Shark
Feb 2, 08:28 PM
Haven't posted a shot in a long time. Enjoy!
http://members.shaw.ca/jaos/Green.png (http://jaos.deviantart.com/#/d38o00r)
http://members.shaw.ca/jaos/Green.png (http://jaos.deviantart.com/#/d38o00r)
Blue Velvet
Mar 2, 11:49 AM
Social Security is fully funded to 2037, will run a surplus at that point and is separate from the budget. The ACA is fully designed to lower health care costs and lower the deficit, something which the right consistently ignores.
If the US were screwed, you wouldn't have countries queuing up to lend you money. Stop cutting taxes on the wealthy and pursuing unfunded wars for a start.
If the US were screwed, you wouldn't have countries queuing up to lend you money. Stop cutting taxes on the wealthy and pursuing unfunded wars for a start.
barnaby
Nov 29, 11:41 PM
You don't speak for the rest of us, and the studios aren't interested in what you have to say because they're not making any money off you.
The entertainment industry "earns" it's money. Seeing a movie is one of the cheapest "nights out" you can find. If it wasn't entertaining, people wouldn't go. You get bad movies every now and then, but the good ones more than make up for it.
As far as putting limitations on digital content, that's their right. It is _their_ content. If they make the wrong decision, they'll come around when someone smarter makes the right one.
We're in the process right now of figuring out DRM. The problem is, copying any digital media doesn't remove detract from the original. There is no incentive to be fair. DRM puts incentive, mainly convenience, in being fair.
When it matures, it will be convenient to consumers and inconvenient to pirates.
The cries of the entertainment industry fall on pretty deaf ears in my house.
Yes, I understand that Universal, Disney, et al, are businesses and survive by making money, but let's not loose sight of one very important fact:
It's entertainment. It is not necessary to the functioning of our country, culture, or lives.
Food is. But look how little farmers get paid.
Medical care is. But look how so much of the money we (or insurance companies on our behalf) pay actually goes to a facilities' or a doctor's malpractice insurance, not to them.
Education is. But look how poorly-prioritized education is in this country.
Work experience is, as a function of how it impacts one's ability to function competently and thereby either retain a job or to acquire a better one. But it's treated just as poorly as education.
Entertainment is NOT. As a consequence, I don't plan for, nor do I budget for, any kind of entertainment concern.
IF, and ONLY IF, there's a movie out that I really want to see, will I go to the theater to see it. And on average I probably go to a theater once a year.
The very notion of licensing when it comes to anything other than a business deal or proposition is disgusting to me. I am not against the principle of intellectual property, but I abhor how the concept is realized in our society.
I own probably something like 10 movies' worth of DVDs, and maybe 5 TV series' worth of DVDs. I think the last DVD I bought was The Incredibles, and that was to show my support for something I found to be superbly entertaining, and have watched multiple times.
Most of the movies that I've acquired by "other means" I've pitched after watching them because, upwards of 80% of those instances of acquisition were instances of the acquisition of crap. So regardless of whatever legal status those materials may have been presumed to possess by others, I no longer have them because, for free or for a fee, I don't want 'em.
The number of times I feel like Bartleby The Scrivener (that is, the character Bartleby) on a regular basis is increasing, and that's due to the fact that I perceive society to be further and further askew from what I personally accept or agree with.
And speaking of HDCP and other DRM, DMCA, etc...
I refuse to accept any of that. I also refuse to accept that I'm either going to have to buy some sort of an adaptor, or buy a new TV, just for the "pleasure" of (what is for me) the infrequent habit of actually watching TV. Yes, I fully realize that means that, at some point, I'll turn on the TV and all I'll get is snow because there are no longer any broadcast standards that my living room TV is compatible with. And you know what I'll do when that day comes? I'll go ahead and cancel my minimum-basic-TV (approx. $13/month) service, leaving only cable modem service. I'm absolutely serious about this.
Perhaps if more people were like me, we could affect some kind of change in the broadcast industry and in Hollywierd, but any kind of "coming together for common good over common consensus" is incredibly arduous at best, and impossible at worst.
Besides, when it comes to myself and a significant other, I can absolutely find a whole lot of other things to do than simply sit down and watch the boob tube.
The entertainment industry "earns" it's money. Seeing a movie is one of the cheapest "nights out" you can find. If it wasn't entertaining, people wouldn't go. You get bad movies every now and then, but the good ones more than make up for it.
As far as putting limitations on digital content, that's their right. It is _their_ content. If they make the wrong decision, they'll come around when someone smarter makes the right one.
We're in the process right now of figuring out DRM. The problem is, copying any digital media doesn't remove detract from the original. There is no incentive to be fair. DRM puts incentive, mainly convenience, in being fair.
