Chundles
Sep 12, 07:36 AM
hmmmm,
i just tried the same with the swedish store, and its down :)
maby this will be a world event afterall!!
Yeah, but I'll bet it's not the "It's Showtime" splash screen is it? Just the busy connection dialogue box.
i just tried the same with the swedish store, and its down :)
maby this will be a world event afterall!!
Yeah, but I'll bet it's not the "It's Showtime" splash screen is it? Just the busy connection dialogue box.
Surf Monkey
Mar 17, 12:55 AM
You're classy.
I hope karma greets you tomorrow morning with a swift kick in the mouth.
Well... You certainly put a finer point on it than I did.
I hope karma greets you tomorrow morning with a swift kick in the mouth.
Well... You certainly put a finer point on it than I did.
Ugg
May 4, 07:51 PM
Fixed...
If I bring my child in for a checkup, physical, broken arm or runny nose the doctor really has no business asking questions that are not pertinent to the treatment of my child. He certainly has no business asking if I have guns in my house if I bring my kid in there for a physical or runny nose.
Dr Choi made this point, "or if children can't play in their front yard for fear of gun fire, it is my problem too." Maybe his focus is on urban kids who live in high crime areas but given that most of the high profile firearm massacres in the past few years were suburban, it seems silly to split hairs, doesn't it?
Do you feel that it's none of the doctor's business if you use a car seat for your child? What if he asked if you make sure the cleaning supplies and anti-freeze are locked up? Is that irrelevant?
Dr Choi also makes the point that in 30,000 people were killed with guns (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_19.pdf).
In 41,059 people were killed in automobile accidents.
What are doctors for?
If I bring my child in for a checkup, physical, broken arm or runny nose the doctor really has no business asking questions that are not pertinent to the treatment of my child. He certainly has no business asking if I have guns in my house if I bring my kid in there for a physical or runny nose.
Dr Choi made this point, "or if children can't play in their front yard for fear of gun fire, it is my problem too." Maybe his focus is on urban kids who live in high crime areas but given that most of the high profile firearm massacres in the past few years were suburban, it seems silly to split hairs, doesn't it?
Do you feel that it's none of the doctor's business if you use a car seat for your child? What if he asked if you make sure the cleaning supplies and anti-freeze are locked up? Is that irrelevant?
Dr Choi also makes the point that in 30,000 people were killed with guns (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_19.pdf).
In 41,059 people were killed in automobile accidents.
What are doctors for?
Buhbuhb
Oct 3, 08:09 PM
looking forward to what iTV will bring... It's an interesting product given that Apple is predominately a software/ computer company.
ilpap
Apr 29, 03:39 PM
been using Lion since DP1 as my main OS without problems
me too
me too
bigmc6000
Oct 6, 10:21 AM
Except Verizon does that too!!!!
Wait, you mean that grass on the other side isn't actually greener it's just painted green?!?!?! ;)
Wait, you mean that grass on the other side isn't actually greener it's just painted green?!?!?! ;)
sennekuyl
May 3, 08:25 PM
deleted
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
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.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
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. 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.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
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.
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'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
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. 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.
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.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. 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. 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.
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.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
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. 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.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
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.
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'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
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. 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.
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.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. 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. 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.
mouthster
Sep 25, 11:21 AM
Just FYI, I'm running Aperture with 17k+ images on an iMac 24" 2.1ghz G5 - sometimes slow, but heck i'm doing it and drooling over the 1.5 update
Ok..:confused:
Ok..:confused:
Mord
Apr 26, 10:38 AM
Thanks, I honestly did not know the answer to that question, and I would guess that others did not know as well. I hope my asking did not offend you.
No problem, you seem well meaning and that's all that matters :)
He is a male, just like me, I can't believe you don't understand that...
He thinks he is female which is a whole other thing
I can't believe you don't understand that she's not. Do you know this girl personally? If not then you don't know a damn thing about her, other than what you've been fed by the media.
No problem, you seem well meaning and that's all that matters :)
He is a male, just like me, I can't believe you don't understand that...
He thinks he is female which is a whole other thing
I can't believe you don't understand that she's not. Do you know this girl personally? If not then you don't know a damn thing about her, other than what you've been fed by the media.
TheWheelMan
Mar 17, 05:10 PM
Love this forum for a good laugh. Obviously the OP was wrong with what he did but love laughing at all the holier than thou responses. :D
You mean like posting just to say "I'm laughing at you all?" Welcome to the "holier than thou club, buddy.
You mean like posting just to say "I'm laughing at you all?" Welcome to the "holier than thou club, buddy.
Eraserhead
Mar 4, 09:10 AM
You should know by noe that fivepoint is only interested in individual freedom when it's an issue he agrees with.
This case is surprisingly transparent however.
This case is surprisingly transparent however.
MrMoore
Mar 25, 10:25 AM
Wow! 10 years. I remember installing it on a Power Mac G3. Saying "Cool" and booting back to OS 9 ;)
I though it was sleek looking, but when I need to do real "work", I went back to "classic" OS. It wasn't until 10.2 (Jaguar) that I became full time OS X user and also put Windows in the bin. Haven't look back since. :D
I though it was sleek looking, but when I need to do real "work", I went back to "classic" OS. It wasn't until 10.2 (Jaguar) that I became full time OS X user and also put Windows in the bin. Haven't look back since. :D
blitzkrieg79
Nov 16, 03:10 PM
Personally, I would be surprised if they didn't eventually use AMD CPU's.
1. Digg had an article on AMD's line of upcoming CPU's which are CPU's and GPU's on one die. Given Apple's history of pushing more and more onto the video cards, this new line seems perfect for Apple.
Link: http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjI0OTUsLCxobmV3cywsLDE=
P.S. Just went to digg to get the link, and AMD is moving to 65nm in 2007. faster, less heat.
Link: http://hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjI0OTcsLCxobmV3cywsLDE=
Thank you for providing those interesting links and slides of AMDs future roadmap, this should go well with Anandtech article (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2379&p=12) and the fact that AMD just released a stream processor board (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/11/14/amd_stream_processor/) to show all the people that CELL processor is the blueprint for future processor development and well ahead of it's time. It will require new programming techniques and algorithms but we will also see new levels of performance. And yes, I am a CELL processor fan boy, 5 years from now everyone will be without even realizing it. :p
EDIT: Ah I almost forgot, AMD and IBM have a close relationship, they have worked and are working on many projects so I guess there might be some connection in it afterall.
1. Digg had an article on AMD's line of upcoming CPU's which are CPU's and GPU's on one die. Given Apple's history of pushing more and more onto the video cards, this new line seems perfect for Apple.
Link: http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjI0OTUsLCxobmV3cywsLDE=
P.S. Just went to digg to get the link, and AMD is moving to 65nm in 2007. faster, less heat.
Link: http://hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjI0OTcsLCxobmV3cywsLDE=
Thank you for providing those interesting links and slides of AMDs future roadmap, this should go well with Anandtech article (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2379&p=12) and the fact that AMD just released a stream processor board (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/11/14/amd_stream_processor/) to show all the people that CELL processor is the blueprint for future processor development and well ahead of it's time. It will require new programming techniques and algorithms but we will also see new levels of performance. And yes, I am a CELL processor fan boy, 5 years from now everyone will be without even realizing it. :p
EDIT: Ah I almost forgot, AMD and IBM have a close relationship, they have worked and are working on many projects so I guess there might be some connection in it afterall.
Eduardo1971
Apr 29, 02:59 PM
I sure as hell wouldnt move back to Windows for my everyday machine. I would move back to my Commodore 64 before that. :)
Ahh! Trip down memory lane. The Commodore 64c was my first computer. I believe I must have been in high school when my parents bought it. Gosh, I', teary eyed now...:o
Ahh! Trip down memory lane. The Commodore 64c was my first computer. I believe I must have been in high school when my parents bought it. Gosh, I', teary eyed now...:o
MorphingDragon
Apr 29, 07:29 PM
I personally find that the "translucent plastic" in Windows 7 looks like it was ripped off from the 90s and a bad Linux window manager. Seriously, it screams "look at me, I'm trying too hard!".
And it's a complete rip-off of KDE 4.x.
So KDE4 is a bad 90s Linux Window Manager?
And it's a complete rip-off of KDE 4.x.
So KDE4 is a bad 90s Linux Window Manager?
JMax1
Jan 5, 03:20 PM
hey that was my idea this time :(
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=265757
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=265757
rtdgoldfish
Mar 24, 10:30 PM
http://www.kropserkel.com/Images/horsehead%20(6).jpg
Do it. Except for real. :D
Good luck! I think you have all of MacRumors behind you now! For a little clarification, you do see your console's serial number is on your wireless network?
Daniel.
Hehe, yeah, I'd love to go Godfather on them. If only I could find a horse head...
And yep, the console's serial number shows up in Connect360 whenever they connect.
Do it. Except for real. :D
Good luck! I think you have all of MacRumors behind you now! For a little clarification, you do see your console's serial number is on your wireless network?
Daniel.
Hehe, yeah, I'd love to go Godfather on them. If only I could find a horse head...
And yep, the console's serial number shows up in Connect360 whenever they connect.
eswank
Apr 13, 10:43 PM
http://nicekicks.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp/files/2011/03/443815_010_A.jpg
I needed some new kicks after mine were torn up in Afghanistan. Lovin' these new Free 2's.
I needed some new kicks after mine were torn up in Afghanistan. Lovin' these new Free 2's.
Forever
Sep 12, 07:56 AM
5PM GMT
6PM BST
BST is what i meant hahaha, cheers dude, will have to check macrumours on my mobile as i'll have finished work by then
6PM BST
BST is what i meant hahaha, cheers dude, will have to check macrumours on my mobile as i'll have finished work by then
Ommid
Apr 25, 01:05 PM
What is the hole above the ear piece?
Secret location tracker.
Secret location tracker.
Aerizon
Apr 25, 10:29 PM
wonder if they'll take a leaf out of the iPad 2's book and make a smart cover. Not a direct copy though, i don't think that would work. Perhaps something that you could just flip up with your thumb.
Abstract
Sep 25, 10:29 PM
While I like Aperture's ability to "catalogue" better than Lightroom, I wouldn't choose Aperture over Lightroom right now just because it's better at importing from my camera and "cataloguing" --- not unless I take 500-1000 photos at a time. Lightroom can sort, although I don't like the UI as much. I like Lightroom right now because while not as fantastic as Aperture at sorting, etc, it's much much better at pp. I have literally SAVED a fantastic RAW photo of my girlfriend in tricky lighting with just the editing tools in Lightroom, and I surely could not do that with Aperture.
Lightroom is also faster.
So Aperture has fantastic sorting and cataloguing for those who take >300 photos, but rather poor at post-production (not much editing, and quite slow at what it CAN do).
Lightroom is also faster.
So Aperture has fantastic sorting and cataloguing for those who take >300 photos, but rather poor at post-production (not much editing, and quite slow at what it CAN do).
Amazing Iceman
May 4, 08:54 AM
I guess people without children that do not fall under any of those careers can't like iPads :(
He forgot to include grandparents and people who live alone to the list of people who like (or would like) the iPad.
He forgot to include grandparents and people who live alone to the list of people who like (or would like) the iPad.
No comments:
Post a Comment