.jpg "justin bieber rare pictures.")
xPismo
Sep 30, 11:55 PM
yay! Anything that makes my powerbook more useful in the work environment is a good thing. :cool:
King Cobra
Aug 20, 08:15 PM
Ah, s***. I just reread rule number 6 for the contest. Oh, well. If the mods are forced to choose between my static avatar and my million avatar, use my static one.
Grade
Oct 15, 05:36 PM
dualscreen, 2nd 90degree portrait mode. Image was from http://ameblo.jp/tokyogenso/
Can't find the picture, since I don't read chinese or Japanese... I don't even know what language is it. Can you help out?
Can't find the picture, since I don't read chinese or Japanese... I don't even know what language is it. Can you help out?
VoR
Apr 6, 02:26 PM
http://blog.backblaze.com/2009/09/01/petabytes-on-a-budget-how-to-build-cheap-cloud-storage/
Pretty amazing considering the date and cost....
Much more interested in this sort of solution over the typical enterprise that simply phones up a vendor and orders a SAN.
Pretty amazing considering the date and cost....
Much more interested in this sort of solution over the typical enterprise that simply phones up a vendor and orders a SAN.
more...
Hellhammer
Apr 28, 10:26 AM
Two GT120s will be able to drive up to four displays (2xDVI and 2xmDP). eBay (http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p5197.m570.l1313&_nkw=NVIDIA+GT120&_sacat=See-All-Categories) is the best source for GT120s at the moment, they go for around 100 bucks.
MST
Dec 1, 06:53 PM
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/5130/desktopmr12100.png
more...
coder12
Mar 25, 11:13 AM
I'm using Garmin Mobile XT on my Windows mobile phone--it's really really nice.
Using maps on my iPad.... uhhhh.... not so nice :P
Using maps on my iPad.... uhhhh.... not so nice :P
bwrairen
Mar 26, 09:26 PM
completely the opposite.
1. title doesn't state picture.
2. listed under the wrong category
buyer wins.
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/8739/35967530.jpg
Wrong category? Have you ever purchased or listed anything on eBay that was in the wrong category? I know I have. Does that deserve jail time?
There have been many time that I have purchased items on eBay as well that were described incorrectly. Now granted, when I have purchased these items, it was to my advantage or of no consequence. But I only knew that by reading and understanding the item description in the first place.
Don't get me wrong...I am not saying the buyer should have to pay. Just going through the experience and realizing how foolish he was should be enough to teach MOST people a lesson like that. I posted to respond to the fanatic that thinks that the seller should go to jail. He did nothing illegal. What he did was immoral, and morality is subjective.
1. title doesn't state picture.
2. listed under the wrong category
buyer wins.
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/8739/35967530.jpg
Wrong category? Have you ever purchased or listed anything on eBay that was in the wrong category? I know I have. Does that deserve jail time?
There have been many time that I have purchased items on eBay as well that were described incorrectly. Now granted, when I have purchased these items, it was to my advantage or of no consequence. But I only knew that by reading and understanding the item description in the first place.
Don't get me wrong...I am not saying the buyer should have to pay. Just going through the experience and realizing how foolish he was should be enough to teach MOST people a lesson like that. I posted to respond to the fanatic that thinks that the seller should go to jail. He did nothing illegal. What he did was immoral, and morality is subjective.
more...
yetanotherdave
Jul 11, 04:36 AM
Well, that was a complete shambles, was anyone else here there? I was the guy 10th in line who left empty handed, they sold out of 16gb's.
Jonasgold
Apr 4, 01:28 PM
Tell me, what market does Apple concentrate on?
Since the Euro is higher than the dollar, I would say they prefer the EU. More profit per sold iDevice ;).
Personally I support this, it is not because I support this. I want to read a paper not being spammed with offers.
Since the Euro is higher than the dollar, I would say they prefer the EU. More profit per sold iDevice ;).
Personally I support this, it is not because I support this. I want to read a paper not being spammed with offers.
more...
skunk
Mar 23, 05:21 PM
Sorry, i'm not getting your point.Your apparent eagerness to lay blame on the victim is bizarre and highly questionable.
wesrk
Feb 20, 12:44 AM
Ya sorry.
no problem, and yeah, she's a beauty.
mind sharing the link/original?
no problem, and yeah, she's a beauty.
mind sharing the link/original?
more...
NoShoreGuy
Apr 20, 07:28 AM
Thanks!
dba7dba
May 1, 12:09 PM
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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
more...
harrymerkin
Aug 5, 09:54 AM
^ I like that, would you mind telling me how you got the dock like that? Ti have the black part cover the icons fully. I'm only now starting to mess around more with my mac, I just changed my dock to a glossy black. Thank you.
http://imgur.com/OGgGXl.jpg
in Applications find 'Terminal' and once it is open put this command in there
$ defaults write com.apple.dock no-glass -boolean YES; killall Dock
swap the 'YES' for 'NO' to undo it.
http://imgur.com/OGgGXl.jpg
in Applications find 'Terminal' and once it is open put this command in there
$ defaults write com.apple.dock no-glass -boolean YES; killall Dock
swap the 'YES' for 'NO' to undo it.
iBecks
Jun 2, 10:07 AM
Looks good. :D
more...
wagnerplace
Sep 26, 10:09 PM
Now if they would only support domain name hosting.
manu chao
Apr 4, 01:42 PM
The Financial Times (and they're far from the only one) are complaining NOT because of the subscription fee split but because they loose "the direct relationship with subscribers". To put that into simple English they currently sell their customers information to marketing firms or use the demographic data to sell ads in the FT or related materials.
They can only sell it if you opt in (or don't opt out, depending on whether that checkbox is checked by default or not). And what harm is happening to you if they use their anonymous demographic data to sell adds? Don't you think Apple is using their demographic data when they sell iAds?
They can only sell it if you opt in (or don't opt out, depending on whether that checkbox is checked by default or not). And what harm is happening to you if they use their anonymous demographic data to sell adds? Don't you think Apple is using their demographic data when they sell iAds?
Huntn
Mar 3, 03:13 PM
You indicated that the rich weren't paying their 'fair share.' I responded by pointing out that the top 50% of wage earners pay 95% of the tax burden. That is completely separate (although obviously relative and related) from the tax 'rate' which they pay.
Then adjust it down and make the top 60% of wage earners pay 90% of the burden.
Let me get this straight... your definition of 'fair' is that people who make the right decisions in life, who invest in the right ideas, who don't waste their money on immediate pursuits so they can benefit in the long-term, who work hard and earn success, and yes... have a little luck should have their money confiscated by the state? By mob rule? Since you've determined that 'they don't need it', that translates to them not 'deserving' it and you being able to steal it from them via taxation?
Yes it is completely fair. What is your definition of steal? We could call taxation stealing. We could call exporting a million jobs out of the country stealing couldn't we? We could call breaking the union so executives, executives who all ready have a lot of money, can have more of labor's pay stealing.
This has been one of my long term themes. You live in a society for a reason. That reason is mutual benefit. Because you are smart (or lucky) and make the right decisions, and you end up with all most more money than you can spend or put another way, so much money to life like a King, should you? Oh, sure some people after living that way for years, start feeling guilty, and start a charity to ease their guilty conscious.
But my point is from a moral standpoint, how much money does an individual and his immediate family need to live a comfortable life? In this case of the successful business person, they should be at the top of the income scale. But I have proposed that scale be capped and a 90% income tax rate at a high level, say over $1 million a year is completely fair. "Damn it's so unfair. I only have $1M per year to live on, when I could have $10M, $20M, $50M, bastards!" Obviously you think it's fair if you are allowed to live in excess while others do without or do even you have a cap? ;)
Now you can muster up all of your capitalistic indignity and tell me why it's not fair. Which brings us back to my original premise. How much do you need to live on and still be considered a 'moral' person? What is your definition of moral, being a glutton? That is what the excessively rich are.
BTW, I don't hold anything against them, I don't envy them as I live what I consider to be a very comfortable life in the range of 150k per year income. But I am in the minority. A whole lot of people scrape by in this country. There is 'smart' and then there is 'opportunity'. Right now large multi-national corporations are doing there best to take away 'opportunity' from average citizens so they can increase their profits. Not only do they not give a damn about society, they have absolutely no national loyalty. Call them carpet baggers.
So in conclusion, I don't think excessive wealth is moral and I have no problem with the Federal government setting the top tax bracket at 90%. Call me a suedo-socialist. :)
I really like that quote where the Brit said it was easier being rich in the U.S. because instead of envying the fat cats, many Americans want to be like them. The inference being that they are cheering them on in hopes of one day being fabulously rich when in reality that is not going to happen for most of us, but we still support federal policies that hurt average people like lemmings heading off the cliff.
Then adjust it down and make the top 60% of wage earners pay 90% of the burden.
Let me get this straight... your definition of 'fair' is that people who make the right decisions in life, who invest in the right ideas, who don't waste their money on immediate pursuits so they can benefit in the long-term, who work hard and earn success, and yes... have a little luck should have their money confiscated by the state? By mob rule? Since you've determined that 'they don't need it', that translates to them not 'deserving' it and you being able to steal it from them via taxation?
Yes it is completely fair. What is your definition of steal? We could call taxation stealing. We could call exporting a million jobs out of the country stealing couldn't we? We could call breaking the union so executives, executives who all ready have a lot of money, can have more of labor's pay stealing.
This has been one of my long term themes. You live in a society for a reason. That reason is mutual benefit. Because you are smart (or lucky) and make the right decisions, and you end up with all most more money than you can spend or put another way, so much money to life like a King, should you? Oh, sure some people after living that way for years, start feeling guilty, and start a charity to ease their guilty conscious.
But my point is from a moral standpoint, how much money does an individual and his immediate family need to live a comfortable life? In this case of the successful business person, they should be at the top of the income scale. But I have proposed that scale be capped and a 90% income tax rate at a high level, say over $1 million a year is completely fair. "Damn it's so unfair. I only have $1M per year to live on, when I could have $10M, $20M, $50M, bastards!" Obviously you think it's fair if you are allowed to live in excess while others do without or do even you have a cap? ;)
Now you can muster up all of your capitalistic indignity and tell me why it's not fair. Which brings us back to my original premise. How much do you need to live on and still be considered a 'moral' person? What is your definition of moral, being a glutton? That is what the excessively rich are.
BTW, I don't hold anything against them, I don't envy them as I live what I consider to be a very comfortable life in the range of 150k per year income. But I am in the minority. A whole lot of people scrape by in this country. There is 'smart' and then there is 'opportunity'. Right now large multi-national corporations are doing there best to take away 'opportunity' from average citizens so they can increase their profits. Not only do they not give a damn about society, they have absolutely no national loyalty. Call them carpet baggers.
So in conclusion, I don't think excessive wealth is moral and I have no problem with the Federal government setting the top tax bracket at 90%. Call me a suedo-socialist. :)
I really like that quote where the Brit said it was easier being rich in the U.S. because instead of envying the fat cats, many Americans want to be like them. The inference being that they are cheering them on in hopes of one day being fabulously rich when in reality that is not going to happen for most of us, but we still support federal policies that hurt average people like lemmings heading off the cliff.
LightSpeed1
Apr 1, 10:12 PM
Can't wait till it's available to consumers.
adelia
May 3, 01:51 AM
Thanks for posting
kuebby
Mar 10, 11:47 PM
Yeah, I saw this earlier, hopefully this means a stable release will be coming soon. There's actually some stuff in 4.3 I'd like, so it'd be nice to not have to wait 2 or 3 months.
I'm not complaining though, I'll be patient. I'm not doing the work so I won't whine about something I'm getting for free.
I'm not complaining though, I'll be patient. I'm not doing the work so I won't whine about something I'm getting for free.
sockdoggy
Apr 28, 07:35 PM
These lawsuits can't possibly be sustainable.
The ancient patent system needs to be revamped.
The ancient patent system needs to be revamped.
parapup
Apr 27, 05:24 PM
just out of curiosity.. do you file bug reports?
i'm pretty guilty of not...
I used to do it - quite a bit actually. But except for one security bug I filed all of the others pretty much got ignored - that was a big disincentive.
i'm pretty guilty of not...
I used to do it - quite a bit actually. But except for one security bug I filed all of the others pretty much got ignored - that was a big disincentive.
No comments:
Post a Comment