sonictonic
Jan 12, 01:45 AM
I'm not at all a fan of that site. I'm all for them being banned. They're childish people who are so rarely professional I often wonder how they got to where they are. It's a crappy site, IMO.
dont24
Nov 24, 08:12 AM
Hopefully it still applies to corporate discounts too. Can anyone confirm what?
Looks like it does. I checked the corporate discount page. The 24" iMac regular $1999, is $1880 - $101. Not bad. $1779 shipped.
Too bad there's no savings on the Mac Pro.
Looks like it does. I checked the corporate discount page. The 24" iMac regular $1999, is $1880 - $101. Not bad. $1779 shipped.
Too bad there's no savings on the Mac Pro.
Jaro65
Mar 25, 08:25 AM
Happy Birthday, OS X! Curious where we'll be when celebrating tenth birthday of iOS.
slffl
Jan 7, 10:43 PM
So I just watched a bit of the Bill Gates keynote at CES. It was streaming live at 500k with no problems. Is this because there isn't as many people watching it? Or do they have more resources available to get the stream out there?
BTW, I had to laugh when they demoed FMV used as a wallpaper in Vista, and the crowd ooohed and awwed and clapped. :)
BTW, I had to laugh when they demoed FMV used as a wallpaper in Vista, and the crowd ooohed and awwed and clapped. :)
more...
RobertD63
Apr 27, 06:03 PM
Arn,
May I ask if you feel this feature has been useful so far. I really like the concept of a post rating. But I feel like this doesn't bring any real value to the MR community.
Thanks,
:)
It would be useful if they you reached a certain amount of upvotes you can get into the marketplace too. That'll help with actual contributing users that don't post much. The current system provokes people to just post quick short responses to raise their post count.
May I ask if you feel this feature has been useful so far. I really like the concept of a post rating. But I feel like this doesn't bring any real value to the MR community.
Thanks,
:)
It would be useful if they you reached a certain amount of upvotes you can get into the marketplace too. That'll help with actual contributing users that don't post much. The current system provokes people to just post quick short responses to raise their post count.
NAG
Jan 12, 07:43 PM
The issue here is that bloggers and online journalists are still a fairly new medium and haven't been fully accepted yet. This would happen with any sort of group that didn't have a history.
I would bet that no print media journalist would ever pull crap like this, either. He/she would have been fired on the spot and the publication itself would have issued a real apology, not post a video online and issue a half-hearted apology to one group.
Whoa. You honestly think that there isn't anyone in the print media that pulled stuff like that? You haven't read a lot of the more satirical magazines.
And by saying "haven't been fully accepted yet" you really mean "the big print media guys are still in their transition." They all know print is basically dead, they've been trying to transition for years. Some morons with a blog turning off tvs at a tech conference are not going to stop this transition. If anything it will lead to conferences learning how to properly vet online media like they do with print media.
I would bet that no print media journalist would ever pull crap like this, either. He/she would have been fired on the spot and the publication itself would have issued a real apology, not post a video online and issue a half-hearted apology to one group.
Whoa. You honestly think that there isn't anyone in the print media that pulled stuff like that? You haven't read a lot of the more satirical magazines.
And by saying "haven't been fully accepted yet" you really mean "the big print media guys are still in their transition." They all know print is basically dead, they've been trying to transition for years. Some morons with a blog turning off tvs at a tech conference are not going to stop this transition. If anything it will lead to conferences learning how to properly vet online media like they do with print media.
more...
pivo6
Apr 22, 10:35 AM
All seems rather silly to me.
Over the years, there must have been 85 threads on some type of reputation/like/thanks system and it's always been shot down (thankfully). What changed?
I realize that this is just a test run of this "feature", but I too wonder what has changed in order to come up with a reputation system.
Over the years, there must have been 85 threads on some type of reputation/like/thanks system and it's always been shot down (thankfully). What changed?
I realize that this is just a test run of this "feature", but I too wonder what has changed in order to come up with a reputation system.
eggstone
Nov 24, 09:29 AM
In store you should be able to get both discounts.
I am looking forward to hear the follow up on this story. I really doubted you can get both EDU and Thanksgiving discount together, even in store.
Maybe one can just ask the question to a on-line apple-store-chat staff?
I am looking forward to hear the follow up on this story. I really doubted you can get both EDU and Thanksgiving discount together, even in store.
Maybe one can just ask the question to a on-line apple-store-chat staff?
more...
iMattcotv
Mar 17, 05:57 PM
Peoplle hated Paris Hilton too and look how not she was...
Fixed.
PS: You should enable auto-correct.
Fixed.
PS: You should enable auto-correct.
AidenShaw
Oct 4, 06:01 AM
They might get laughed at but apple will be the ones laughing when their the first to debut santa rosa with 800mhz fsb and nand flash. Hopefully this is whats going to happen
Apple won't be first, they'll either announce the same day as HP/Dell/Lenovo/Acer/Asus/... - or they'll announce later.
With Yonah, Merom, Woodcrest and Conroe, the pattern has been "later".
At some point the consumer experience is not appreciably improved by processor improvements. Except for media processing intensive applicatons, we are there.
That alone ia an amazing statement for the Apple platform.
Can any other platform say that or even promise that any time within 2 years?
Windows and Linux are running on the same platform, and both have proven SMP capabilities far beyond what Apple is selling.
Most of the quad and octo systems at IDF were running XP, W2K3, or Vista. None were running OSX.
Apple won't be first, they'll either announce the same day as HP/Dell/Lenovo/Acer/Asus/... - or they'll announce later.
With Yonah, Merom, Woodcrest and Conroe, the pattern has been "later".
At some point the consumer experience is not appreciably improved by processor improvements. Except for media processing intensive applicatons, we are there.
That alone ia an amazing statement for the Apple platform.
Can any other platform say that or even promise that any time within 2 years?
Windows and Linux are running on the same platform, and both have proven SMP capabilities far beyond what Apple is selling.
Most of the quad and octo systems at IDF were running XP, W2K3, or Vista. None were running OSX.
more...
twoodcc
Apr 27, 09:22 PM
:p
Cool, glad you had them.
I know what you mean about OC'ing waiting to see if it will stay up or crash each time you change something. I was looking at CPUZ on my i7 and I guess I did get it to stay at 3.2Ghz but with 3 gpu's on it I'm not going to try bigadv on it.
I still have 4 boards not in cases - in the basement - getin' kind of dusty too :D but they were cheap and don't need any special cooling, they do fine like that. However I may retire them before too long as I decided to go ahead and get an i7 980x to do some bigadv units on. :rolleyes: I think it should do better than my Mac Pro. I hope. The board has 2 x16 slots for gpu's - when I can afford a pair of GTX 480's :p
thanks. so i have a total of 9 GPUs, and i've got 7 of them running now. maybe one day i'll have them all up and running
well, once you get the OC setting right, then you don't really have to worry about it. like the 2 i7s that i have running now, are both OCed. (3.5 and 3.7)
now i thought about getting an i7 980x, but wasn't ready to spend that kind of money. i think i might just buy a pre-made system if i ever get one (feel more comfortable that way). but that would be sweet if you got one. heck, you know there's a motherboard out there that can hold 2 x i7 980x for $600 i think. now that would be awesome - but just 2 processors and motherboard would cost over $2600
Cool, glad you had them.
I know what you mean about OC'ing waiting to see if it will stay up or crash each time you change something. I was looking at CPUZ on my i7 and I guess I did get it to stay at 3.2Ghz but with 3 gpu's on it I'm not going to try bigadv on it.
I still have 4 boards not in cases - in the basement - getin' kind of dusty too :D but they were cheap and don't need any special cooling, they do fine like that. However I may retire them before too long as I decided to go ahead and get an i7 980x to do some bigadv units on. :rolleyes: I think it should do better than my Mac Pro. I hope. The board has 2 x16 slots for gpu's - when I can afford a pair of GTX 480's :p
thanks. so i have a total of 9 GPUs, and i've got 7 of them running now. maybe one day i'll have them all up and running
well, once you get the OC setting right, then you don't really have to worry about it. like the 2 i7s that i have running now, are both OCed. (3.5 and 3.7)
now i thought about getting an i7 980x, but wasn't ready to spend that kind of money. i think i might just buy a pre-made system if i ever get one (feel more comfortable that way). but that would be sweet if you got one. heck, you know there's a motherboard out there that can hold 2 x i7 980x for $600 i think. now that would be awesome - but just 2 processors and motherboard would cost over $2600
virus1
Jan 7, 10:05 AM
do you think apple is doing this because apple will release a limited edition product like only 200 of something
huh? apple is doing what?
huh? apple is doing what?
more...
Reverend Wally
Nov 16, 01:17 PM
i just don't see this happening. Intel has better performance, especially in notebooks (correct me if i'm wrong)
OK...Not a correction and I see it that no one is either right or wrong. I am using a custom built AMD powered laptop that literally, if it had tires, could burn a set slap off the rims by squeeling out....and it is like greased lightning, and was the cat's meow until the Core 2 Duos were released.
I would put this little jewel up beside anything out there, and it isn't even an Apple.
BUT
Soon that is what I will be using... Macbook Pro...ie the Rolls Royce of the computer world.
;)
OK...Not a correction and I see it that no one is either right or wrong. I am using a custom built AMD powered laptop that literally, if it had tires, could burn a set slap off the rims by squeeling out....and it is like greased lightning, and was the cat's meow until the Core 2 Duos were released.
I would put this little jewel up beside anything out there, and it isn't even an Apple.
BUT
Soon that is what I will be using... Macbook Pro...ie the Rolls Royce of the computer world.
;)
flopticalcube
Apr 15, 02:40 PM
What is Gay History? History, while interesting, has always struck me as unimportant in educating Children for essential workforce skills. Leave history for Colleges or elective courses.
Absolutely not. History is just as essential in building a rational model of the world as math or science is. It just has to be taught properly, without the rote memorization of dates and people. More emphasis on the impact of events in the shaping of nations and civilization.
Absolutely not. History is just as essential in building a rational model of the world as math or science is. It just has to be taught properly, without the rote memorization of dates and people. More emphasis on the impact of events in the shaping of nations and civilization.
more...
kevinliu4
Sep 12, 07:59 AM
if you want to impress me, bring the iTMS to hong kong.
til then, zzz...zzz...zzz...
til then, zzz...zzz...zzz...
snberk103
Apr 15, 12:29 PM
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
more...
dethmaShine
Apr 29, 04:43 PM
They are currently sorted into the four categories first, and then alphabetically in those categories. It seems Lion is throwing everything together and doing away with categories
The categories are still there. Arrange alphabetically was just another option.
The categories are still there. Arrange alphabetically was just another option.
rhett7660
Jul 27, 04:01 PM
Well,
Nature wallpaper free nature
quagmire
Nov 14, 09:39 PM
Mowing down thousands of civilians for now reason.
Getting killed in the second mission.
I didn't know terrorists had reasons to kill people. :p Again, you were trying to earn Makarov's trust. As controversial as that mission is, I think people are reading too much into it. It's a game and obviously that controversy brought it publicity( simply because parents didn't want their precious 8 year olds playing a game like MW2).
You got killed on that mission because Sheppard betrayed you and told Makarov that you were an American leaving a perfect scapegoat and reason for Russia to invade the US. I don't find that ludicrous at all.
Getting killed in the second mission.
I didn't know terrorists had reasons to kill people. :p Again, you were trying to earn Makarov's trust. As controversial as that mission is, I think people are reading too much into it. It's a game and obviously that controversy brought it publicity( simply because parents didn't want their precious 8 year olds playing a game like MW2).
You got killed on that mission because Sheppard betrayed you and told Makarov that you were an American leaving a perfect scapegoat and reason for Russia to invade the US. I don't find that ludicrous at all.
snberk103
Apr 17, 04:43 PM
What security problem?
You know what kills more Americans than terrorism every year? Peanut allergies. Swimming pools. Deer running in front of cars.
Pat downs, body scanners, and TSA in generally are about "security theater." The government puts on a big show so the poor little sheep who are afraid of the big bad muslim wolves feel better.
So how about we all stop letting politicians play on our fears, stop feeding money to the contractors who design useless crap like body scanners and stop giving up constitutional rights all in the name of preventing a "danger" that's significantly less likely to kill you than a lightning strike.
I believe that's faulty logic. Using seat belts has cut the number of fatalities for car passengers by 50% to 75% (depending on the rate of seat belt usage in a jurisdiction - USA/Canada). Because very few people are now killed in car crashes, you are saying we should stop enforcing the seat belt laws?
Or because so many fewer people are now dying due to drunk driving we should stop enforcing those laws?
I'm not sure your logic supports your conclusion.
You know what kills more Americans than terrorism every year? Peanut allergies. Swimming pools. Deer running in front of cars.
Pat downs, body scanners, and TSA in generally are about "security theater." The government puts on a big show so the poor little sheep who are afraid of the big bad muslim wolves feel better.
So how about we all stop letting politicians play on our fears, stop feeding money to the contractors who design useless crap like body scanners and stop giving up constitutional rights all in the name of preventing a "danger" that's significantly less likely to kill you than a lightning strike.
I believe that's faulty logic. Using seat belts has cut the number of fatalities for car passengers by 50% to 75% (depending on the rate of seat belt usage in a jurisdiction - USA/Canada). Because very few people are now killed in car crashes, you are saying we should stop enforcing the seat belt laws?
Or because so many fewer people are now dying due to drunk driving we should stop enforcing those laws?
I'm not sure your logic supports your conclusion.
Links
Aug 15, 04:44 PM
why?
Those dual optical slots in the mac pro, one of them's obviously for a Blue Ray / HD-DVD drive, both of which use HDCP content protection. HDCP isn't supported currently on the ACD.
...
...nor is HDCP support enabled on your current graphics card.
For more on the current state of HDCP and computer monitoring:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20060119095559.html
Those dual optical slots in the mac pro, one of them's obviously for a Blue Ray / HD-DVD drive, both of which use HDCP content protection. HDCP isn't supported currently on the ACD.
...
...nor is HDCP support enabled on your current graphics card.
For more on the current state of HDCP and computer monitoring:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20060119095559.html
CaoCao
Apr 17, 03:05 PM
It's so refreshing to see that with their 1 in 4 illiteracy rate and 1 in 5 high school dropout rate, California really has their priorities in order when it comes to education. Well done I say.
There are tons of Hispanic immigrants in California, many are hard working, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are educated
I have no idea what experience you are speaking from, but it isn't universal. :confused:
I assure you that in the junior high, high school, and college classes I took, Hinckley was mentioned, JFK may or may not have been described as a Catholic, and Jodi Foster wasn't even popular yet.
I'm talking about my experiences on history class in California.
There are tons of Hispanic immigrants in California, many are hard working, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are educated
I have no idea what experience you are speaking from, but it isn't universal. :confused:
I assure you that in the junior high, high school, and college classes I took, Hinckley was mentioned, JFK may or may not have been described as a Catholic, and Jodi Foster wasn't even popular yet.
I'm talking about my experiences on history class in California.
cybermiguel
Nov 16, 09:59 PM
who wants to run amd anyway?
I would.
You see...ATi's integrated graphics solution is WAAYY BETTER than Intel 945 integrated graphics solution, so, it would be the perfect match for a lowcost laptop: Turion CPU and an ATi chipset.
Here's a page with some IGP benchmarks: http://kettya.com/notebook2/gpu_ranking.htm
I would.
You see...ATi's integrated graphics solution is WAAYY BETTER than Intel 945 integrated graphics solution, so, it would be the perfect match for a lowcost laptop: Turion CPU and an ATi chipset.
Here's a page with some IGP benchmarks: http://kettya.com/notebook2/gpu_ranking.htm
Hovey
Jul 21, 10:49 AM
I hate to add to this whole tiresome "debate" but it does amuse me how a video of an iPhone 4 losing signal is proof *positive* of a design flaw whereas a similar video of a different smartphone is no proof at all!
I have an iPhone 4, its the best phone I have ever had and by a mile! I'm happy with it and frankly I'm pretty much sick and tired of folks telling me I'm mad or stupid for saying so!
Keith
Yes there does seem to be a double standard when it comes to online video credibility.
I have an iPhone 4, its the best phone I have ever had and by a mile! I'm happy with it and frankly I'm pretty much sick and tired of folks telling me I'm mad or stupid for saying so!
Keith
Yes there does seem to be a double standard when it comes to online video credibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment