy not to.
Citation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_King (The word "editor" is used 7 times in that article.)
Do you have a citation for that $50 figure? My sister has written a novel and I lack the time or interest to even read it but I want to support her. My question is not because I doubt you but because I'd like to gift her a line edit or a base edit and I'd like to know what the costs should be while I comparison shop. It appears that there are a number of sites that are out there that offer this service and that a good number of them charge by the word. When they charge by the word, somewhere around $0.002 to $0.0085 seems to be in the normal range from my initial research. I do not know what the average editing word rate per hour (ewr/h? I'm just making phrase up.) would be.
Isn't that what the notice inside the jacket is about? "If you bought this book without a cover it has been stripped and the publisher has not been paid for this work." (Or something akin to that.) I figured that that meant that bookstores, as opposed to paying to ship the books back to the publisher, would sometimes have the retailer "destroy" the work by cutting off the front cover.
I never looked into it but that's what the text implied to my reading. It is in a lot of books and those books are from various publishers which also leads me to believe that this is (was? There aren't a lot of new book stores left.) an industry standard. I know I've seen coverless* books at various flea market type places (usually romance type stuff) and always assumed they'd received their ill-gotten goods via the dumpster or a shady bookstore employee. Being the apathetic person that I am I have, of course, never bothered to report them as the notice indicated they would like me to do.
* **A quick Google, M-W, and a "hacked" OED account indicate that "coverless" is not, in fact, a word. I'm disturbed by that.
**Slashdot ate my superscript 1 which was input using the International Keyboard Layout - how odd.
-----
€¼½¾‘üúí It allows those characters but not superscript 1, 2, or 3 it seems. It doesn't appear to allow 'sup' as markup either. Oh well. I haven't been a paid subscriber for years so I don't think they'll offer me a refund. ;)
How is that a troll? It was pretty funny and obviously intended as such.
She... You insensitive clod.
Enable spell check in your browser and type a lot. It has helped me immensely. I was a horrific speller and decided that I'd spell check everything before posting it. I hate wasting time so it turns out that I simply learned to spell better instead of having to go back, delete words, and retype them.
The effect strength looked too strong big to be explained by that, but its hard to tell.
?
Correlation does not imply causation. ;)
I understand that the hallucinations are perception overload, that you're simply perceiving more than your brain can handle and thus hallucinations are the result.
I've done a lot of acid (and other hallucinogens) and have read quite a bit about the subject but I don't know the truth to the above. *gasp* I'm not an expert and I admit it. I'm not even sure where I got that from though I think it was a book about drugs.
I'm half tempted to come back to this thread in three days and type, "Damn you!" It is, of course, too late for that now.
Did you just hurp when you meant to derp?
It is quantum. He was using it before he bought it.
Oh, I know that. I was just commenting on the parent's mention of DEC. Sort of going off on a tangent, if you will. I was also a bit high as I recall. They made me think of DEC back in the day and I was responding to that. ;)
It appears that they are alive and well. Oddly enough...
https://www.google.com/search?q=xerox&num=100&newwindow=1&client=firefox-a&hs=VbM&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=XrOeUcarKIi29gSrloGgBQ&ved=0CA4Q_AUoAQ&biw=1600&bih=767
Cite? Not that I doubt you but, rather, that I think that the reading would be interesting. I did try the mighty Google with the terms "original spec ethernet wireless" and skimmed a couple of pages (including the history section at Wikipedia) and didn't find anything.
Again, it is not that I doubt you or the likes - I'm just curious and would like to read.