MattSepeta
Apr 27, 01:12 PM
You're basically saying we're not women/men by having such strict and naive definitions of gender, thankfully you're in the minority.
Why is it so difficult to simply broaden your understanding of what woman/man actually means? If you want to point out that I'm genetically XY like it means a damn be my guest, otherwise your whole viewpoint can get stuffed.
Where to start....
- How about the definition of "Gender".... I am not talking about "Gender roles" or "norms" or any of that. I am speaking ONLY about the scientific aspect of "Gender".
Case in point: Lets say a transgendered individual is stricken with a life threatening ailment. Now we all know that certain illnesses are more prone to certain genders. The doctor asks you what gender you are, in order to diagnose and cure you before you die. No matter how much you are convinced that you are actually gender "X" , having successfully lived as gender "X" for years, despite being born gender "Y", you are still going to be disposed to illnesses that effect gender "Y".
Anyone care to debate that? Any MDs care to chime in?
Another thing- I find it very interesting how quickly you guys started to assume I'm being "narrow minded" and how I need to "broaden my horizons"...
I find it even more interesting that you jumped to the same conclusions (prejudicial conclusions, perhaps) despite my twice stating that I support transgender rights and that it is not a personal choice but an inherent predisposition.
EDIT: So let me clear it us as exhaustively as possible---
I understand that people are born feeling that they were put in the wrong body.
I understand it is not a choice, that these people are born like this, just as I was born with lots of moles. Not my choice, not their choice.
I understand that these people have sex reassignment surgery, or may dress/act like the opposite sex.
I understand and support full rights for these people.
I understand and support a person such as this living as the opposite gender.
BUT
I think it is wholly inaccurate to scientifically label them as the opposite gender, despite all of the above.
Does that really make me a narrow minded biggot? Seriously?
Why is it so difficult to simply broaden your understanding of what woman/man actually means? If you want to point out that I'm genetically XY like it means a damn be my guest, otherwise your whole viewpoint can get stuffed.
Where to start....
- How about the definition of "Gender".... I am not talking about "Gender roles" or "norms" or any of that. I am speaking ONLY about the scientific aspect of "Gender".
Case in point: Lets say a transgendered individual is stricken with a life threatening ailment. Now we all know that certain illnesses are more prone to certain genders. The doctor asks you what gender you are, in order to diagnose and cure you before you die. No matter how much you are convinced that you are actually gender "X" , having successfully lived as gender "X" for years, despite being born gender "Y", you are still going to be disposed to illnesses that effect gender "Y".
Anyone care to debate that? Any MDs care to chime in?
Another thing- I find it very interesting how quickly you guys started to assume I'm being "narrow minded" and how I need to "broaden my horizons"...
I find it even more interesting that you jumped to the same conclusions (prejudicial conclusions, perhaps) despite my twice stating that I support transgender rights and that it is not a personal choice but an inherent predisposition.
EDIT: So let me clear it us as exhaustively as possible---
I understand that people are born feeling that they were put in the wrong body.
I understand it is not a choice, that these people are born like this, just as I was born with lots of moles. Not my choice, not their choice.
I understand that these people have sex reassignment surgery, or may dress/act like the opposite sex.
I understand and support full rights for these people.
I understand and support a person such as this living as the opposite gender.
BUT
I think it is wholly inaccurate to scientifically label them as the opposite gender, despite all of the above.
Does that really make me a narrow minded biggot? Seriously?
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 15, 07:47 PM
That depends on the game. Everything after COD4 has had a very shallow campaign that is just boring. I only play the campaign because i find COD's online to be bland. I like MP with different classes, like TF2 or KZ2. I dont like when everyone's job is simply shooting. It gets boring really quickly for me. I played KZ2 online more than any other game because if i got tired or sniping i could go around setting up bots. If i got tired of that i could play Medic and heal the crap out of people. So many things to do whereas in COD everyone has a gun and shoots, thats all.
So i'd rather have Treyarch spend more time on the campaign than MP. Insomniac makes a game with a solid campaign every year (except this year -_-) and they are working with a tiny budget compared to the COD franchise.
So i'd rather have Treyarch spend more time on the campaign than MP. Insomniac makes a game with a solid campaign every year (except this year -_-) and they are working with a tiny budget compared to the COD franchise.
DoFoT9
May 15, 01:39 AM
Wirelessly posted (nokia e63: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.2; U; Series60/3.1 NokiaE63-1/100.21.110; Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 ) AppleWebKit/413 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/413)
twoodcc, logmein.com is a wonderful (free) web based app. You install a task bar application tht runs whenever the computer turns on.. You then connect in via a web based interface.
Also you could use team viewer to connect. Its free as well but is an app that needs to be opened (auto start might work), its a much much better experience then logmein.com but not as reliable/portable/accessible.
You could also setup port forwarding yourself and run vnc servers :)
twoodcc, logmein.com is a wonderful (free) web based app. You install a task bar application tht runs whenever the computer turns on.. You then connect in via a web based interface.
Also you could use team viewer to connect. Its free as well but is an app that needs to be opened (auto start might work), its a much much better experience then logmein.com but not as reliable/portable/accessible.
You could also setup port forwarding yourself and run vnc servers :)
tveric
Oct 9, 08:32 AM
But if iTunes' DRM was annoying to users, it never would have made it to 70%. Users absolutely care about DRM. But they're not aware of it unless it's too restrictive or inconvenient - if you give them *bad* DRM they will totally notice it and hate it.
Again - 70% of the DRM market, not 70% of all music obtained online. And that number doesn't figure in (obviously) any music obtained from a site like allofmp3. The legality of allofmp3 may be dubious, but there's an example of DRM-free music, that people are paying for (at a rate of .10 on the dollar, I'll grant you) - and it's trouncing any other pay service. I would continue to shop there even if they made the prices comparable to the itms, simply because I can be confident that once I purchase an album, I'll be able to play that album on any computer, any mp3 player, anytime, far into the future. Not so with the itms; you need an ipod and itunes, and while those are my current items of choice, who's to say they will continue to be my software and/or player of choice 5, 10, 15 years from now? I still have CDs I bought 15 years ago - I should be able to buy music now with the same confidence, that I can play it forever if I want to.
And by the way, before I hear the same wrongful accusations about how people are breaking the law by going to allofmp3 - guess what, they're not. Distributing copyrighted material is against the law - every single RIAA lawsuit was brought against someone for THAT offense, being that people were running Kazaa, or other p2p software, and naturally everyone is distributing while downloading. They haven't sued anyone for using allofmp3 simply because technically, it's not illegal to download music from them. Are the operators of the site in violation of the law? Yes - US copyright law, and they're not inside the US. I know it's a shock to some of you, but people not living in the US aren't subject to our laws.
Support your artists, not the record companies. Buy from DRM-free sites online and see the bands when they tour - that's where 90% of the bands make 90% of their money anyway.
Again - 70% of the DRM market, not 70% of all music obtained online. And that number doesn't figure in (obviously) any music obtained from a site like allofmp3. The legality of allofmp3 may be dubious, but there's an example of DRM-free music, that people are paying for (at a rate of .10 on the dollar, I'll grant you) - and it's trouncing any other pay service. I would continue to shop there even if they made the prices comparable to the itms, simply because I can be confident that once I purchase an album, I'll be able to play that album on any computer, any mp3 player, anytime, far into the future. Not so with the itms; you need an ipod and itunes, and while those are my current items of choice, who's to say they will continue to be my software and/or player of choice 5, 10, 15 years from now? I still have CDs I bought 15 years ago - I should be able to buy music now with the same confidence, that I can play it forever if I want to.
And by the way, before I hear the same wrongful accusations about how people are breaking the law by going to allofmp3 - guess what, they're not. Distributing copyrighted material is against the law - every single RIAA lawsuit was brought against someone for THAT offense, being that people were running Kazaa, or other p2p software, and naturally everyone is distributing while downloading. They haven't sued anyone for using allofmp3 simply because technically, it's not illegal to download music from them. Are the operators of the site in violation of the law? Yes - US copyright law, and they're not inside the US. I know it's a shock to some of you, but people not living in the US aren't subject to our laws.
Support your artists, not the record companies. Buy from DRM-free sites online and see the bands when they tour - that's where 90% of the bands make 90% of their money anyway.
vincenz
Oct 5, 05:10 PM
Wonder if he'll let me crash on his sofa!
tvguru
Sep 12, 07:19 AM
Man that's early must be a big update. :cool: :D
Dagless
Nov 24, 07:08 AM
Why don't Apple do anything like that outside of their own country, god knows they're cheaper in America than here.
Globalisation with none of the benefits.
Globalisation with none of the benefits.
Knox
Jan 5, 06:25 PM
please admins, be sure to moderate this thread as to make sure NOBODY spoils anything... just to ruin the fun for everybody else...
Probably safest avoiding the forums to be honest, including this thread :)
Probably safest avoiding the forums to be honest, including this thread :)
ChazUK
Apr 22, 04:23 AM
I like this change. Hopefully it'll put an end to replies that consist of nothing but "+1".
Awaits someone to quote my post with the reply "+1". :D
Awaits someone to quote my post with the reply "+1". :D
longsilver
Sep 12, 09:00 AM
All new Macs have DL SD (well, all new Macs with SDs)...
Is that true of the MacBook and the 15.4" MacBook Pro? I thought they didn't have DL.
Is that true of the MacBook and the 15.4" MacBook Pro? I thought they didn't have DL.
CEAbiscuit
Aug 7, 03:46 PM
Unfortunately they are still seriously lacking in ports. Digital DVI only...no VGA, S-Video, etc with input toggle switch. No easy way to hook up an Xbox 360 for instance. Or to give the monitor a second life as a tv if you upgrade to larger displays.
I hope they change their stance on this because it's a deal breaker for me.
Um, hate to say it, but the Dells have most of those things. My xbox is plugged in right along side my computer. Just hate that d*ll logo staring me in the face all the time.
I hope they change their stance on this because it's a deal breaker for me.
Um, hate to say it, but the Dells have most of those things. My xbox is plugged in right along side my computer. Just hate that d*ll logo staring me in the face all the time.
mcrain
Mar 4, 03:18 PM
Really? You don't believe in that whole 'teach a man to fish' crap?
I suppose you also think the solution to African starvation is sending them bags of rice, corn, wheat w/out teaching them to plant some?
The liberal view is to build schools that teach people to fish, hire people to teach, treat the teachers well and then send the students off into the world with good educations. Liberals then try to protect the lakes and rivers so that the fish can be eaten, and so that fish can thrive and be caught by the fishermen. When bad times happen, as they always do, liberals are willing to help the fishermen survive natural disasters, famine, draught, and the occassional cold spell (luck and weather). Liberals stand hand to hand with their neighbors, knowing that as their neighbor thrives, so do they.
The conservative view is to set up a corporation on the banks of the lake/river, hire fishermen from out of the country, make enough profits to make a machine that harvests all of the fish available, then dump the waste back into the river/lake poisoning the lake and forever destroying the habitat, and finally, adding fillers and cheap materials to sell canned "authentic fish product" to the people. When the fish run low, the business relocates its operations and hires foreigners to fish, and then requires a government bailout when the people can't afford to buy their products.
Go fish.
(edit) Don't bother posting your usual response about how conservatives give more and are more charitable. I'm talking about liberal government policies.
I suppose you also think the solution to African starvation is sending them bags of rice, corn, wheat w/out teaching them to plant some?
The liberal view is to build schools that teach people to fish, hire people to teach, treat the teachers well and then send the students off into the world with good educations. Liberals then try to protect the lakes and rivers so that the fish can be eaten, and so that fish can thrive and be caught by the fishermen. When bad times happen, as they always do, liberals are willing to help the fishermen survive natural disasters, famine, draught, and the occassional cold spell (luck and weather). Liberals stand hand to hand with their neighbors, knowing that as their neighbor thrives, so do they.
The conservative view is to set up a corporation on the banks of the lake/river, hire fishermen from out of the country, make enough profits to make a machine that harvests all of the fish available, then dump the waste back into the river/lake poisoning the lake and forever destroying the habitat, and finally, adding fillers and cheap materials to sell canned "authentic fish product" to the people. When the fish run low, the business relocates its operations and hires foreigners to fish, and then requires a government bailout when the people can't afford to buy their products.
Go fish.
(edit) Don't bother posting your usual response about how conservatives give more and are more charitable. I'm talking about liberal government policies.
jjrtiger
May 2, 09:39 AM
Not that I really care about the tracking services...but I wonder if Apple will skip the 3G again with this update...
balamw
Aug 7, 03:57 PM
it's too bad that they don't match or exceed the dell monitors in all categories
You're free to dream, but they don't plan to meet or exceed the Dell in number of units sold, so I wouldn't expect them to meet or exceed them on price either.
B
You're free to dream, but they don't plan to meet or exceed the Dell in number of units sold, so I wouldn't expect them to meet or exceed them on price either.
B
berniemac
Nov 24, 09:10 AM
Are they giving any additional discounts at the retail stores? I thought somebody said that last year they received a scratch off card with 10% off.
emotion
Nov 16, 01:16 PM
I don't know where this assertion that AMD are rubbish comes from. The integrated memory controller technology that AMD have currently is beter than Intels offering (for the moment).
That said, they'd be daft to go with AMD. It's nice that they have this stick to poke Intel with though.
That said, they'd be daft to go with AMD. It's nice that they have this stick to poke Intel with though.
Surely
Apr 21, 10:35 PM
"Thanks" might work in a pure support form. But for news discussion, it makes little sense.
arn
Perhaps a "Relevant" button then.
I guess leaving it as a +1 button is pretty much the same thing without using a word.
*shrug*
I just think it may be more troublesome than helpful to have a -1 button. If someone disagrees with a post, they usually respond with an argument. If they agree, unless they have something to add, hitting the +1 button would work, and it would clear up the "Agreed" and "+1" posts.
arn
Perhaps a "Relevant" button then.
I guess leaving it as a +1 button is pretty much the same thing without using a word.
*shrug*
I just think it may be more troublesome than helpful to have a -1 button. If someone disagrees with a post, they usually respond with an argument. If they agree, unless they have something to add, hitting the +1 button would work, and it would clear up the "Agreed" and "+1" posts.
arn
Sep 12, 12:59 AM
Maybe, but to impact the market, you need a critical mass. Didn't iTMS have 200,000-300,000 songs when it opened?
Who else is? Anyway, my point was more that if Disney is all the iTunes Movie Store has to offer, it will look like a huge marketing failure, and the media will feed on it... If it's true, expect predictions of Apple's pending demise on Wednesday...
Variety first reported it
http://www.variety.com/VR1117949519.html
Who else is? Anyway, my point was more that if Disney is all the iTunes Movie Store has to offer, it will look like a huge marketing failure, and the media will feed on it... If it's true, expect predictions of Apple's pending demise on Wednesday...
Variety first reported it
http://www.variety.com/VR1117949519.html
MacSA
Sep 12, 08:05 AM
You can't even check on orders already placed at Apple.com. The store is down.
thats what happened last wednesday before the iMacs/Minis were released. New hardware must be coming out today.
thats what happened last wednesday before the iMacs/Minis were released. New hardware must be coming out today.
jive
Sep 12, 07:30 AM
Disney own/are part of Buena Vista - who make a shedload of movies.
Mac'nCheese
Apr 17, 03:10 PM
They're not in the records?
Come on, guy. Does it really matter if somebody were gay? I thought people of a liberal mindset are supposed to be "colorblind" or what have you, yet all of a sudden their sexuality, which has nothing to do with their achievements, should be made an important part of history?
How hypocritical.
There's a difference in being colorblind in your everyday life - hiring the best man for the job, black or white - and acknowledging the people who made living like this possible - for example, remembering Jackie Robinson as the first black player in the major leagues. Nothing hypocritical at all about that.
Come on, guy. Does it really matter if somebody were gay? I thought people of a liberal mindset are supposed to be "colorblind" or what have you, yet all of a sudden their sexuality, which has nothing to do with their achievements, should be made an important part of history?
How hypocritical.
There's a difference in being colorblind in your everyday life - hiring the best man for the job, black or white - and acknowledging the people who made living like this possible - for example, remembering Jackie Robinson as the first black player in the major leagues. Nothing hypocritical at all about that.
JAT
Apr 16, 09:07 AM
When Apple releases their new HD TV the networks will have complete control on pricing with Apple getting it's cut. Apple will provide a complete hardware delivery system for them that operates seamlessly with a click, and has a magical (could not resist) effect on the end user.
No needing to try all this crap streaming through Amazon and such BS. Could even give Netflix a run.
Tivo already did this, over a decade ago. And look at the mess that has existed for them. First with DirecTV, and now Comcast. Uh, and now with DirecTV again.
No needing to try all this crap streaming through Amazon and such BS. Could even give Netflix a run.
Tivo already did this, over a decade ago. And look at the mess that has existed for them. First with DirecTV, and now Comcast. Uh, and now with DirecTV again.
dernhelm
Oct 4, 07:45 AM
The Mini is pretty powerful. Sorry to discount your argument, but I think that it's more than enough for people out there that aren't power users/computer nerds. Heck, my dad runs engineering software all day long on his Pentium 3 733mhz, 256MB RAM computer and doesn't feel the need to upgrade.
It being in a small case is even better for the common user. Maybe to us, a small case seems like a bad computer, but the specs are similar to MacBook specs, which seems like enough for almost all users out there.
I agree - this mid-range headless computer everyone is talking about isn't likely to happen. Apple has clearly discounted this segment as "not very interesting". I'm just guessing here, but it seems like their market research might be a little better than ours on this matter. Even if we did have several friends not buying a Mac because the mini is too small and the Mac Pro too expensive, I'm guessing Apple isn't in that market because they don't feel the niche carries enough value to produce and maintain yet another product line.
However, and I've said this before, I think Apple should build another headless machine aimed at a particular market segment: gamers. They've already shown they can build super-cool looking hardware. They've already produced systems with crazy stuff like liquid cooling. And if anyone can give Dell/Alienware and HP/Voodoo a run for their money, it's Apple.
It being in a small case is even better for the common user. Maybe to us, a small case seems like a bad computer, but the specs are similar to MacBook specs, which seems like enough for almost all users out there.
I agree - this mid-range headless computer everyone is talking about isn't likely to happen. Apple has clearly discounted this segment as "not very interesting". I'm just guessing here, but it seems like their market research might be a little better than ours on this matter. Even if we did have several friends not buying a Mac because the mini is too small and the Mac Pro too expensive, I'm guessing Apple isn't in that market because they don't feel the niche carries enough value to produce and maintain yet another product line.
However, and I've said this before, I think Apple should build another headless machine aimed at a particular market segment: gamers. They've already shown they can build super-cool looking hardware. They've already produced systems with crazy stuff like liquid cooling. And if anyone can give Dell/Alienware and HP/Voodoo a run for their money, it's Apple.
wenger2k
Oct 20, 12:09 PM
I believe Apple always in reality wanted to go with AT&T - I think they talked to both companies so they could create a form of competition to get what they wanted out of the deal. So why did they want AT&T - it was really simple it was that AT&T used GSM and UMTS that allowed them to make a single device that they could then roll out to a large part of the rest of the world with out a lot of reengineering. This has turned out to be a good decision for them.
If you're so sure this has been such a great thing for AT&T look at their stock price vs apple's and verizon for that matter during this time. While it has represented a huge amount of revenue for AT&T it has also increased their cost by orders of magnitude. Its also forced them to upgrade substantial parts of their network far ahead of plan which has also come at significant unplanned expense. They're currently rolling out the 850mhz and the 7.2gb HSPA overlay framework at least a year ahead of their original plans - all of this is reportedly because essentially Apple made them.
The majority of AT&T's network issues are likely caused by the massive increase in bandwidth consumption which can almost all be attributed to the iPhone. Had Verizon gotten the iphone they'd be in a similar situation.
As for CDMA iPhones, Apple has already announced that they'll be offering the iphone with Bell Canada and its been widely reported that they will offer iPhones with both China Unicom and China Mobile which will force the creation of a CDMA/EVDO iPhone so the technical barrier to entry for Verizon no longer exists. Reality of course is that Verizon represents a big enough customer that creation of a CDMA hardware version would be a minimal barrier if Apple didn't continue to see more benefit from the prime vendor relationship that they have with AT&T than they would get by breaking out and offering the product with Verizon. My guess is that if the volume of complaints about AT&T's network don't start going down soon Apple will be forced to expand to other carriers.
If you're so sure this has been such a great thing for AT&T look at their stock price vs apple's and verizon for that matter during this time. While it has represented a huge amount of revenue for AT&T it has also increased their cost by orders of magnitude. Its also forced them to upgrade substantial parts of their network far ahead of plan which has also come at significant unplanned expense. They're currently rolling out the 850mhz and the 7.2gb HSPA overlay framework at least a year ahead of their original plans - all of this is reportedly because essentially Apple made them.
The majority of AT&T's network issues are likely caused by the massive increase in bandwidth consumption which can almost all be attributed to the iPhone. Had Verizon gotten the iphone they'd be in a similar situation.
As for CDMA iPhones, Apple has already announced that they'll be offering the iphone with Bell Canada and its been widely reported that they will offer iPhones with both China Unicom and China Mobile which will force the creation of a CDMA/EVDO iPhone so the technical barrier to entry for Verizon no longer exists. Reality of course is that Verizon represents a big enough customer that creation of a CDMA hardware version would be a minimal barrier if Apple didn't continue to see more benefit from the prime vendor relationship that they have with AT&T than they would get by breaking out and offering the product with Verizon. My guess is that if the volume of complaints about AT&T's network don't start going down soon Apple will be forced to expand to other carriers.
No comments:
Post a Comment