When it matures, it will be convenient to consumers and inconvenient to pirates.
The cries of the entertainment industry fall on pretty deaf ears in my house.
Yes, I understand that Universal, Disney, et al, are businesses and survive by making money, but let's not loose sight of one very important fact:
It's entertainment. It is not necessary to the functioning of our country, culture, or lives.
Food is. But look how little farmers get paid.
Medical care is. But look how so much of the money we (or insurance companies on our behalf) pay actually goes to a facilities' or a doctor's malpractice insurance, not to them.
Education is. But look how poorly-prioritized education is in this country.
Work experience is, as a function of how it impacts one's ability to function competently and thereby either retain a job or to acquire a better one. But it's treated just as poorly as education.
Entertainment is NOT. As a consequence, I don't plan for, nor do I budget for, any kind of entertainment concern.
IF, and ONLY IF, there's a movie out that I really want to see, will I go to the theater to see it. And on average I probably go to a theater once a year.
The very notion of licensing when it comes to anything other than a business deal or proposition is disgusting to me. I am not against the principle of intellectual property, but I abhor how the concept is realized in our society.
I own probably something like 10 movies' worth of DVDs, and maybe 5 TV series' worth of DVDs. I think the last DVD I bought was The Incredibles, and that was to show my support for something I found to be superbly entertaining, and have watched multiple times.
Most of the movies that I've acquired by "other means" I've pitched after watching them because, upwards of 80% of those instances of acquisition were instances of the acquisition of crap. So regardless of whatever legal status those materials may have been presumed to possess by others, I no longer have them because, for free or for a fee, I don't want 'em.
The number of times I feel like Bartleby The Scrivener (that is, the character Bartleby) on a regular basis is increasing, and that's due to the fact that I perceive society to be further and further askew from what I personally accept or agree with.
And speaking of HDCP and other DRM, DMCA, etc...
I refuse to accept any of that. I also refuse to accept that I'm either going to have to buy some sort of an adaptor, or buy a new TV, just for the "pleasure" of (what is for me) the infrequent habit of actually watching TV. Yes, I fully realize that means that, at some point, I'll turn on the TV and all I'll get is snow because there are no longer any broadcast standards that my living room TV is compatible with. And you know what I'll do when that day comes? I'll go ahead and cancel my minimum-basic-TV (approx. $13/month) service, leaving only cable modem service. I'm absolutely serious about this.
Perhaps if more people were like me, we could affect some kind of change in the broadcast industry and in Hollywierd, but any kind of "coming together for common good over common consensus" is incredibly arduous at best, and impossible at worst.
Besides, when it comes to myself and a significant other, I can absolutely find a whole lot of other things to do than simply sit down and watch the boob tube.
tbluhp
Oct 15, 09:03 PM
Any better once please not built in itunes one.
more...
jsw
Feb 15, 11:50 AM
Give it a week, if we're not the most hated members on the forum, we're probably not working hard enough. :eek: :D
Not to mention any names, but I don't see any of you becoming the most hated (or, perhaps, least liked) members. I think those spots are already pretty secure.
Not to mention any names, but I don't see any of you becoming the most hated (or, perhaps, least liked) members. I think those spots are already pretty secure.
jrko
Apr 15, 12:09 PM
10.5 should still run, and even run 1-2 apps at a time. (I got 10.5 successfully, if incredibly slowly, running on a 700Mhz eMac G4 with just 128MB RAM, so its definitely possible).
more...
models with short hair (3)
short hair 2011 for women.
more...
Short Hair Girl 3D Model
short hair on models
more...
short hair styles 2011 men.
short hair updos for
more...
short hair. love girls with
Labels: Punk Hair Models
more...
rocking the short hair,
models with short hair (2)
more...
Hilton Short Blond Haircut
Smooth short hair models.
Hair Models, hair styles women
Reacent Post
more...
Rodimus Prime
Apr 27, 10:39 PM
Without even stepping into the whole "they're lying/they're not lying" debate, and since iOS and Android are the only really choices out there, I'm going with the option that doesn't have its sole business model built on knowing as much as possible about me and sharing it with third parties.
To anyone that thinks Google is giving that OS away for free for altruistic reasons, I have a bridge you might be interested in. ;)
So you go with the company that has shown that is will look for any way to make an extra buck.
I trust Google a hell of a lot more than Apple.
Now that Apple is in the ads game I can tell you they will be a lot worse about sharing your data than Google ever was and will be.
To anyone that thinks Google is giving that OS away for free for altruistic reasons, I have a bridge you might be interested in. ;)
So you go with the company that has shown that is will look for any way to make an extra buck.
I trust Google a hell of a lot more than Apple.
Now that Apple is in the ads game I can tell you they will be a lot worse about sharing your data than Google ever was and will be.
psychometry
Oct 5, 06:12 PM
On the contrary, resizeable textareas are part of the CSS3 standard; Safari 3.0 will simply be the first mainstream browser to implement it. Once you try it, I promise you will not want to go back. It's really a non-issue, and I'm surprised anybody's complaining about it to the point they would disable this end-user feature using JavaScript. I'll just disable JavaScript on your site, then, buddy.
The CSS3 resizer property is fine and good because you can set resizer:none to a form element if you want to. As a side note, resizer applies to all elements, including html, meaning a site could prevent you from resizing the browser window. That has the potential to be very annoying if abused, as I'm sure it will be. Right now, I don't think any of the main 5 or 6 browsers support this propery for any element.
What worries me is if Safari is implementing this feature using built-in DOM functions instead of just supporting the CSS3 property. This is a possibility to me. They've got quite a ways to go in terms of the standard right now.
The CSS3 resizer property is fine and good because you can set resizer:none to a form element if you want to. As a side note, resizer applies to all elements, including html, meaning a site could prevent you from resizing the browser window. That has the potential to be very annoying if abused, as I'm sure it will be. Right now, I don't think any of the main 5 or 6 browsers support this propery for any element.
What worries me is if Safari is implementing this feature using built-in DOM functions instead of just supporting the CSS3 property. This is a possibility to me. They've got quite a ways to go in terms of the standard right now.
more...
Sydde
Mar 2, 11:56 AM
I have heard that much of the hemorrhage could be addressed with a simple 0.5% tax on market trades, while also affording a little stability to the markets. After that, a nice little national property tax might well make up the difference if structured properly
redAPPLE
Oct 22, 06:49 AM
yeah, i heard of that...
i think they mentioned it on the same sentence, when they mentioned iWalk.
right guys?
i think they mentioned it on the same sentence, when they mentioned iWalk.
right guys?
more...
Blakeasd
Apr 10, 03:14 PM
How do I use the 2d Fluid Simulation Patch in Quartz Composer? Does anyone know of an example? Thanks
CaoCao
Mar 24, 12:34 AM
Why is dressing provocatively stupid? That's one of the many freedoms women enjoy in the western world, and i enjoy looking at them dressed that way. But I'm not gonna go and rape them. What you're saying confirms Muslim countries justification for sharia law. And I also find it insulting to males, because it says that if a women dresses provocatively then we have no self control and will rape them.
Yes, dressing like a slut is a freedom in the Western World. This however does not mean it is a good idea. A woman who dresses like a slut is advertising that the best thing about them is their body. I don't know about y'all, but I value more than looks so someone who dresses in such bad taste is clearly a thing to avoid.
On the other hand I go out of my way to help women who act and dress well because it is more conductive to business. Ever tried to conduct a business meeting where a woman shows up dress very promiscuously? Seems I'm the only one who can concentrate in those kinds of settings.
Yes, dressing like a slut is a freedom in the Western World. This however does not mean it is a good idea. A woman who dresses like a slut is advertising that the best thing about them is their body. I don't know about y'all, but I value more than looks so someone who dresses in such bad taste is clearly a thing to avoid.
On the other hand I go out of my way to help women who act and dress well because it is more conductive to business. Ever tried to conduct a business meeting where a woman shows up dress very promiscuously? Seems I'm the only one who can concentrate in those kinds of settings.
more...
twoodcc
Jan 11, 12:26 AM
I just got a 2.8 i7 Quad Core iMac, and I wouldn't mind helping out if someone would outline the steps for me. I already installed seti@home, but the application is only using one core, which really bugs me. I wont be able to dedicate my machine 24/7, but on the down time, or when I leave the room I wouldn't mind leaving it on.
thanks! your iMac should fold nicely. start here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=21908) at our own folding FAQ.
basically, there are 2 types of folding clients: a console (terminal) and one that runs in system preferences. most people here run the console client, mainly b/c you have more control.
are you familiar with running things in terminal? if so, all you do is download the client, extract it, move into that folder, and start the script with some options. here would be an example for you:
fah -smp 8 -advmethods -verbosity 9 -local
and you can stop that when you want by typing control+c.
please let us know if you have any other questions
thanks! your iMac should fold nicely. start here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=21908) at our own folding FAQ.
basically, there are 2 types of folding clients: a console (terminal) and one that runs in system preferences. most people here run the console client, mainly b/c you have more control.
are you familiar with running things in terminal? if so, all you do is download the client, extract it, move into that folder, and start the script with some options. here would be an example for you:
fah -smp 8 -advmethods -verbosity 9 -local
and you can stop that when you want by typing control+c.
please let us know if you have any other questions
Khryz
Apr 4, 08:41 PM
Why can't WiFi be everywhere so that we won't need cell phone carriers anymore?
:)
:)
more...
LimeiBook86
Dec 14, 10:00 PM
That's a cute style, very, very awesome! :D
spoon man
Oct 12, 03:58 PM
My new 1
more...
Abyssgh0st
Apr 24, 05:36 PM
I'm getting this... one day.
Amen brother.. Arguably my favorite car under $300,000 right now. I've never been so enamored with an 'inexpensive' car. (Note, I use inexpensive loosely here).
Amen brother.. Arguably my favorite car under $300,000 right now. I've never been so enamored with an 'inexpensive' car. (Note, I use inexpensive loosely here).
Crager724
Oct 5, 05:40 PM
I am not a webdesigner so could someone explain the TEXTAREA upgrade? It sounded like a good idea when I read it, but it seems to have struck a nerve with a couple people, and I'm not sure why. I'm guessing it would be like if I went to an art auction and bought a painting by Monet, I bring the painting home and realize that the wallspace I have for it isn't wide enough, so I grab a corner of the painting a pull it down, hence making it skinnier and fitting my wall? Nobody would ever consider doing that to a Monet, yet isn't this what the new TEXTAREA feature does?
normwood
Oct 9, 03:55 PM
i just sold out and bought it, too. :D
I have to admit that I did too. I had downloaded Tweetdeck yesterday and Twitteriffic this morning and was pretty sold on Twitteriffic....and then I caved when I saw that it was available and downloaded in instantly....no hesitation.....zero to to dowloaded in 7 seconds.
I hate that I am a wet noodle!:D
Looks great so far!
Steve
I have to admit that I did too. I had downloaded Tweetdeck yesterday and Twitteriffic this morning and was pretty sold on Twitteriffic....and then I caved when I saw that it was available and downloaded in instantly....no hesitation.....zero to to dowloaded in 7 seconds.
I hate that I am a wet noodle!:D
Looks great so far!
Steve
Intell
Mar 20, 11:01 AM
Nope, the closest thing is Surick's Veency. But it doesn't work well enough for video.
Kabeyun
Apr 29, 05:52 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
Perfect. Decide to sue, THEN figure out why. It's the new tit for tat, only we pay for it.
Perfect. Decide to sue, THEN figure out why. It's the new tit for tat, only we pay for it.
Tulipone
Apr 27, 07:13 PM
What proportion of iPhone users do you think understand what a cache is? How about what cell tower triangulation is? How about the Core Location framework? Most people don't understand the finer points of how their phone works. The vast majority don't care and just want it to work and not do anything nefarious. As phones get smarter, there are only going to be more things that people don't understand - I think he makes a fair point.
I am trying to decide if you are serious. I suspect most people here understand what a cache is. I think most have a pretty good idea about cell tower triangulation. We are the people SJ is talking about. I'm not sure what the point about understanding technology is about - why do we NEED to know how a smartphone does what it does? It would be nice to understand what features can be turned off if we feel it is outside our comfort zone.
A user may not be bothered about his firewall, he wants it to do what it supposed to. Do you think that the average person would be happy that it sends a feed of the traffic back to the OEM to target the owner for advertising? I seem to remember Belkin had a similar issue some years ago and hurriedly rushed out a firmware update after it was caught.
I am trying to decide if you are serious. I suspect most people here understand what a cache is. I think most have a pretty good idea about cell tower triangulation. We are the people SJ is talking about. I'm not sure what the point about understanding technology is about - why do we NEED to know how a smartphone does what it does? It would be nice to understand what features can be turned off if we feel it is outside our comfort zone.
A user may not be bothered about his firewall, he wants it to do what it supposed to. Do you think that the average person would be happy that it sends a feed of the traffic back to the OEM to target the owner for advertising? I seem to remember Belkin had a similar issue some years ago and hurriedly rushed out a firmware update after it was caught.
Reebok4523
Apr 7, 09:19 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Mmm....12 pita bites sounds delicious.
Lol I love pita bites
Mmm....12 pita bites sounds delicious.
Lol I love pita bites
Tadros86
Apr 13, 09:36 AM
There honestly is no need to update the iPhone line EVERY year at this point. iPhone 4 was the biggest jump and I don't see a reason to jump again so soon, especially after Verizon customers JUST recived access to the phone. I can understand updating the models to include 4G, but at this point 4G IMHO is not needed. It's not a mature enough standard to expect iPhone owners to have smooth service with Verizon and AT&Ts 4G networks. I see them both being great next year, but it'd be a forced move on Apples part to update so soon.
0 comments:
Post a Comment