.jpg "Quotes Wallpapers love")
Eidorian
Nov 16, 02:50 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86#Manufacturers
Hopefully Apple will stick with the best for now. (Intel) I've seen the promises AMD has but it's leaning toward 4x4 to compete with Intel. What's on the lower end for the average user when a Core 2 beats the pants off of what AMD has out.
Hopefully Apple will stick with the best for now. (Intel) I've seen the promises AMD has but it's leaning toward 4x4 to compete with Intel. What's on the lower end for the average user when a Core 2 beats the pants off of what AMD has out.
tristangage
Apr 22, 02:50 PM
To me, the whole idea is completely redundant.
Yeah, we can tell.
Yeah, we can tell.
Shadow
Nov 24, 05:59 PM
All the Apple Stores are really slow, they must be getting *hammered*.
MacQuest
Oct 10, 09:35 PM
Apple will utterly HUMILIATE microsoft's zune device by releasing this "true" video device .
What's funny is that m$ actually thinks that they're gonna compete with the iPod when it's [i]this device that they should be chasing.
The zune won't even stall the current 5.5g's iPod sales, but the combination of the current iPods strong [as usual] sales and this "true" video device will absolutely SLAUGHTER m$'s zune.
What's funny is that m$ actually thinks that they're gonna compete with the iPod when it's [i]this device that they should be chasing.
The zune won't even stall the current 5.5g's iPod sales, but the combination of the current iPods strong [as usual] sales and this "true" video device will absolutely SLAUGHTER m$'s zune.
hookedonmac
Nov 23, 09:45 PM
Great! Only 15 minutes to go and I can sleep in in the morning.
Thanks again.
:)
Duh, PST. I was so excited I didn't see that PST. Oh well guess I'll be gtting up early after all.
Thanks again.
:)
Duh, PST. I was so excited I didn't see that PST. Oh well guess I'll be gtting up early after all.
skunk
Apr 21, 12:07 PM
It may be that the backend has a different value stored than what displayed in your cached version. Honestly I know about as much of the system as you do. I haven't seen that behavior exhibited but I do thank you for bringing it up so that it can be looked into.I clicked on a post rated 0 and it went to -2. I clicked on another post rated 0, and it went to -2. I clicked - again and it went to -1.
David G.
Jan 11, 07:19 PM
Ban. Them. Now.
Baadshah
Apr 16, 09:29 AM
I think this is original case of the forthcoming iphone, if you guys look at all apple products, they all are aluminum. And i strongly believe that the new iphone will also be aluminum. This one looks sexy.........
Les Kern
Apr 25, 02:20 PM
Pbbbt... Looks fake.
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.
rdowns
Apr 27, 05:44 PM
Oh no.
talking to a friend at the shared open area locker room.
at some point I said something to the affect, she started really working it and it eventually got hard.
Nice trip to HR.
Subject matter; an expoy based resin.
I can't imagine the accusations that would take place with a unisex bathroom in the united states. Lawyers would take up residence out side of the bathrooms along with a whole new array of tv commercials
Where do you get these things?
There are many unisex bathrooms in NYC. Never heard of a lawsuit.
talking to a friend at the shared open area locker room.
at some point I said something to the affect, she started really working it and it eventually got hard.
Nice trip to HR.
Subject matter; an expoy based resin.
I can't imagine the accusations that would take place with a unisex bathroom in the united states. Lawyers would take up residence out side of the bathrooms along with a whole new array of tv commercials
Where do you get these things?
There are many unisex bathrooms in NYC. Never heard of a lawsuit.
QuarterSwede
Mar 17, 06:24 PM
iPhone 4's are everywhere here in CA. They used to be unique, now the only comment is... "oh you have the one with a bad antenna."
I get that from time to time and my response is that I actually get better reception than any phone I've owned (Sony Ericssons included). Antenna-gate is a complete non issue for me.
I get that from time to time and my response is that I actually get better reception than any phone I've owned (Sony Ericssons included). Antenna-gate is a complete non issue for me.
Ender17
May 3, 11:10 PM
Pity I can't buy the product.
Why are Apple spending so much money on advertising when they can't even keep up with demand? Makes no sense.I found a store online selling them
http://store.apple.com/us
Why are Apple spending so much money on advertising when they can't even keep up with demand? Makes no sense.I found a store online selling them
http://store.apple.com/us
CaryMacGuy
Oct 7, 07:14 AM
I used to live in Ithaca, NY and drove 45 miles to work up to Seneca Falls, going through much wilderness and nothingness. Throughout the drive, with Verizon not only would I have coverage but I would have 3G coverage most of the way. With AT&T, no only did I not have 3G coverage (about 1 mile outside of Ithaca) but much of the drive, I had no coverage at all.
That is just one example. Part of me wants to cancel AT&T and use my iPhone as a standalone iPod Touch device.
That is just one example. Part of me wants to cancel AT&T and use my iPhone as a standalone iPod Touch device.
soulreaver99
Mar 17, 01:27 AM
You are so going to jail...
wmmk
Aug 14, 11:44 AM
You're telling me they haven't recouped costs for designing the things yet? Or that we should always have to pay..
Of course they've recouped costs for designing products. My point is, if one product has superior design, there is high demand for it. Considering that the global economy is based on supply & demand, well designed products will always cost more than poorly designed products, unless the creator of the product with superior design chooses to discount their product to gain market share and popularity.
Of course they've recouped costs for designing products. My point is, if one product has superior design, there is high demand for it. Considering that the global economy is based on supply & demand, well designed products will always cost more than poorly designed products, unless the creator of the product with superior design chooses to discount their product to gain market share and popularity.
wordoflife
Apr 25, 06:33 PM
http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/full/284725738.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1303773395&Signature=PCxhkNUAUfz2RA%2FbPdbd3vLcc%2Bs%3D
Hmm
Hmm
jamesi
Nov 20, 02:15 AM
Here we go folks.
Just to put everybody's mind at ease. These are the guys who predicted the arrival of a G5 iBook in early 2005.
They have never, ever been right.
ditto, why would apple switch to another chip when they are with the most reliable and solid choice at the moment
Just to put everybody's mind at ease. These are the guys who predicted the arrival of a G5 iBook in early 2005.
They have never, ever been right.
ditto, why would apple switch to another chip when they are with the most reliable and solid choice at the moment
twoodcc
Jan 12, 12:19 AM
Steve Jobs has earned the right to be smug, you however, have not.
ha, that was pretty good. and true really...
they didn't release iwork and ilife probably b/c of Amazon putting it up on their website early
ha, that was pretty good. and true really...
they didn't release iwork and ilife probably b/c of Amazon putting it up on their website early
karatekidk
Mar 24, 03:05 PM
Happy 10th B'day!
Getting a bit sentimental just by thinking about what I was doing in 2001...
Getting a bit sentimental just by thinking about what I was doing in 2001...
ChrisTX
Apr 25, 07:06 PM
I seriously doubt Apple is going to change the screen size so slightly because it may require a lot of software re-writes (unless the apps are truly resolution independent).
Perhaps, the screen only appears bigger because the borders will relatively shrink in the next generation????
Notice the size the iPhone apps scale to on the iPad is significantly larger than the actual 3.5" of the iPhone and they scale just fine. I didn't read all of the comments, but I've never seen anyone ever point this out before.
Perhaps, the screen only appears bigger because the borders will relatively shrink in the next generation????
Notice the size the iPhone apps scale to on the iPad is significantly larger than the actual 3.5" of the iPhone and they scale just fine. I didn't read all of the comments, but I've never seen anyone ever point this out before.
akm3
Sep 29, 12:18 AM
WTH? Whoever wrote this clearly doesn't have any idea about what has been going on in architecture in, oh, the past 150 years. I met Peter Bohlin last year and we got to talking about his design strategies. He's been doing similar work throughout his career, even before BCJ (then Bohlin Powell) was founded in 1965. Check out Japanese architecture from the past 1,500 years.
As an architecture major and architectural history minor I find this comment to be Jobs-worship. Thinking that nobody else could come up with the concept of a simple and sophisticated design is just asinine.
My rant aside, I love the floor plan and can't wait to see some elevations/perspectives. Go BCJ!
Also, on a side note, BCJ is the firm that designed Bill Gates' house...
Bill Gates copying Steve AGAIN, just earlier than usual this time... (!) (<-- That's a sarcasm mark)
As an architecture major and architectural history minor I find this comment to be Jobs-worship. Thinking that nobody else could come up with the concept of a simple and sophisticated design is just asinine.
My rant aside, I love the floor plan and can't wait to see some elevations/perspectives. Go BCJ!
Also, on a side note, BCJ is the firm that designed Bill Gates' house...
Bill Gates copying Steve AGAIN, just earlier than usual this time... (!) (<-- That's a sarcasm mark)
balamw
Apr 27, 07:04 PM
My sources.. well, my main sources is the Apple documentation (all of it), then theres books and all the same stuff than most developers learn from. And.. no I haven't read all of the books, nor watch every video but I will.
Again with the lack of specificity. :rolleyes:
Being specific is a huge part of learning how to program, because computers only do what you tell them to do. (As you should have learned just by living through this thread).
It's not essential to read every page of every book, but certain books are good at explaining particular concepts. Others, less so.
Telling us specifically which resources got you in this mess, can help us point you at the relevant portions of the resources you already have at your disposal. It also can help us the next newbie who doesn't know a method from an object instance, by pointing them to different resources to avoid your mistakes.
For example, if we know you have access to Kochan's book we could be more specific and say: "Go back and re-read Chapter 3 on "Classes, Objects and Methods"" instead of a more generic "step back and learn the fundamentals".
No, self refers to the instance of the object that is executing the currently running code.
Which Nekbeth might actually know if they took the time to learn something about objects, for example from said Chapter 3 in Kochan. For me, it remains the best description of objects I have read.
B
Again with the lack of specificity. :rolleyes:
Being specific is a huge part of learning how to program, because computers only do what you tell them to do. (As you should have learned just by living through this thread).
It's not essential to read every page of every book, but certain books are good at explaining particular concepts. Others, less so.
Telling us specifically which resources got you in this mess, can help us point you at the relevant portions of the resources you already have at your disposal. It also can help us the next newbie who doesn't know a method from an object instance, by pointing them to different resources to avoid your mistakes.
For example, if we know you have access to Kochan's book we could be more specific and say: "Go back and re-read Chapter 3 on "Classes, Objects and Methods"" instead of a more generic "step back and learn the fundamentals".
No, self refers to the instance of the object that is executing the currently running code.
Which Nekbeth might actually know if they took the time to learn something about objects, for example from said Chapter 3 in Kochan. For me, it remains the best description of objects I have read.
B
emotion
Nov 16, 07:23 AM
I'd consider it highly unlikley but here's the rumour (it's be wise for Apple to have rumours circulated just to keep Intel sharp):
http://www.digitimes.com/systems/a20061115PR207.html
http://www.digitimes.com/systems/a20061115PR207.html
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario