munkle
Feb 14, 12:54 PM
If it is a complaint by mymemory does it really matter? :D
Good point ;)
Good point ;)
benhollberg
Apr 28, 01:11 AM
I'm hoping for the new iMacs but I don't think so.
dotdotdot
Sep 24, 04:25 PM
(delete this post)
njmac
Oct 31, 06:53 PM
I saw it at digg.com (http://www.digg.com/index/page2) too.
more...
res1233
Apr 25, 02:44 AM
I know the reason, or the supposed reason (who knows, Apple has been as tight lipped as ever on the issue) . If true, its a disgrace it made it to the keynote presentation, without the issue being identified or a reasonable fix found. I don't care how you square it - being 10 months late for a device who has an average life of 12 months is utter incompetence and hence disgraceful.
Hats off for Apple sticking to it, but that does not take away from the fact that they should never have made the promise w/o a better understanding of production issues. The iPhone 4 design has been around since at least January per spy shots of the iPad before release. So, its not as if the design was so new that they could claim there was no time to identify the issue until after the June 2010 keynote by Steve Jobs.
This was the first iPhone, and quite possibly the first phone in general, whose enclosure is made almost entirely of glass, besides the buttons and metal band. This is an issue that likely never came up in the past because the white paint on glass thing never really mattered before. I find it entirely plausible that they thought it wouldn't bleed as badly as it seems to.
Hats off for Apple sticking to it, but that does not take away from the fact that they should never have made the promise w/o a better understanding of production issues. The iPhone 4 design has been around since at least January per spy shots of the iPad before release. So, its not as if the design was so new that they could claim there was no time to identify the issue until after the June 2010 keynote by Steve Jobs.
This was the first iPhone, and quite possibly the first phone in general, whose enclosure is made almost entirely of glass, besides the buttons and metal band. This is an issue that likely never came up in the past because the white paint on glass thing never really mattered before. I find it entirely plausible that they thought it wouldn't bleed as badly as it seems to.
Doctor Q
Nov 4, 04:35 PM
I don't think so. I couldn't find a way to do this, even from a constructed URL that you could bookmark.
However, you can search for your own posts from a mobile device by using the regular website and the iPhone Friendly forum skin, chosen from the drop-down at the bottom of the page.
However, you can search for your own posts from a mobile device by using the regular website and the iPhone Friendly forum skin, chosen from the drop-down at the bottom of the page.
more...
PopCulture
Feb 18, 09:10 AM
Cool. I need to put the Pillboxie app on my mom's phone.
Nermal
Sep 9, 05:54 PM
and maybe it has already been addressed
It has.
It has.
more...
logandzwon
Apr 4, 12:37 PM
stop with the fud already. Businesses operating in the eu cannot do this. Just because corporations in the usa can, doesn't mean the rest of the world is the same... :rolleyes:
lol
lol
DrDomVonDoom
Apr 6, 11:51 AM
I'd buy that for a dollar!!! :D
more...
stridemat
May 3, 08:21 AM
I wasn't saying anything against donating blood, I commend that. I just pointed out that there aren't that many potential donors here to actively support that cause.
Please can you clarify your statement about the lack of potential donors?
Please can you clarify your statement about the lack of potential donors?
MacMan314
Oct 7, 08:46 PM
I am not a webdesigner so could someone explain the TEXTAREA upgrade? It sounded like a good idea when I read it, but it seems to have struck a nerve with a couple people, and I'm not sure why. I'm guessing it would be like if I went to an art auction and bought a painting by Monet, I bring the painting home and realize that the wallspace I have for it isn't wide enough, so I grab a corner of the painting a pull it down, hence making it skinnier and fitting my wall? Nobody would ever consider doing that to a Monet, yet isn't this what the new TEXTAREA feature does?
I think you have it backwards, the feature is destroying the art to make room for something else, not destroying the art so it fits a predefined space. It's more like having a beautifully built house, realizing that the dining room isn't big enough for the table you'd like, then taking a sledgehammer and bashing several walls down to make it bigger.
Yes, it sounds like a good idea. No, it will not work perfectly with all websites. No, web designers will not expend much effort making it work correctly, because nobody uses Safari and this feature isn't even an official standard.
So basically it will ruin more than a few pages, but all the mac centric websites will make sure it works perfectly with theirs. It all depends on how the layouts (wait for it...) laid out.
I think you have it backwards, the feature is destroying the art to make room for something else, not destroying the art so it fits a predefined space. It's more like having a beautifully built house, realizing that the dining room isn't big enough for the table you'd like, then taking a sledgehammer and bashing several walls down to make it bigger.
