ltldrummerboy
Jan 11, 04:32 PM
If you look at the picture of the iPhone poster, it seems to have a couple of subtle differences compared to my iPhone:
I think you're right about the home buttons on the iPhone. Here's a picture of one from the apple website, and the one from the macworld poster.
I think you're right about the home buttons on the iPhone. Here's a picture of one from the apple website, and the one from the macworld poster.
CraigEvander
Mar 21, 07:00 AM
Well we have to agree it was a long run with many songs. After all 10 yeas is a long period for every gadget these days. Just look at how phones are appearing and disappearing on the market.
decksnap
Sep 12, 05:27 PM
WTF have they done?? I think I'm going to overwrite the new control buttons with the old ones.
mcrain
Mar 11, 01:10 PM
I tried to implement the Fivepoint solution to the budget deficit and still came up with a deficit of 156 Billion dollars, but I was able to save Social Security (137%)
I cut EVERY even remotely liberal sounding program by 50%, rounding down. So, for example, if EPA's budget was 27, I changed it to 13. If it was a conservative supported idea, I didn't touch it (prisons, immigration, etc...) The only concession I made on that point was to reduce military spending from 601 to 400. As for taxes and social security, I raised NO taxes and only reduced benefits and increased the age of participation in SS.
Based on what I know, I don't think it would be possible to reduce some of the budgets by 50% or more, but I went ahead and did it anyway, and still had a significant budget deficit. I guess military spending could be reduced even more, but I can't imagine Republicans voting for that.
Fiscal responsibility seems to me to be a three part question. First, are you spending more than you take in. Second, will the cuts cause damages that will require additional unbudgeted spending. Third, will any tax increases materially reduce revenue through damage to the economy. Everything else is a matter of priorities, and those are debatable.
When I did the matrix the first time with my priorities, I managed to end up with a modest surplus that could be used to reduce the debt. I think I met the first criteria. I cut some spending, including military, but I tried to not slash any area beyond what seemed an amount that could be sustained without too much damage. All in all, on the spending side, the cuts were modest, and were offset by some increases in spending. Spending cuts alone did not meet the first criteria, but considering the areas that I cut were very inflated compared to our needs, I don't think that the cuts would cause too much in the way of damage. Obviously, some additional costs might be necessary, but probably not more than 10-20 billion, and certainly not more than the surplus I had at the end. Finally, I raised taxes in a progressive fashion, the majority of increases falling on those above $100,000 per year income, with the most increases going to the top two groups. The estate tax also was increased. I'm not a fan of VAT taxes or sin taxes, so I eschewed those. History has shown that increased taxes don't result in major economic decline, and in fact, result in increased economic activity, so I think I met all three criteria. Even if the tax increases cause some damage, is that damage more or less than having large deficits and increasing our debt? I don't think so, but that's probably debatable.
When I tried to anticipate how Rand Paul or his followers would deal with this problem, I had a deficit despite slashing almost every major governmental program. I can't imagine how cutting necessary and relied upon programs by 50% or more would not result in all sorts of problems that will require governmental intervention and spending, not to mention hurt millions of people. The only criteria I "met" was in not increasing taxes, and 30 years of Reaganomics and Bush Voodoo economics may actually be enough proof to say that may not even be the case.
Anyway, that was my attempt to do what Fivepoint suggests, and I failed miserably. I'd like to see how fiscally responsible his proposal would be, and I'd like to see the choices he makes. It's one thing to say you're going to cut a program by 75%, and another to actually do it and then deal with the aftermath.
I cut EVERY even remotely liberal sounding program by 50%, rounding down. So, for example, if EPA's budget was 27, I changed it to 13. If it was a conservative supported idea, I didn't touch it (prisons, immigration, etc...) The only concession I made on that point was to reduce military spending from 601 to 400. As for taxes and social security, I raised NO taxes and only reduced benefits and increased the age of participation in SS.
Based on what I know, I don't think it would be possible to reduce some of the budgets by 50% or more, but I went ahead and did it anyway, and still had a significant budget deficit. I guess military spending could be reduced even more, but I can't imagine Republicans voting for that.
Fiscal responsibility seems to me to be a three part question. First, are you spending more than you take in. Second, will the cuts cause damages that will require additional unbudgeted spending. Third, will any tax increases materially reduce revenue through damage to the economy. Everything else is a matter of priorities, and those are debatable.
