Actually, non-profits are allowed to run a surplus, even for years in a row.
What they can't do is redistribute that surplus to employees or owners, as for-profit companies do. They are required to retain the surplus for reinvestment in the business.
Use Foxit Reader instead. It's singlehandedly destroyed my fear of pdfs.
I'm running three monitors on Windows XP, with a Radeon x1650 driving two and a Geforce 7600 running the other one. It was literally a matter of installing the ATI drivers, then the nVidia drivers, then checking a couple checkboxes. Both Catalyst and Nvidia control panel work fine.
Maybe I happened to pick a couple cards that don't interfere with each other?
I much prefer Phonovision.
I wasn't asking you.
At least it didn't divide the world into a red half and a blue half.
What do you think he was, born yesterday?
Jeez, why didn't they just call it roundtine? I mean the jar is round, the mug is round...
Of course, I'm not discounting that I might be a moron who can't spell, but it could just be one of the differences in the language.
It's actually the former. Sorry, truth hurts.
Well, all money ever does is employ people. That's what money is - a way to get other people to give you the product of their labors.
Wow, I didn't know Osmos was on sale for $2. I picked up from the developer's site for $10 and I think it's a steal at double that price. Great game!
So, it is OK (to whomever) to censor when we can make a buck?
Yes, because Google is a corporation whose responsibility is to its shareholders, not to the people of China.
If search engines censor to make a buck, where is their line drawn (to make a buck)?
They draw the line when they run a cost-benefit analysis and find that making that buck harms their reputation by more than a buck's worth.
"Don't be evil" is a very good motto because it makes people believe that the corporation has ethics and responsibility, rather than being a mindless money-making machine. The people running Google have just decided that they can best make money by endearing themselves to people.
I am shöcked.
What a coincidence! I just bought one of those at Ikea last week.
So then what is it about the US that seems to drive it to a two-party system?
Being Canadian I have more of an outside perspective, I suppose. I'm used to there being four or five viable parties. Many countries in Europe have more parties than you can count on your hands. Why have they been able to stay away from the two-party system?
"It's the best thing since professional golfers on 'ludes." -- Rick Obidiah