Yes, it sounds like a good idea. No, it will not work perfectly with all websites. No, web designers will not expend much effort making it work correctly, because nobody uses Safari and this feature isn't even an official standard.
So basically it will ruin more than a few pages, but all the mac centric websites will make sure it works perfectly with theirs. It all depends on how the layouts (wait for it...) laid out.
more...
TuffLuffJimmy
Apr 25, 03:04 AM
I can imagine that Apple provides detailed specs to the manufacturers of the glass and that there is a bidding process involved. That means that any deviation from the provided specs after production will have to be corrected at the cost and time of the manufacturer, not Apple.
If this is actually the case, than the manufacturer can even be held accountable for the loss in sales.
More likely it was Apple's fault for specifying either a nearly unachievable spec or for giving a bad material specification.
If this is actually the case, than the manufacturer can even be held accountable for the loss in sales.
More likely it was Apple's fault for specifying either a nearly unachievable spec or for giving a bad material specification.
mscriv
Apr 6, 12:49 PM
Worth quoting, given the back-and-forth that's gone on since this was originally posted.
Thank you sir. I'm glad you enjoyed the post and appreciate the compliment. :)
No woman was ever raped because of the kind of clothes she was wearing. Women are raped because people (almost exclusively men) choose to rape them.
While it is true that people can put themselves at a higher risk through certain activities, for a politician to blame a young girl for her own rape is absolutely disgusting. It's also nauseating and ignorant for politicians to suggest modest dress as a way to prevent rape. Such thinking is completely backward.
I agree with the notion that people should try to take steps to avoid risk, and that people can greatly reduce personal risk by making safer choices.
But this nugget of wisdom does not really touch on the substance of the issue arising in the OP, to wit - how much responsiblity does a rape victim carry? Or, to turn the question around, how much of the rape is not the rapist's fault?
Here's the thing. A woman's choice in dress or action does not mean she is to "blame" for being victimized, but we can not deny that her choice in dress or behavior can be a factor in her chances of being targeted.
As far as the politician's comments, let's not forget that multiple articles have been written about her quote and she claims to have been misquoted. Regardless of our own personal political views, we must admit that people do get misquoted. Additionally, none of us are above making a error in judgement with our words. Sometimes things don't come out as we intend them or they sound different when they come out of our mouths as opposed to how it sounded in our heads.
She responded to an email written to her by a blogger (http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20110318/tanja-cilia/unjust-justice)with this:
Thank you for your e-mail. You may want to read the article that appeared in the New York Times. When I read the article my heart went out to the little girl and I was angry that she was brutally assaulted. I was angry that nobody protected her and that she was even allowed to leave with an older boy. In my opinion an 11 year old girl is still a child and as such shouldn't be expected to understand that certain actions or attire are not appropriate for her. I did not indicate that she was raped because she was wearing inappropriate attire. What I did say (which was not reported) was that if her parents don't protect her then all that's left is the school.
Additionally, the writer who wrote the story quoted by the OP has written two follow up stories on the matter. In the most recent one he states (http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/juice/2011/03/11_year_olds_dressed_like_pros.php#):
But, look -- no matter where Kathleen Passidomo exists on the feminist spectrum, whether she's a closet burqa-wearer or the secret owner of a lucrative chain of abortion clinics -- the fact is, Kathleen Passidomo probably doesn't think this 11-year-old deserved to be gang-raped. How do we know? Because Kathleen Passidomo is a human being, and human beings do not generally feel that justice has been served when children are tortured and brutalized. However regrettable her phrasing, what Passidomo was trying to express is an obvious if unpopular truth: that although a child has every right to safety in any environment she chooses to enter, that right will not be equally protected by all individuals in all environments.
* bold emphasis mine
It's also, by the way, fallacious to assume that only young, attractive and/or scantily-clad women are raped.
Great point. My post was intended to speak on the connection between personal responsibility and possible victimization. There is often a correlation between these variables. My comments in that post and in this one are not directed solely at this one sad case, but towards all types of victimization. If we focus on the topic of rape specifically there are a variety of types of rapes each carrying their own specific factors.
If your interested my thoughts on post 50 is that it fundamentally misses the point.
Everyone understands that we live in a world which contains certain dangers which can be mitigated by changing our behaviors.
That isn't the point of this conversation, were all talking about BLAMING the victim in this case. Just because a victim makes a bad decision does not remove their reasonable expectation of safety.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your view is very short sighted and continues to be rooted in a morality vacuum as opposed to reality. Sure, we can all agree that the ideal is every person, everywhere, regardless of circumstances should be safe, but the fact of the matter is that we aren't.
No one is arguing that victims deserve what happens to them or that perpetrators should be any less to blame for the actions they take. However, we must learn to accept that a variety of factors are involved and that even victims can bear a measure of responsibility in putting themselves in situations where they are more likely to be victimized.
Like I said above there are a variety of types of rape. Let's take the broad category of date rape as an example. The female that chooses to dress and carry herself in a suggestive manner might be sending signals that she does not intend to send and in doing so is making herself more of a target. Add alcohol to the mix and risks go way up. Does this mean the predator who chooses to take advantage in this situation is any less culpable, of course not, but to ignore the risk factors is like burying your head in the sand. Young women need to be taught about risk factors and learn how certain choices can either increase or minimize risk.
As I have suggested, we cannot really know the answers to these questions without first interviewing (or obtaining transcripts of interviews of) rapists. Most of us on this forum are not rapists (I hope), so making broad inferences on what goes through such a monster's mind is rather pointless.
Another great point. Guess what, in my experience as a therapist I've worked with rapists and abusers directly. I've done the interviews and talked with these indivduals about "what goes through [their] mind".
Continuing the line of reasoning I started in my answer to AP_piano295, one young man who had "date raped" more than one female explained to me that at college parties he would target the girls who dressed and acted provocatively in addition to drinking heavily. In his words, "you know, the party girls" His reasoning was that these girls were easy marks and in most cases were less likely to report anything because they would rationalize the experience, if they remembered it, as "having gotten a little out of control or having drank too much" as opposed to having been victimized or raped.
You see, rape is not always about power. Sometimes it is, but at other times it's about abuse, pain, fear, rage, or just plain sexual desire/conquest.
One young male offender I worked with was in the system for sexually molesting his younger brother. He was a victim of abuse himself and his motivation for abusing his brother was jealously and anger. He felt his parents loved the younger brother more because he wasn't "damaged" and thus he acted out so his brother would be "just like him".
I agree, but there's a vast difference between trying to 'minimize risk' and the post below:
...If a man sees a woman with a low top, lots of cleavage showing, high skirts and heels, then he will view her as trash.....
Which acts as a kind of justification.
Yes and no. While based on my own personal morals/ethics I agree with you that such a line of thinking is ridiculous, I must keep in mind that there are people that do think this way. And, they will use whatever rationalization it takes to both motivate and justify their judgements or actions. In the case of a predator the kind of thinking above could be the initial thought that starts a chain of events which ultimately results in an attack of some kind.
In this specific gang rape case the victim is a child and thus there is limited capacity for personal responsibility. However, there are a variety of potential factors that ultimately contributed to what occurred: lack of parental supervision, negative peer involvement, possible previous sexually inappropriate behavior, socioeconomic conditions, etc. etc. I don't know the specifics and thus these are just generalizations, but regardless, the perpetrators are solely responsible for their actions and should be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law.
Please understand, I'm not talking about morals, ideals, and values here (what I've previously referred to as the morality vacuum). I'm talking about understanding the link between personal responsibility and potential victimization. Simply put, while our choices do not make us responsible for any victimization that may befall us, we must recognize that our actions can contribute to the chances of us being targeted for victimization.
I apologize for the long post, but I wanted to touch on the many comments that had been made and attempt to better explain my position. :)
Thank you sir. I'm glad you enjoyed the post and appreciate the compliment. :)
No woman was ever raped because of the kind of clothes she was wearing. Women are raped because people (almost exclusively men) choose to rape them.
While it is true that people can put themselves at a higher risk through certain activities, for a politician to blame a young girl for her own rape is absolutely disgusting. It's also nauseating and ignorant for politicians to suggest modest dress as a way to prevent rape. Such thinking is completely backward.
I agree with the notion that people should try to take steps to avoid risk, and that people can greatly reduce personal risk by making safer choices.
But this nugget of wisdom does not really touch on the substance of the issue arising in the OP, to wit - how much responsiblity does a rape victim carry? Or, to turn the question around, how much of the rape is not the rapist's fault?
Here's the thing. A woman's choice in dress or action does not mean she is to "blame" for being victimized, but we can not deny that her choice in dress or behavior can be a factor in her chances of being targeted.
As far as the politician's comments, let's not forget that multiple articles have been written about her quote and she claims to have been misquoted. Regardless of our own personal political views, we must admit that people do get misquoted. Additionally, none of us are above making a error in judgement with our words. Sometimes things don't come out as we intend them or they sound different when they come out of our mouths as opposed to how it sounded in our heads.
She responded to an email written to her by a blogger (http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20110318/tanja-cilia/unjust-justice)with this:
Thank you for your e-mail. You may want to read the article that appeared in the New York Times. When I read the article my heart went out to the little girl and I was angry that she was brutally assaulted. I was angry that nobody protected her and that she was even allowed to leave with an older boy. In my opinion an 11 year old girl is still a child and as such shouldn't be expected to understand that certain actions or attire are not appropriate for her. I did not indicate that she was raped because she was wearing inappropriate attire. What I did say (which was not reported) was that if her parents don't protect her then all that's left is the school.
Additionally, the writer who wrote the story quoted by the OP has written two follow up stories on the matter. In the most recent one he states (http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/juice/2011/03/11_year_olds_dressed_like_pros.php#):
But, look -- no matter where Kathleen Passidomo exists on the feminist spectrum, whether she's a closet burqa-wearer or the secret owner of a lucrative chain of abortion clinics -- the fact is, Kathleen Passidomo probably doesn't think this 11-year-old deserved to be gang-raped. How do we know? Because Kathleen Passidomo is a human being, and human beings do not generally feel that justice has been served when children are tortured and brutalized. However regrettable her phrasing, what Passidomo was trying to express is an obvious if unpopular truth: that although a child has every right to safety in any environment she chooses to enter, that right will not be equally protected by all individuals in all environments.
* bold emphasis mine
It's also, by the way, fallacious to assume that only young, attractive and/or scantily-clad women are raped.
Great point. My post was intended to speak on the connection between personal responsibility and possible victimization. There is often a correlation between these variables. My comments in that post and in this one are not directed solely at this one sad case, but towards all types of victimization. If we focus on the topic of rape specifically there are a variety of types of rapes each carrying their own specific factors.
If your interested my thoughts on post 50 is that it fundamentally misses the point.
Everyone understands that we live in a world which contains certain dangers which can be mitigated by changing our behaviors.
That isn't the point of this conversation, were all talking about BLAMING the victim in this case. Just because a victim makes a bad decision does not remove their reasonable expectation of safety.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your view is very short sighted and continues to be rooted in a morality vacuum as opposed to reality. Sure, we can all agree that the ideal is every person, everywhere, regardless of circumstances should be safe, but the fact of the matter is that we aren't.
No one is arguing that victims deserve what happens to them or that perpetrators should be any less to blame for the actions they take. However, we must learn to accept that a variety of factors are involved and that even victims can bear a measure of responsibility in putting themselves in situations where they are more likely to be victimized.
Like I said above there are a variety of types of rape. Let's take the broad category of date rape as an example. The female that chooses to dress and carry herself in a suggestive manner might be sending signals that she does not intend to send and in doing so is making herself more of a target. Add alcohol to the mix and risks go way up. Does this mean the predator who chooses to take advantage in this situation is any less culpable, of course not, but to ignore the risk factors is like burying your head in the sand. Young women need to be taught about risk factors and learn how certain choices can either increase or minimize risk.
As I have suggested, we cannot really know the answers to these questions without first interviewing (or obtaining transcripts of interviews of) rapists. Most of us on this forum are not rapists (I hope), so making broad inferences on what goes through such a monster's mind is rather pointless.
Another great point. Guess what, in my experience as a therapist I've worked with rapists and abusers directly. I've done the interviews and talked with these indivduals about "what goes through [their] mind".
Continuing the line of reasoning I started in my answer to AP_piano295, one young man who had "date raped" more than one female explained to me that at college parties he would target the girls who dressed and acted provocatively in addition to drinking heavily. In his words, "you know, the party girls" His reasoning was that these girls were easy marks and in most cases were less likely to report anything because they would rationalize the experience, if they remembered it, as "having gotten a little out of control or having drank too much" as opposed to having been victimized or raped.
You see, rape is not always about power. Sometimes it is, but at other times it's about abuse, pain, fear, rage, or just plain sexual desire/conquest.
One young male offender I worked with was in the system for sexually molesting his younger brother. He was a victim of abuse himself and his motivation for abusing his brother was jealously and anger. He felt his parents loved the younger brother more because he wasn't "damaged" and thus he acted out so his brother would be "just like him".
I agree, but there's a vast difference between trying to 'minimize risk' and the post below:
...If a man sees a woman with a low top, lots of cleavage showing, high skirts and heels, then he will view her as trash.....
Which acts as a kind of justification.
Yes and no. While based on my own personal morals/ethics I agree with you that such a line of thinking is ridiculous, I must keep in mind that there are people that do think this way. And, they will use whatever rationalization it takes to both motivate and justify their judgements or actions. In the case of a predator the kind of thinking above could be the initial thought that starts a chain of events which ultimately results in an attack of some kind.
In this specific gang rape case the victim is a child and thus there is limited capacity for personal responsibility. However, there are a variety of potential factors that ultimately contributed to what occurred: lack of parental supervision, negative peer involvement, possible previous sexually inappropriate behavior, socioeconomic conditions, etc. etc. I don't know the specifics and thus these are just generalizations, but regardless, the perpetrators are solely responsible for their actions and should be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law.
Please understand, I'm not talking about morals, ideals, and values here (what I've previously referred to as the morality vacuum). I'm talking about understanding the link between personal responsibility and potential victimization. Simply put, while our choices do not make us responsible for any victimization that may befall us, we must recognize that our actions can contribute to the chances of us being targeted for victimization.
I apologize for the long post, but I wanted to touch on the many comments that had been made and attempt to better explain my position. :)
more...
poobear
Apr 15, 09:04 AM
No problem with Starcraft 2 over here.
Soundburst
Mar 30, 12:29 PM
Hey guys,
I originally bought an mbox mini and upgraded to Pro Tools 7.4.2.
In my account on digidesign (Avid Audio)'s website I can download various installer packages and the authorisation codes. However it only goes up to Tiger, and Leopard.
I was wondering , if I upgrade to Snow Leopard. . .does the 7.4.2 version of Pro Tools LE for Leopard run on SL?
Thanks a lot :)
I originally bought an mbox mini and upgraded to Pro Tools 7.4.2.
In my account on digidesign (Avid Audio)'s website I can download various installer packages and the authorisation codes. However it only goes up to Tiger, and Leopard.
I was wondering , if I upgrade to Snow Leopard. . .does the 7.4.2 version of Pro Tools LE for Leopard run on SL?
Thanks a lot :)
more...
partyBoy
Sep 1, 01:02 AM
http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee187/colombian_pride69/Geektool%20themes/Screenshot2010-09-01at15938AM.png
maclaptop
Apr 26, 08:28 AM
why even bother coming out with a white iphone for this year? Does anyone really care anymore?
They blew it so bad, it should be brown :)
Poor suckers can't cut it.
Flippin rotten Apple con job.
They blew it so bad, it should be brown :)
Poor suckers can't cut it.
Flippin rotten Apple con job.
daviddcmd
Mar 27, 10:35 AM
You have to understand the law. What the seller did was intentionally try to deceived. Would a reasonable person be deceived by this listing, yes, therefore the judgement would go to the plaintiff if something like this ever went to court.
The seller should be banned and hopefully will.
The seller should be banned and hopefully will.
iMattcotv
Mar 7, 07:54 AM
Until the iPad 2 comes out in the US and I CANT WAIT.
Actually, this is crazy, because I live in Canada -_-
I just cant wait for the flood of iPad 2 reviews / videos and apps that begin to show up in the app store!
AHH THIS DRIVING ME CRAZAYYY
Actually, this is crazy, because I live in Canada -_-
I just cant wait for the flood of iPad 2 reviews / videos and apps that begin to show up in the app store!
AHH THIS DRIVING ME CRAZAYYY
Nermal
Mar 13, 03:50 PM
There is already a thread about this.
firewood
Apr 20, 05:38 PM
iPod Touch should not count.
The IRS would be very unhappy with me and my accountant if my business didn't report the portion of my iOS app sales that went to iPod Touch users (a significant portion, according to some analytics I ran last year). I don't sell anywhere near as many apps to Android users. Too bad.
The IRS would be very unhappy with me and my accountant if my business didn't report the portion of my iOS app sales that went to iPod Touch users (a significant portion, according to some analytics I ran last year). I don't sell anywhere near as many apps to Android users. Too bad.
bmms8
Feb 10, 08:06 AM
to those who switched online, can you confirm that i would need to select the anymobile option and unselect the unlimited text option, as the anymobile includes both? i wasnt to sure so i decided to cancel
iDeclare
Jul 11, 05:51 PM
When I was there at 3:30 the line had about 200 people...is it moving now? Was thinking of trying back later this evening. :confused:
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar