BRLawyer
Mar 26, 04:53 PM
""They're going to see it all eventually so who cares how they get it." Which seemed to be about web content, said the tipster."
How can that be interpreted about web content ? :confused:
Exactly, Jobs was just talking about paparazzi taking pics of 'em. :D
How can that be interpreted about web content ? :confused:
Exactly, Jobs was just talking about paparazzi taking pics of 'em. :D
Diode
Jan 6, 03:13 PM
I'm surprised of no chat notifications or are those considered "messages"?
Andronicus
Aug 19, 11:13 AM
because it's turned on by default. it should be off by default (IMO) and then turned on as an option. many people aren't aware that Facebook's new "features" are almost always on when rolled out.
Can anyone confirm this? It's so annoying when new features are turned on by default. I guess I just need to delete my account. I have a fb, but never check it, but I keep it around just because I get an email if somebody sends me a message on there and then I contact them back. Facebook is just awful, worst mistake signing up for it. If you don't have one DON'T GET ONE!!
Can anyone confirm this? It's so annoying when new features are turned on by default. I guess I just need to delete my account. I have a fb, but never check it, but I keep it around just because I get an email if somebody sends me a message on there and then I contact them back. Facebook is just awful, worst mistake signing up for it. If you don't have one DON'T GET ONE!!
NP3
Apr 30, 04:50 PM
anybody going to do Amazon's "pre-order, get a beta key" for the mac? I assume it would work too, right?
more...
Fuzzy14
Dec 21, 05:27 PM
Joe has still sold 450,000 records, which is phenomenal.
Interesting to note that a typical Christmas number 1 would sell 200-250,000 copies. So this hype has helped shift another 200,000 copies of the X-factor song. Even when they lose, they win.
ALEXANDRA BURKE, JLS and LEONA LEWIS have all come from X Factor and sold millions.
What about the other saps who have won these 'talent' contests, used by the industry then disappeared into obscurity? Steve Brookstein anyone?
Rage Against The Machine couldn't fill Wembley now. I think Joe will.
Bollox
(note the above isn't a rant at immy85, he was quoting Louis Walsh)
Interesting to note that a typical Christmas number 1 would sell 200-250,000 copies. So this hype has helped shift another 200,000 copies of the X-factor song. Even when they lose, they win.
ALEXANDRA BURKE, JLS and LEONA LEWIS have all come from X Factor and sold millions.
What about the other saps who have won these 'talent' contests, used by the industry then disappeared into obscurity? Steve Brookstein anyone?
Rage Against The Machine couldn't fill Wembley now. I think Joe will.
Bollox
(note the above isn't a rant at immy85, he was quoting Louis Walsh)
hulugu
Apr 4, 01:02 PM
The Laffer Curve makes sense. You find a balance and you have taxes that are low enough not to hinder the economy and high enough to fund the government. I really don't understand where this "keep lowering taxes" logic comes from. It certainly has nothing to do with the Laffer Curve.
The Laffer Curve is often referenced, but you're correct about it's actual meaning. Some conservatives have taken the Curve to mean that lowering taxes will always bring about more revenue. Something this article is trying to address.
I wasn't making that argument so I guess I was confused why it was brought up. I've only been making an argument that the article can't conclude cutting taxes resulted in the budget problem. A state may have cut taxes and their economy might not have improved since cutting taxes, but the author of the article needs to fill in the gap and explain why there is a correlation/causation.
Negative correlation is very difficult to prove, but the article was merely noting that lowering taxes does not make for a rising economy. Obviously, we'd look to see if raising taxes improved the economy, and we might try to use some statistical methods to identify correlation.
What's important is that many conservative politicians have been selling low taxes as a fix for state budgetary problems�Wisconsin is a good example�without acknowledging that such measure often don't work, especially in the short-term.
I propose that you could run a state with some income tax or no income tax if the budget was made competently. So, IMO, cutting taxes does not, in and of itself, mean it has caused a budget shortfall. I personally think cutting taxes does help the economy but that's not what is at issue here.
In the short-term, lowering taxes just takes money from the state purse and does not drive new economic development. In the mid-term and long-term, lower taxes may encourage growth, but there's not a direct connection between taxation and economic development. They are orthogonal elements.
I have only a general understanding of the theories those guys you mentioned are famous for. I think Austrian economics make much more sense. A theory of how to get the maximum tax dollars out of the people is irrelevant to me. It's like studying how much blood you can drain from people while keeping them alive. My preferred income tax rate is 0.
For the Red Cross, knowing that fact is infinitely useful. For government, some tax is necessary to maintain infrastructure, pay for public safety, and encourage a social society. The complicated part is how to get some money without adversely affecting the entire society.
I don't mind paying taxes because I like good roads, working sewers, and schools. I also like national parks, museums and libraries. I don't mind paying for cops, firefighters, and department of environmental quality either. These are useful things that help me more than they cost to me personally and I would hesitate to argue that for nearly everyone this is true.
I wouldn't have believed it 3 years ago but now I can say from experience that anyone can do it if that's what they want to do. It's all a matter of hard work and willingness to live cheaply. The only thing that might tie you down is a family. I live for traveling so I've just worked my life to be able to do what I like. 3 years ago I was a law school dropout with no prospects and a monthly loan repayment of $1100. The highest paying job I qualified for was tutoring.
We should talk.
I've traveled a lot and I'm hoping to do more once my son is a bit older.
The Laffer Curve is often referenced, but you're correct about it's actual meaning. Some conservatives have taken the Curve to mean that lowering taxes will always bring about more revenue. Something this article is trying to address.
I wasn't making that argument so I guess I was confused why it was brought up. I've only been making an argument that the article can't conclude cutting taxes resulted in the budget problem. A state may have cut taxes and their economy might not have improved since cutting taxes, but the author of the article needs to fill in the gap and explain why there is a correlation/causation.
Negative correlation is very difficult to prove, but the article was merely noting that lowering taxes does not make for a rising economy. Obviously, we'd look to see if raising taxes improved the economy, and we might try to use some statistical methods to identify correlation.
What's important is that many conservative politicians have been selling low taxes as a fix for state budgetary problems�Wisconsin is a good example�without acknowledging that such measure often don't work, especially in the short-term.
I propose that you could run a state with some income tax or no income tax if the budget was made competently. So, IMO, cutting taxes does not, in and of itself, mean it has caused a budget shortfall. I personally think cutting taxes does help the economy but that's not what is at issue here.
In the short-term, lowering taxes just takes money from the state purse and does not drive new economic development. In the mid-term and long-term, lower taxes may encourage growth, but there's not a direct connection between taxation and economic development. They are orthogonal elements.
I have only a general understanding of the theories those guys you mentioned are famous for. I think Austrian economics make much more sense. A theory of how to get the maximum tax dollars out of the people is irrelevant to me. It's like studying how much blood you can drain from people while keeping them alive. My preferred income tax rate is 0.
For the Red Cross, knowing that fact is infinitely useful. For government, some tax is necessary to maintain infrastructure, pay for public safety, and encourage a social society. The complicated part is how to get some money without adversely affecting the entire society.
I don't mind paying taxes because I like good roads, working sewers, and schools. I also like national parks, museums and libraries. I don't mind paying for cops, firefighters, and department of environmental quality either. These are useful things that help me more than they cost to me personally and I would hesitate to argue that for nearly everyone this is true.
I wouldn't have believed it 3 years ago but now I can say from experience that anyone can do it if that's what they want to do. It's all a matter of hard work and willingness to live cheaply. The only thing that might tie you down is a family. I live for traveling so I've just worked my life to be able to do what I like. 3 years ago I was a law school dropout with no prospects and a monthly loan repayment of $1100. The highest paying job I qualified for was tutoring.
We should talk.
I've traveled a lot and I'm hoping to do more once my son is a bit older.
more...
thatisme
Mar 29, 06:29 AM
I didn't say on different cameras. I said different lenses on the same, crop, camera.
Look. I own a 7D. I own an EF-s 17-85mm IS USM. I own a EF 50mm prime. I know that if I set the zoom to 50mm and take the same shot as with the prime exact same field of view. EF-s lenses are not corrected for the crop in the way you are saying they are.
I'll say it again. You are incorrect.
See this exerpt from the-digital-picture.com: read the underlined section carefully.
What affect does the FOVCF have on lenses? None - physically. The lenses are the same and retain all of their same physical attributes. But, there are some differences in how these lenses are used that should be mentioned ...
*
First, most lenses produce the highest quality image from near the center of their image circles. Distortion, softness (opposite of sharpness), vignetting ... These issues often show up in the outside portion of the image circle. Since the FOVCF DSLRs utilize only the center portion of a Canon EF Lens, they often avoid a lens' weaknesses. I say "Canon EF Lens" because Canon EF-S Lenses are made specifically for the 1.6x FOVCF DSLR bodies (but still require the same FOVCF to be applied as the standard Canon EF Lenses to get the equivalent focal length comparison). EF Lens hoods are designed for full-frame bodies.
Look. I own a 7D. I own an EF-s 17-85mm IS USM. I own a EF 50mm prime. I know that if I set the zoom to 50mm and take the same shot as with the prime exact same field of view. EF-s lenses are not corrected for the crop in the way you are saying they are.
I'll say it again. You are incorrect.
See this exerpt from the-digital-picture.com: read the underlined section carefully.
What affect does the FOVCF have on lenses? None - physically. The lenses are the same and retain all of their same physical attributes. But, there are some differences in how these lenses are used that should be mentioned ...
*
First, most lenses produce the highest quality image from near the center of their image circles. Distortion, softness (opposite of sharpness), vignetting ... These issues often show up in the outside portion of the image circle. Since the FOVCF DSLRs utilize only the center portion of a Canon EF Lens, they often avoid a lens' weaknesses. I say "Canon EF Lens" because Canon EF-S Lenses are made specifically for the 1.6x FOVCF DSLR bodies (but still require the same FOVCF to be applied as the standard Canon EF Lenses to get the equivalent focal length comparison). EF Lens hoods are designed for full-frame bodies.
twoodcc
Apr 16, 09:53 PM
I do now, for some reason it takes me a while to understand when I look at it.
i think those stats are pretty good. nothing is perfect, but they seem to work for me.
Ha ha, yes we could use some more folders.
yeah the more the better right now. and i finally got my other system up!
i think those stats are pretty good. nothing is perfect, but they seem to work for me.
Ha ha, yes we could use some more folders.
yeah the more the better right now. and i finally got my other system up!
more...
strabes
Apr 5, 05:20 PM
Headset jack was removed, so had to buy a USB headset for example.
I think you're misinformed. The current models simply combined the 1/8" in and out jacks into one port (TRRS), just like the port on the iPhone. For example, you can plug your iPhone headphones into your Mac for use as a headset.
It also supports optical via mini-TOSlink: http://www.amazon.com/6ft-Toslink-Mini-Cable/dp/B000FMXKC8/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1302041837&sr=8-2
I think you're misinformed. The current models simply combined the 1/8" in and out jacks into one port (TRRS), just like the port on the iPhone. For example, you can plug your iPhone headphones into your Mac for use as a headset.
It also supports optical via mini-TOSlink: http://www.amazon.com/6ft-Toslink-Mini-Cable/dp/B000FMXKC8/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1302041837&sr=8-2
timmillwood
Oct 10, 03:21 PM
i dont think this means there will be any changes too the Macbook, i just hope the Macbook Pro update is soon!
more...
thatisme
Mar 29, 09:54 AM
well, you have a funny way expressing yourself then because you WROTE something completely different...
ok. this is getting comical.
From your post, blasting me....
A canon 55-200 EF-s and a 70-200L lens at 200mm on a canon 7D will produce the exact same image...the same as if you would mount both lenses on a full frame body and crop the image by 1.6
Don't crop the image, and what do you have? a different image. Want proof? See post #27
ok. this is getting comical.
From your post, blasting me....
A canon 55-200 EF-s and a 70-200L lens at 200mm on a canon 7D will produce the exact same image...the same as if you would mount both lenses on a full frame body and crop the image by 1.6
Don't crop the image, and what do you have? a different image. Want proof? See post #27
AP_piano295
May 3, 09:00 AM
The effect of terrorists to the West is enormously magnified by our reaction to them. How many Western deaths have been caused through terrorism in the last 15 years. 5000? Probably less than 200 in the last 5 years.
How many soldiers have been killed in subsequent wars? Over 7000 (http://icasualties.org/).
How many civilians have been killed in these wars? 100s of thousands.
And how much are we spending on this? What is the 'opportunity cost' of that lost cash - which could have been spent on health care/research/education?
I think we need to learn to ignore the 'short game' of small terrorist outrages and instead concentrate on the 'long game', which the West is undoubtably winning.
Terrorists represent a tiny proportion of radicals, that bubble to the surface of large populations of unhappy, poor and repressed people. Those underlying populations are changing though... all across North Africa and the Arab world people are mobilising to gain democracy, spurred on by the slow liberalising Western influence of open communication technologies and culture. This 'long game' political change is MUCH more significant than OBL's death.
Take away the unhappy cultures that breed terrorists won't completely remove risk - but it will make terrorism more the action of criminals, and less of a 'clash of cultures'. Smart Western political leadership would sell terrorist outrages as 'random acts of criminal radicals' not 'we must go to war with the axis of evil'.
All Obama has to do is decide whether he can afford to stop propping up the US military industrial complex.
It is a bit like spending a trillion dollars trying to invent an anti lighting hat (rather unsuccessfully). While totally ignoring cancer research :confused:.
How many soldiers have been killed in subsequent wars? Over 7000 (http://icasualties.org/).
How many civilians have been killed in these wars? 100s of thousands.
And how much are we spending on this? What is the 'opportunity cost' of that lost cash - which could have been spent on health care/research/education?
I think we need to learn to ignore the 'short game' of small terrorist outrages and instead concentrate on the 'long game', which the West is undoubtably winning.
Terrorists represent a tiny proportion of radicals, that bubble to the surface of large populations of unhappy, poor and repressed people. Those underlying populations are changing though... all across North Africa and the Arab world people are mobilising to gain democracy, spurred on by the slow liberalising Western influence of open communication technologies and culture. This 'long game' political change is MUCH more significant than OBL's death.
Take away the unhappy cultures that breed terrorists won't completely remove risk - but it will make terrorism more the action of criminals, and less of a 'clash of cultures'. Smart Western political leadership would sell terrorist outrages as 'random acts of criminal radicals' not 'we must go to war with the axis of evil'.
All Obama has to do is decide whether he can afford to stop propping up the US military industrial complex.
It is a bit like spending a trillion dollars trying to invent an anti lighting hat (rather unsuccessfully). While totally ignoring cancer research :confused:.
more...
840quadra
May 24, 08:58 PM
YAY!!
Now I need to remember this Thread when I get home and back to my Macintosh!!
Thanks for the hard work, and the link!!
Now I need to remember this Thread when I get home and back to my Macintosh!!
Thanks for the hard work, and the link!!
tvguru
Sep 25, 10:55 AM
The site has been updated!
http://www.apple.com/aperture/
Good eye! Thanks for the heads up.
http://www.apple.com/aperture/
Good eye! Thanks for the heads up.
more...
alamein
Nov 22, 11:09 PM
seeing the success of these kids i'm sure apple will start selling them too (only better quality)
saving107
Oct 6, 10:39 AM
No way in hell. They've already asked their developers to change app resolutions once. 3 screen sizes will never fly with developers.
99.999% likelihood of this being total nonsense.
its possible to have a 10" iPad and a 7" inch iPad, as long as they both have the same resolution, screen size doesn't really matter to developers, they wouldn't have to change anything on their apps. Same goes for the iPhone/iPod touch, Apple could have multiple screen sizes, but still keep the same resolution for all of their devices.
that being said, I don't believe Apple will make multiple sizes.
99.999% likelihood of this being total nonsense.
its possible to have a 10" iPad and a 7" inch iPad, as long as they both have the same resolution, screen size doesn't really matter to developers, they wouldn't have to change anything on their apps. Same goes for the iPhone/iPod touch, Apple could have multiple screen sizes, but still keep the same resolution for all of their devices.
that being said, I don't believe Apple will make multiple sizes.
more...
CorvusCamenarum
Apr 13, 02:30 AM
1. You mean Ashkenazi Jews are 1SD above NON-JEWISH whites? Because last time i checked Ashkenazi's were white.
source - wiki
In an ethnic sense, an Ashkenazi Jew is one whose ancestry can be traced to the Jews of Central and Eastern Europe.
...
A 2006 study found Ashkenazi Jews to be a clear, relatively homogenous genetic subgroup
2. It actually has nothing to do with race. Jews have a higher chance of being college educated than non-jews, and blacks have less of a chance of being college educated than whites altogether. It's not genetic, its the result of a combination of social factors.
So in short, race has no effect on intelligence. Upbringing does.
I didn't say it was wholly genetic, nor do the authors of the book to which I linked. However, to accept without question that we inherit a myriad of traits from our parents (hair color, eye color, height, predisposition to certain diseases, the list goes on) but discount intelligence from that group is foolish in the extreme.
source - wiki
In an ethnic sense, an Ashkenazi Jew is one whose ancestry can be traced to the Jews of Central and Eastern Europe.
...
A 2006 study found Ashkenazi Jews to be a clear, relatively homogenous genetic subgroup
2. It actually has nothing to do with race. Jews have a higher chance of being college educated than non-jews, and blacks have less of a chance of being college educated than whites altogether. It's not genetic, its the result of a combination of social factors.
So in short, race has no effect on intelligence. Upbringing does.
I didn't say it was wholly genetic, nor do the authors of the book to which I linked. However, to accept without question that we inherit a myriad of traits from our parents (hair color, eye color, height, predisposition to certain diseases, the list goes on) but discount intelligence from that group is foolish in the extreme.
skunk
May 4, 01:28 AM
War is why we evolved so far past the next "animal".Bollocks. It is absolutely nothing to do with evolution. Opposed thumbs, brain size, bipedality, toolmaking and speech have had the most influence on our development. As to whether we have evolved past any other species, that, I would have thought, is very much up for debate.
GadgetAddict
Apr 12, 04:09 PM
Right now in NYC you can walk in the Apple store anytime and get the Verizon iPad. ATT models are extremely hard to find.
So how is it that Verizon is preferred???... (I know why but I'll let you guess...:))
So how is it that Verizon is preferred???... (I know why but I'll let you guess...:))
jessica.
Jan 20, 07:25 AM
Well, do you have itchy scalp?
eawmp1
Apr 10, 12:44 PM
New bumper sticker: "It's Not A Choice, It's A Consequence"
tech4all
Oct 26, 02:31 PM
While I have no interest in this app, it is disappointing that they left PowerPC in the dust. Hopefully this isn't a new trend other companies will follow.
Apple is quickly moving its focus towards Intel Macs, and no longer sells Power PC systems in many places.
While that may be true, there are still plenty of PowerPC customers out there. Probably more than Mac x86, right? Then again, as it was said by someone here, this was probably just meant to be a Windows only app, so they might have just made a Mac x86 version so that there could be some Mac support.
Apple is quickly moving its focus towards Intel Macs, and no longer sells Power PC systems in many places.
While that may be true, there are still plenty of PowerPC customers out there. Probably more than Mac x86, right? Then again, as it was said by someone here, this was probably just meant to be a Windows only app, so they might have just made a Mac x86 version so that there could be some Mac support.
mozumder
Mar 28, 08:48 AM
wishlist:
iOS 5.0: totally new look, no more icon based.
This is really needed.
The app-centric model is really confusing. Who wants to go through 250,000 apps to figure out how to perform a task? Apple really need to move to a data-centric model.
The Windows phone 7 Metro UI is much better looking than iOS, cleaner, more fashionable. iOS is downright ugly compared to it.
iOS 5.0: totally new look, no more icon based.
This is really needed.
The app-centric model is really confusing. Who wants to go through 250,000 apps to figure out how to perform a task? Apple really need to move to a data-centric model.
The Windows phone 7 Metro UI is much better looking than iOS, cleaner, more fashionable. iOS is downright ugly compared to it.
rk21jc
Mar 31, 01:07 PM
I'm not sure if it was the 10.6.3 or the iPhoto update, but iPhoto now recognizes faces. yay!
No comments:
Post a Comment