When I did the matrix the first time with my priorities, I managed to end up with a modest surplus that could be used to reduce the debt. I think I met the first criteria. I cut some spending, including military, but I tried to not slash any area beyond what seemed an amount that could be sustained without too much damage. All in all, on the spending side, the cuts were modest, and were offset by some increases in spending. Spending cuts alone did not meet the first criteria, but considering the areas that I cut were very inflated compared to our needs, I don't think that the cuts would cause too much in the way of damage. Obviously, some additional costs might be necessary, but probably not more than 10-20 billion, and certainly not more than the surplus I had at the end. Finally, I raised taxes in a progressive fashion, the majority of increases falling on those above $100,000 per year income, with the most increases going to the top two groups. The estate tax also was increased. I'm not a fan of VAT taxes or sin taxes, so I eschewed those. History has shown that increased taxes don't result in major economic decline, and in fact, result in increased economic activity, so I think I met all three criteria. Even if the tax increases cause some damage, is that damage more or less than having large deficits and increasing our debt? I don't think so, but that's probably debatable.
When I tried to anticipate how Rand Paul or his followers would deal with this problem, I had a deficit despite slashing almost every major governmental program. I can't imagine how cutting necessary and relied upon programs by 50% or more would not result in all sorts of problems that will require governmental intervention and spending, not to mention hurt millions of people. The only criteria I "met" was in not increasing taxes, and 30 years of Reaganomics and Bush Voodoo economics may actually be enough proof to say that may not even be the case.
Anyway, that was my attempt to do what Fivepoint suggests, and I failed miserably. I'd like to see how fiscally responsible his proposal would be, and I'd like to see the choices he makes. It's one thing to say you're going to cut a program by 75%, and another to actually do it and then deal with the aftermath.
Champ1
May 4, 11:38 PM
What are you a sloth? It sounds like you rarely use your Mac. Updates are pretty far in-between to be that lazy:confused:
It's ridiculous that iOS hasn't already had this enabled - having to crawl back to my Mac to update my phone or iPad is just a total pain....
It's ridiculous that iOS hasn't already had this enabled - having to crawl back to my Mac to update my phone or iPad is just a total pain....
islandman
Nov 8, 07:48 AM
If only the graphics card were better!
TheMacFeed
Oct 18, 05:09 PM
Slight change again, still need to do something with my 10000000's of cables. :mad:
The glass desk doesn't necessarily help you. You could try looking into Bluelounge's CableBox (Link to product description on Bluelounge's website (http://www.bluelounge.com/cablebox.php)) or do a make-shift version.
The glass desk doesn't necessarily help you. You could try looking into Bluelounge's CableBox (Link to product description on Bluelounge's website (http://www.bluelounge.com/cablebox.php)) or do a make-shift version.
Sydde
Apr 8, 10:42 PM
I hear what you are saying, but again I would disagree. Though I'm not sure you intend to do so, the argument you have presented comes across as if all believers in the Bible ascribe to a theology of works. Though some denominations might function in this manner, it is not consistent with the primary message of the Bible which is that we are saved by grace through faith based on the sacrifice of Christ.
Which takes us into rougher territory. If works are relatively insignificant in the scheme of salvation, your absolute moral code starts to crumble and fall in on itself. For, why should a believer bother to follow it if the saviour is always near at hand to forgive and redeem?
Why should a Ted Bundy not go out and brutalize one more victim when he can just prostrate himself before the altar and come away clean and ready to face god? Why should Lloyd Blankfein not cook up another scheme that will immorally (but legally) cheat a few more million people of their hard earned savings if it is not proscribed by his faith (not sure on the specifics of jewish morality).
In light of the examples of history (perhaps including those in the bible itself), how can you say that religion has made anyone a better person than they would have been? To me, it looks like religion has made the world a worse place than it might have been without it.
The concept of moral neutrality or clean slate at birth, is a long debated issue and you are correct in saying that the Bible teaches the doctrine of original sin. Based on scripture I personally believe that while man is definitely capable of "good" due to the fact that he has been created in the image of God, that image has been marred by sin. This leaves man in a "broken" condition and at the core we are selfish by nature.
Every time I hear about how we are naturally selfish and corrupt, I hear the utterer trying to apologize for their own faults by expanding them upon all others. As a counselor, you should be familiar with the mechanism called "projection". I see right-wingers using it constantly (not that I am specifically calling you a right-winger).
