why do people fear change so much? The new Office design is much better
It's not that we fear change. It's that we're sick of relearning everything every couple years. Offer a new interface? Sure, just please don't take away the old one.
Something says it would be more polite if Google were to close the Performics division outright and then reverse-engineer its tactics to stomp out SEO-spam companies.
And have someone else pick up where they left off? Sounds like a short-term goal to me.
Instead, take the division and keep it, which is a way to control it. As in "Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer." Unfortunately, there is a conflict of interest, a conflict so important it may raise the public eyebrow. That leaves the solution of keep them around, but wound them. Removing them from their erstwhile connections should disorient them enough to not move perfectly smoothly, and give Google the time it needs to get one step ahead.
That is, of course, assuming they want to cripple it. They may just want to leave it alone and make some cash off of it. Regardless, the worst of all scenarios would be to close them, as it helps noone.
Why can the government tell me who or how many people I can marry?
Because marriage is nothing other than a recognition. And they choose to recognize only one at a time. Other than the recognition, it does not affect you.
Because the Speaker of the House is a government employee
Technically, that is incorrect. The Speaker does not even have to be elected by the people. Indeed, there are almost no requirements on the Speaker, and almost all benefits are from House rules.
Investigators found multiple instances of infection, informed Microsoft, then had to sever internet connectivity to avoid leaking too much data!"
Not only were they infected, they were infected multiple times! And then, completely delerious, they thought Microsoft was informed. And then--horror of horrors--they has to amputate their internet connection before they leaked.
Normally, i like the sob story, but this is TMD, Too Much Data.
1. Integrated biometrics so the system only works with the soldier to which the system was issued? Sounds good, but probably buggy and adds weight/expense. What would prevent the captor from detaining a soldier and coercing them to tell them information? I suppose they could be trained to give spurious responses.
On one episode of VENOM got MASKs masks, and put them on. They were all zapped, game over.
2. Soldier login and quick disable feature? Might work if the soldier is able to deactivate the system (i.e. still alive, ambulatory). Requires the soldier to remember to deactivate in the heat of the moment.
Spectrum Disabler, on!
3. Remote disable? This would rely upon an effective means of determining that an authorized user is in possession of the equipment.
They could require a nifty watch that stuns the user into submission, to be required.
One things i really, really, really like about Amazon are the comments. For the most part, good and bad are there. Censoring is left to inappropiate or off-topic remarks. B&N, however, remove all negative remarks.
If Amazon messes up here and there, i don't care much. They offer an excellent service.
The word "Now", mentioned earlier, was an addition. "had formed" would be a more correct translation.
Does Hebrew have that tense and it wasn't used here?
I think it is more factual then historical. So, personally, i'd remove the word "had", but i would not call it incorrect, because it is indeed factual as all animals were created before man.
Does saying "and He formed" imply that this forming happened after what had just been described, or is it common for these things to be listed out of order?
I'll preface my reply with the Talmudical statement "ain mukdum oo'm'uchar b'kra", there is no earlier and later in the Bible. The Bible is not meant to be historical, and it is explicitly historical were important. Here it is not explicit.
The meaning of this verse is for a couple of reasons. I'll say them quickly, but can expand a bit if you'd like. Fish were created from water, mammals from land, and fowl from both. This can be seen in the verses, and only fowl are mentioned twice, once for earth and once for water. The second reason is in relation to Man, so this comment mentioning earth is mentioned here to introduce the subject.
"Now that I have Gmail Paper, I understand the difference between labels and folders. I had one message with two labels, but when I tried to stick the paper version into two filing cabinets at the same time, it just wouldn't go."
Of course, Google Filing Cabinet, soon to be announced, does allow double filing by creating an ethereal copy for the second cabinet.
. I'm not a scholar of ancient Hebrew, so I can't say which translation is more accurate to the original text, but if the NIV is accurate, it certainly makes sense.
It is past tense, as are all the creation verses. The first word (vayitzer) can be exactly translated as "and He formed". (The "He" is left out in translations because the subject (G-d) is mentioned in the next two words.)
the old Hebrew one where God is not a single being but Ilohim (which is plural and I may have spelled it wrong)
Actually, if it meant many gods it would be elohos, the "im" ending pluralizes the "el" part which refers to strength. So, He is a singular god of many strengths, which is how the word is used.
Slashdot Mirror
Fat Cat: I'd commemorate this by linking to my page on Geocities, but, well...
magine if you were trapped in a landslide, and you didn't die.
IIRC, in Lode Runner ctrl-a was instadeath just for such situations/
Reiser Murder Case Gets Stranger
Was the stranger one of the eight?
You are horrible. We are talking about life here, not some computer game.
visited the site ss
The site has a Secret Service?
1. The old UI was already overburdened by the old feature set, and would be even worse with the new feature set.
It was not overburdened.
2. People would be tempted to just keep using the old UI, even if the new UI is vastly superior.
*Gasp* And people will choose for themselves. We can't have that!
Have you ever seen 1984?
why do people fear change so much? The new Office design is much better
It's not that we fear change. It's that we're sick of relearning everything every couple years. Offer a new interface? Sure, just please don't take away the old one.
Something says it would be more polite if Google were to close the Performics division outright and then reverse-engineer its tactics to stomp out SEO-spam companies.
And have someone else pick up where they left off? Sounds like a short-term goal to me.
Instead, take the division and keep it, which is a way to control it. As in "Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer." Unfortunately, there is a conflict of interest, a conflict so important it may raise the public eyebrow. That leaves the solution of keep them around, but wound them. Removing them from their erstwhile connections should disorient them enough to not move perfectly smoothly, and give Google the time it needs to get one step ahead.
That is, of course, assuming they want to cripple it. They may just want to leave it alone and make some cash off of it. Regardless, the worst of all scenarios would be to close them, as it helps noone.
Why can the government tell me who or how many people I can marry?
Because marriage is nothing other than a recognition. And they choose to recognize only one at a time. Other than the recognition, it does not affect you.
The Internet is like the Interstate Highways. Except, instead of people in vehicles going to places, data in packets go to clients.
Because the Speaker of the House is a government employee
Technically, that is incorrect. The Speaker does not even have to be elected by the people. Indeed, there are almost no requirements on the Speaker, and almost all benefits are from House rules.
This is the First Post compressed really well, so it took until after a few posts to show up.
He should have gone to jail for a long time and the fact he still walks the streets and cares for his children leaves me sick in the stomach.
And that makes me happy you lost. You're not there to protect anybody, but to serve your own brand of justice, based of personal feelings.
Investigators found multiple instances of infection, informed Microsoft, then had to sever internet connectivity to avoid leaking too much data!"
Not only were they infected, they were infected multiple times! And then, completely delerious, they thought Microsoft was informed. And then--horror of horrors--they has to amputate their internet connection before they leaked.
Normally, i like the sob story, but this is TMD, Too Much Data.
1. Integrated biometrics so the system only works with the soldier to which the system was issued? Sounds good, but probably buggy and adds weight/expense. What would prevent the captor from detaining a soldier and coercing them to tell them information? I suppose they could be trained to give spurious responses.
On one episode of VENOM got MASKs masks, and put them on. They were all zapped, game over.
2. Soldier login and quick disable feature? Might work if the soldier is able to deactivate the system (i.e. still alive, ambulatory). Requires the soldier to remember to deactivate in the heat of the moment.
Spectrum Disabler, on!
3. Remote disable? This would rely upon an effective means of determining that an authorized user is in possession of the equipment.
They could require a nifty watch that stuns the user into submission, to be required.
Why is it taken for granted that humans came from monkeys? I think monkeys devolved from humans who drank too much beer!
One things i really, really, really like about Amazon are the comments. For the most part, good and bad are there. Censoring is left to inappropiate or off-topic remarks. B&N, however, remove all negative remarks.
If Amazon messes up here and there, i don't care much. They offer an excellent service.
Hasn't someone written an addon that clicks things and downloads pages randomly yet?
No bees?
So, let's see them transfer the black oil now!
So what's your opinion of the NIV's "had formed"?
The word "Now", mentioned earlier, was an addition. "had formed" would be a more correct translation.
Does Hebrew have that tense and it wasn't used here?
I think it is more factual then historical. So, personally, i'd remove the word "had", but i would not call it incorrect, because it is indeed factual as all animals were created before man.
Does saying "and He formed" imply that this forming happened after what had just been described, or is it common for these things to be listed out of order?
I'll preface my reply with the Talmudical statement "ain mukdum oo'm'uchar b'kra", there is no earlier and later in the Bible. The Bible is not meant to be historical, and it is explicitly historical were important. Here it is not explicit.
The meaning of this verse is for a couple of reasons. I'll say them quickly, but can expand a bit if you'd like. Fish were created from water, mammals from land, and fowl from both. This can be seen in the verses, and only fowl are mentioned twice, once for earth and once for water. The second reason is in relation to Man, so this comment mentioning earth is mentioned here to introduce the subject.
Yep, Linode is what i use too. Just what i need, and a nice staff to boot.
Good, but not good enough to break to fastest record.
Though, i think they are on the right track, and they just need more training.
Of course, Google Filing Cabinet, soon to be announced, does allow double filing by creating an ethereal copy for the second cabinet.
. I'm not a scholar of ancient Hebrew, so I can't say which translation is more accurate to the original text, but if the NIV is accurate, it certainly makes sense.
It is past tense, as are all the creation verses. The first word (vayitzer) can be exactly translated as "and He formed". (The "He" is left out in translations because the subject (G-d) is mentioned in the next two words.)
the old Hebrew one where God is not a single being but Ilohim (which is plural and I may have spelled it wrong)
Actually, if it meant many gods it would be elohos, the "im" ending pluralizes the "el" part which refers to strength. So, He is a singular god of many strengths, which is how the word is used.