erratikmind
Mar 17, 08:27 AM
Enjoy your new iPad. Based on your comments, you conscience is clear and unencumbered. Personally, I do not agree nor practice your way of thinking/living. However, to each his/her own methods.
Any means to justify a self serving end . . . Quite sad actually.
When the messenger of Misery comes knocking at your door, it will be of your own doing.
Any means to justify a self serving end . . . Quite sad actually.
When the messenger of Misery comes knocking at your door, it will be of your own doing.
takao
Nov 28, 06:27 PM
Make a Custom Class with Ghost, problem solved. Hell, equip that same class with the Strela, and not only will the various Choppers not shoot you, but you can then bring it down so it stops killing your team as well.
well you mean ghost pro ... the normal one is useless against that (i already have that layout ;) )
but seriously getting some of the perks to pro is ridiculously difficult while some others can be pro before hitting level 15
.. i have been trying to get ghost to pro for a while now and ironically i'm stuck on destroying an enemy turrent.. which somehow aren't popular at all jsut liek the tomahawk .. while i killed perhaps 30 guys with it i haven't been killed by a single tomahawk yet despite it being perfect for those "we are losing charlie" moments
another point of advice: don't bother with the top MP: it has only a 20 shot clip (opposed to some other MPs) and annoyingly ejects empty rounds right out of the top
having the mp just one slot below but with increased firerate add on (IMHO the best for taking down assault rifle users on short range) and silencer is the way better gun
in general with this being my first call of duty i have to say that my opinion of killing streaks hasn't changed at all ... it still is an invitation for camping in many, many game situations... and some of the attacks are simply ridiculous if you look at the size of some of the maps or their designs: yay for houses with no roofs/glass roofs
well you mean ghost pro ... the normal one is useless against that (i already have that layout ;) )
but seriously getting some of the perks to pro is ridiculously difficult while some others can be pro before hitting level 15
.. i have been trying to get ghost to pro for a while now and ironically i'm stuck on destroying an enemy turrent.. which somehow aren't popular at all jsut liek the tomahawk .. while i killed perhaps 30 guys with it i haven't been killed by a single tomahawk yet despite it being perfect for those "we are losing charlie" moments
another point of advice: don't bother with the top MP: it has only a 20 shot clip (opposed to some other MPs) and annoyingly ejects empty rounds right out of the top
having the mp just one slot below but with increased firerate add on (IMHO the best for taking down assault rifle users on short range) and silencer is the way better gun
in general with this being my first call of duty i have to say that my opinion of killing streaks hasn't changed at all ... it still is an invitation for camping in many, many game situations... and some of the attacks are simply ridiculous if you look at the size of some of the maps or their designs: yay for houses with no roofs/glass roofs
mkrishnan
Sep 8, 11:30 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHA
wait, your name is michael bolton?
:p ;) :D
If it was, I'm pretty sure Bush would somehow be responsible.
http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/schacka_2.gif
wait, your name is michael bolton?
:p ;) :D
If it was, I'm pretty sure Bush would somehow be responsible.
http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/schacka_2.gif
thejadedmonkey
Apr 13, 03:00 PM
Windows PCs with enabled File Sharing (or whatever they call it, that new confusing Homegroup with a code or password or something) show up in Finder's sidebar. "It just works".
Oh how I wish it were so. For the last year or so, I haven't had ANY windows PC show up in my finder's sidebar, except my girlfriend's Dell (go figure) which has 0 shared folders, and my desktop... after it's turned off- but never while it's on.
It's actually really pathetic. When Leopard first game out, and I was trying to use a new Mac Mini in a networked PC environment, Apple's level II technicians told me to return it, and buy one in a few months when they had worked out the bugs.
Oh how I wish it were so. For the last year or so, I haven't had ANY windows PC show up in my finder's sidebar, except my girlfriend's Dell (go figure) which has 0 shared folders, and my desktop... after it's turned off- but never while it's on.
It's actually really pathetic. When Leopard first game out, and I was trying to use a new Mac Mini in a networked PC environment, Apple's level II technicians told me to return it, and buy one in a few months when they had worked out the bugs.
Frosties
Jul 21, 09:41 AM
The Nokia phone have not the same bars/signal ratio as the iphone 4.
taylor swift and selena gomez
Country star Taylor Swift and
Selena Gomez and Taylor Swift
selena gomez and demi lovato
Selena Gomez and Taylor Swift
Joe Jonas and Taylor Swift
Selena Gomez Taylor Swift
Taylor Swift Selena Gomez
Selena Gomez says that she
Taylor Lautner may be back
selena gomez taylor swift.
selena gomez taylor swift
SELENA GOMEZ amp; TAYLOR SWIFT
Selena Gomez And Taylor Swift
martymcr
Nov 27, 03:26 AM
They are doing a similar event in the UK on Friday 1st December - a 'one day only special sales event'
azentropy
Jan 9, 12:18 PM
What I want:
Ultra Portable MacBook: < 2.5lbs, 11.1" LCD, 10+ hours battery, a SSD option, starting at < $1500
Consumer Expandable mini-tower using DESKTOP processors, starting at <$1200.
What I predict:
That I won't be happy
:(
Ultra Portable MacBook: < 2.5lbs, 11.1" LCD, 10+ hours battery, a SSD option, starting at < $1500
Consumer Expandable mini-tower using DESKTOP processors, starting at <$1200.
What I predict:
That I won't be happy
:(
Shadow
Oct 28, 03:36 PM
So? Who uses it anyway? I know absolutley *no-one* who uses OpenDarwin/whatever its called. No-one. I know people who use Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, Mac OS X, but no-one uses OpenDarwin.
jamferma
Sep 12, 08:14 AM
3am :(
I was just getting ready to go to bed for a couple of hours before 3 but I'm a little hyped now.
Bloody Apple
mate im hyped as well might get some sleep, get up early...... i need a new ipod, im due for an update..... my 3g stuffed up today, earphone jack doesent work anymore:( it has had a great life:D
I was just getting ready to go to bed for a couple of hours before 3 but I'm a little hyped now.
Bloody Apple
mate im hyped as well might get some sleep, get up early...... i need a new ipod, im due for an update..... my 3g stuffed up today, earphone jack doesent work anymore:( it has had a great life:D
samcraig
May 2, 11:55 AM
The only way to remove the cache after 4.3.3 will be to disable location services. They wont have poor location service performance, they will have none. :rolleyes:
On or off - like the switch says. Makes sense and is logical.
On or off - like the switch says. Makes sense and is logical.
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 07:17 AM
How come people still keep picking up on this point, it surprises me, especially from a developer. A larger screen doesn't necessarily mean problems for apps, a change in resolution does. That, coupled with the previous rumors of a bigger screen with the same resolution mean that if this is true, it doesn't make any difference to developers because there will be the same number of pixels in the screen. All it means is that everything will be very slightly bigger.
I think anyone claiming to be a developer and thinking screen size has anything to do with fragmentation is quite hilarious and shows the quality of some iOS developers.
It's exactly like you say, if you assumed a certain resolution when coding your app, only a change in resolution affects you. Screen size means nothing, it's all about the pixels. 960x640 is the same whether it is on a 3.5" screen or a 4" screen for a developer.
If the iOS frameworks were more resolution independent, this wouldn't even matter. PC/Mac/Web developers have had to cope with multitudes of different resolutions for years and you don't hear them whining about it.
I think anyone claiming to be a developer and thinking screen size has anything to do with fragmentation is quite hilarious and shows the quality of some iOS developers.
It's exactly like you say, if you assumed a certain resolution when coding your app, only a change in resolution affects you. Screen size means nothing, it's all about the pixels. 960x640 is the same whether it is on a 3.5" screen or a 4" screen for a developer.
If the iOS frameworks were more resolution independent, this wouldn't even matter. PC/Mac/Web developers have had to cope with multitudes of different resolutions for years and you don't hear them whining about it.
lordonuthin
Apr 10, 11:47 AM
dang. yeah, not asking for much huh :cool:
but don't be surprised if you don't get half of that, and it costs $6k.
this is one of the main things that bothers me about apple. i just don't understand why they wait so long to update the mac pros like this. at least announce something
I know... but I can always hope :p
It used to be worse when we had to wait for Motorola/IBM to produce enough chips, there were almost always delays in production because of yield issues or something else.
but don't be surprised if you don't get half of that, and it costs $6k.
this is one of the main things that bothers me about apple. i just don't understand why they wait so long to update the mac pros like this. at least announce something
I know... but I can always hope :p
It used to be worse when we had to wait for Motorola/IBM to produce enough chips, there were almost always delays in production because of yield issues or something else.
Puck.
Jan 14, 01:40 PM
Pretty sure that the "something in the air" is the stench of the hardcore fanboys leaving their parents' basements for the first time in months...
Spanna
Nov 25, 06:20 AM
Could someone please tell me what is thanksgiving, I have seen it being celebrated on many american television programs and I know it's got something to do with turkeys but they never seem to mention its origins. Also is it a national public holiday ?
roadbloc
Apr 5, 04:35 PM
This is stupid.
GeekLawyer
May 3, 10:52 PM
When I hear “It’s just getting started,” that signals to me there is more to come. Which implies that patience will be rewarded. Which further implies to wait for future models....I get your meaning. I hear "it's just getting started" like the Macintosh was just getting started in the mid-80s. I see it a little more expansively than any one model. It's about the next epoch in information technology getting underway.
NAG
Jan 12, 04:34 PM
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
That's nothing to laugh about.
Yes, and disagreeing with President Bush means you support the Terrorists. Yes, I just went there.
Seriously, that is such a slippery slope argument it isn't funny. Blaming some pranksters for the end of big expos is silly.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
That's nothing to laugh about.
Yes, and disagreeing with President Bush means you support the Terrorists. Yes, I just went there.
Seriously, that is such a slippery slope argument it isn't funny. Blaming some pranksters for the end of big expos is silly.
lostprophet894
Apr 15, 05:16 PM
If they're going to go with an aluminum design, it should look like this, but maybe with rounded edges:
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2010/03/30/iphone-4g-aka-hd-mock-up-design-and-details-photo/
That homescreen is nice. Not sure how I feel about the casing.
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2010/03/30/iphone-4g-aka-hd-mock-up-design-and-details-photo/
That homescreen is nice. Not sure how I feel about the casing.
Branskins
Apr 30, 12:33 PM
Look at us debating this, I am sure Apple is having a hard time determining what to do too! I have a feeling they like it to, but you are correct that it is confusing when there are only two options.
However, this doesn't mean I think it should go away. It just needs a little more tweaking! :D
Also, I am glad they are going with the squarish buttons. It's amazing how more modern it feels compared to the rounded buttons!
However, this doesn't mean I think it should go away. It just needs a little more tweaking! :D
Also, I am glad they are going with the squarish buttons. It's amazing how more modern it feels compared to the rounded buttons!
Gibsonsoup
Apr 11, 06:25 PM
can't understand why it doesn't let me post the right pictures :confused:
They look exactly like the original Apple ones though
They look exactly like the original Apple ones though
snberk103
Apr 15, 08:03 PM
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
French iPod
Apr 8, 08:12 PM
I was supposed to get it today but my dad had a doctor appointment so i'll be getting it tomorrow:D
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/1339/ps3justcause2.jpg (http://img703.imageshack.us/i/ps3justcause2.jpg/)
so freaking can't wait to do crazy stuff in that game:D!! specially the skydiving part (Grand Theft Auto4+Spider Man 2 = Just Cause 2):D
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/1339/ps3justcause2.jpg (http://img703.imageshack.us/i/ps3justcause2.jpg/)
so freaking can't wait to do crazy stuff in that game:D!! specially the skydiving part (Grand Theft Auto4+Spider Man 2 = Just Cause 2):D
darthraige
Dec 13, 01:40 PM
I highly doubt an early 2011 verizon iphone. LTE, doubly so. If it's coming for Verizon, it will be unveiled/launch the same time as the AT&T iphone 5.
And if you're wrong and it's announced in January? ;)
And if you're wrong and it's announced in January? ;)
Red Defiant
Mar 25, 04:09 AM
10 years is a long time
No comments:
Post a Comment