Please hear what I'm saying, because as you correctly point out this can be a very confusing process, especially in a post modern world that espouses situational ethics and moral relativity. I believe in absolute truth, truth that exists outside of my perspective and is applicable regardless of how I "feel" about it.
Yet, again, the absolutes get bent. When believers run up against a moral wall that divides them from their goals, they seek the counsel of a cleric. The cleric typically sympathizes with the believer's plight and very often finds a way to interpret the scripture to turn the question to the believer's favor. So you have your absolutes, but they are also flexible. What good then are they, that they can be molded to suit your needs? How is this better than situational ethics (logic, reason and compromise), other than to employ scholars in the service of the almighty?
An accurate understanding of original sin does not mean that man is completely "evil" in the sense that we are incapable of doing works that would be considered "good" or altruistic. The human spirit is capable of many good things, but without an accurate understanding of who God is and our relationship to him these good works become nothing but acts of vanity and self glorification that serve only to advance pride and promote self-reliance.
No, sorry, you cannot have that one. "Altruistic" does not coincide with "vanity and self glorification". In my filthy heathen state of unsaved gracelessness, I still do things for which my only reward is a smile. And even when I do have an ulterior motive ("you can return the favor at your leisure, to me or to someone else"), how does that detract from my having done well and good by someone else?
Like many of the things we have discussed in this thread I fully understand that this will hinge upon that impasse of faith that many can't get over.
I have had more than a third of a century (from teenage years) to develop my philosophy and unbeliefs, and you are obviously quite steadfast in yours, so yes, there can be little doubt of the mexican stand-off. Does it trouble you? As hoary and mulish as I may be, I still find merit in these discussions, because they draw things out into the light that I had not bothered to look at. You do teach me things, though they are almost certainly not the things you intend. I hope you in some way also benefit, it would be a shame to think this only leads you to despair.
Which takes us into rougher territory. If works are relatively insignificant in the scheme of salvation, your absolute moral code starts to crumble and fall in on itself. For, why should a believer bother to follow it if the saviour is always near at hand to forgive and redeem?
Why should a Ted Bundy not go out and brutalize one more victim when he can just prostrate himself before the altar and come away clean and ready to face god? Why should Lloyd Blankfein not cook up another scheme that will immorally (but legally) cheat a few more million people of their hard earned savings if it is not proscribed by his faith (not sure on the specifics of jewish morality).
In light of the examples of history (perhaps including those in the bible itself), how can you say that religion has made anyone a better person than they would have been? To me, it looks like religion has made the world a worse place than it might have been without it.
The concept of moral neutrality or clean slate at birth, is a long debated issue and you are correct in saying that the Bible teaches the doctrine of original sin. Based on scripture I personally believe that while man is definitely capable of "good" due to the fact that he has been created in the image of God, that image has been marred by sin. This leaves man in a "broken" condition and at the core we are selfish by nature.
Every time I hear about how we are naturally selfish and corrupt, I hear the utterer trying to apologize for their own faults by expanding them upon all others. As a counselor, you should be familiar with the mechanism called "projection". I see right-wingers using it constantly (not that I am specifically calling you a right-winger).
Please hear what I'm saying, because as you correctly point out this can be a very confusing process, especially in a post modern world that espouses situational ethics and moral relativity. I believe in absolute truth, truth that exists outside of my perspective and is applicable regardless of how I "feel" about it.
Yet, again, the absolutes get bent. When believers run up against a moral wall that divides them from their goals, they seek the counsel of a cleric. The cleric typically sympathizes with the believer's plight and very often finds a way to interpret the scripture to turn the question to the believer's favor. So you have your absolutes, but they are also flexible. What good then are they, that they can be molded to suit your needs? How is this better than situational ethics (logic, reason and compromise), other than to employ scholars in the service of the almighty?
An accurate understanding of original sin does not mean that man is completely "evil" in the sense that we are incapable of doing works that would be considered "good" or altruistic. The human spirit is capable of many good things, but without an accurate understanding of who God is and our relationship to him these good works become nothing but acts of vanity and self glorification that serve only to advance pride and promote self-reliance.
No, sorry, you cannot have that one. "Altruistic" does not coincide with "vanity and self glorification". In my filthy heathen state of unsaved gracelessness, I still do things for which my only reward is a smile. And even when I do have an ulterior motive ("you can return the favor at your leisure, to me or to someone else"), how does that detract from my having done well and good by someone else?
Like many of the things we have discussed in this thread I fully understand that this will hinge upon that impasse of faith that many can't get over.
I have had more than a third of a century (from teenage years) to develop my philosophy and unbeliefs, and you are obviously quite steadfast in yours, so yes, there can be little doubt of the mexican stand-off. Does it trouble you? As hoary and mulish as I may be, I still find merit in these discussions, because they draw things out into the light that I had not bothered to look at. You do teach me things, though they are almost certainly not the things you intend. I hope you in some way also benefit, it would be a shame to think this only leads you to despair.
Dr Kevorkian94
May 4, 10:07 PM
No, thanks. I don't wanna have to wear these stupid-looking glasses every time I need to use the iPad and look like a total dork. :mad:
Image (http://cl.ly/6VL2/img.jpg)
There using a GLASSES-LESS 3D screen that is y it is significant, the red/blue glasses will work with any screen if the image is in that format, that is y it works in any tv.
Image (http://cl.ly/6VL2/img.jpg)
There using a GLASSES-LESS 3D screen that is y it is significant, the red/blue glasses will work with any screen if the image is in that format, that is y it works in any tv.
Cameront9
Aug 24, 01:30 PM
There seem to be varying reports of the serial numbers affected, and Apple's site seems dead right now. I'm hoping my battery IS affected, because I was getting close to ordering a new battery, as my year-and three month old battery is down to 25% of it's original capacity after 440 load cycles.
The site was up briefly and claimed 4-6 weeks for the new battery to ship. That's a LONG time to go without a battery.
The site was up briefly and claimed 4-6 weeks for the new battery to ship. That's a LONG time to go without a battery.
Dagless
Mar 18, 05:42 PM
Not happy with it, but meh. I'll just buy a 160gb Classic if they're not planning on updating. I'm using my 80gb now just for videos and it's much better than my iPod touch; which is a super fine PDA.
I guess I'm waiting for the capacity of flash drives to match microdrives.
I guess I'm waiting for the capacity of flash drives to match microdrives.
Frisco
Sep 22, 01:15 PM
For those that are unfamiliar with Wal-Marts business practices I recommend you watch Frontline's Is Wal-Mart Good For America? (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/)
It's a great documentary. You can watch it online for free using RealPlayer.
It's a great documentary. You can watch it online for free using RealPlayer.
reLAXER564
Oct 24, 10:14 PM
just moved out to the dirty jerz to start my career... got my set up in a new home. also just bought the M-Stand for my laptop and it is quite nice
I took that picture on the right. Just sayin'.
I took that picture on the right. Just sayin'.
Kilamite
Nov 12, 10:51 AM
Gutted.. the Facebook app since the 3.0 update has really been looking good, and I'd love to see Hewitt evolve it even more.
Think Phil Schiller should send him an email just to thank him for developing so gracefully for the iPhone, explain the review process and reasoning behind it and then just wish him well in the future.
This is a PR blow, and Phil will have to do something or this could be damaging to the platform's future development.
Think Phil Schiller should send him an email just to thank him for developing so gracefully for the iPhone, explain the review process and reasoning behind it and then just wish him well in the future.
This is a PR blow, and Phil will have to do something or this could be damaging to the platform's future development.
MarcelV
Aug 24, 01:50 PM
They may be screwed.
Maybe.....that softly spoken. They are screwed. Sony can't be too happy at this time. Delays in launching products, new product acceptance less than stellar, and while Consumer Electronics was doing a little better than past years, this is setting them back. Hopefully they will learn a lesson and do some more R&D next time.
Maybe.....that softly spoken. They are screwed. Sony can't be too happy at this time. Delays in launching products, new product acceptance less than stellar, and while Consumer Electronics was doing a little better than past years, this is setting them back. Hopefully they will learn a lesson and do some more R&D next time.
David085
Oct 24, 08:04 PM
like the setup :)
michaelsviews
Mar 22, 08:18 AM
Maybe the guy should buy a pair ! Wife telling him to return, she's probably at the feed trough all day and the iPad2 took from her beer and cigarette allotment.
anim8or
Apr 14, 02:26 AM
Spoken like a 12 year old :rolleyes:
Owning software /= professional. Skill and natural talent for editing make you a professional. A real pro can cut footage on any system, any piece of software and doesn't rely on apps to do it for them. It's a tool that they use to do what they do faster and more efficiently so they can maximize their time/profits.
To certain degree I see what he is saying...
If I am correct then the point is that this new way of editing will open up more time for novice editors to spend more time developing editing techniques and styles rather then getting to grips with the software needed to do the job.
I don't think the pro software makes the editor a pro, but it will be a lot more of a smooth transition when using the new FCPX.
Owning software /= professional. Skill and natural talent for editing make you a professional. A real pro can cut footage on any system, any piece of software and doesn't rely on apps to do it for them. It's a tool that they use to do what they do faster and more efficiently so they can maximize their time/profits.
To certain degree I see what he is saying...
If I am correct then the point is that this new way of editing will open up more time for novice editors to spend more time developing editing techniques and styles rather then getting to grips with the software needed to do the job.
I don't think the pro software makes the editor a pro, but it will be a lot more of a smooth transition when using the new FCPX.
iJon
Sep 22, 02:53 PM
I am 73 years old, I live in Rogers, AR as does my daughter. My daughter is a Walmart employee! She does not have a mustache! The preceding remark is, in my opinion, unnecessary, cruel and sexist.
There is a great deal about Wal Mart to depise but none of them justify such a gatuitous attack on women, many of whom are single parents, that work hard there to support their families.:(
I'm sure it was all fun and games. It's hard for us Arkansans though. Desipte what reasons people hate Wal-Mart for, they are always a big deal up in our community (local NWA resident here). What I do see though is a lot of under class citizens in our neck of the woods who are able to pay for certain things that they probably couldn't afford elsewhere.
jon
There is a great deal about Wal Mart to depise but none of them justify such a gatuitous attack on women, many of whom are single parents, that work hard there to support their families.:(
I'm sure it was all fun and games. It's hard for us Arkansans though. Desipte what reasons people hate Wal-Mart for, they are always a big deal up in our community (local NWA resident here). What I do see though is a lot of under class citizens in our neck of the woods who are able to pay for certain things that they probably couldn't afford elsewhere.
jon
nonameowns
Apr 12, 12:49 PM
hmm i wonder when the day will come that universal currency will show up ;)
hello mass effect :p gimme some billion credits kthx
hello mass effect :p gimme some billion credits kthx
calderone
Oct 18, 10:02 PM
I like that desk. Who is it by?
Ikea:
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/20115533
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/40115532
Looks like these legs:
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/10115519
Ikea:
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/20115533
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/40115532
Looks like these legs:
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/10115519
YMark
Mar 25, 03:17 PM
I've been going thru these forums for about a year now. I find good posts and opinions but I hate these snide comments from people. Not everyone is as tech savvy as many who post here. I'm sick of scrolling past these guys that have nothing better to do than mock others.
Go pound sand, it has nothing to do with being tech savvy.
Go pound sand, it has nothing to do with being tech savvy.
Lixivial
Sep 12, 05:35 PM
Ack, when I have my iPod connected, my load times take FOREVER on my MacBook. It takes at least two minutes to simply bring up the UI.
I'm finding it interesting that the OS X version is lacking a feature that the PC version has. It's no doubt for troubleshooting, but weird. It's called "Run Diagnostics..." and presents the attached window.
I guess it's so Apple's iTMS support doesn't have to know Windows to get relevant information. :)
I'm finding it interesting that the OS X version is lacking a feature that the PC version has. It's no doubt for troubleshooting, but weird. It's called "Run Diagnostics..." and presents the attached window.
I guess it's so Apple's iTMS support doesn't have to know Windows to get relevant information. :)
gri
Mar 22, 03:40 PM
Here we go with the "You said this, so you must be this..." stereotype... :rolleyes:
I know guys where even though they are the "bread winner" or contribute greatly to the funds, they have to approve EVERYTHING through the Wife - whereas the Wife can spend as she pleases....
Happy Wife, Happy Life... :eek:
Not into that type of relationship.
Just tried to answer the question that was asked... Not stereotyping at all
I know guys where even though they are the "bread winner" or contribute greatly to the funds, they have to approve EVERYTHING through the Wife - whereas the Wife can spend as she pleases....
Happy Wife, Happy Life... :eek:
Not into that type of relationship.
Just tried to answer the question that was asked... Not stereotyping at all
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu