The US Government has actually been talking about Tibet at all?

Does anyone know an effective cutting agent for printer toner? I've been using graphite, but it's not quite the right texture and I'd like something cheaper.

The n810 technically has GPS, but it takes a very long time to connect and isn't very accurate. It should in no way be a deciding factor for anyone to purchase an 810 over a 800.

You can pick up Holux bluetooth GPS unit for about $50 which will preform a lot better. The n810's built in mapping software is pretty weak, and you have to pay for navigation. Doubt many folks here would want to use it anyway.

It's just you. Have you actually tried more than one adapter? They cost a few cents to make, so I could see quality control not being a huge issue.

Right. Nokia has only tested 8gb cards. I have a 16 which works just fine.

Why do our senators have elderly interns and clerks?

Because it takes time and money to develop software and sometime people want to get some of that back.

Ask.com gives them money.

Because privatized systems are more efficient than their government provided counterparts.

You can pretty much have it whichever way you want in the US. You have the right to a jury trial, but you don't have to exercise it. If you think the subject matter is too complicated or prejudicial, or if you just don't want a jury, you can elect to have a bench trial(where the judge determines guilt/culpability).

1) They've allowed documents stating their support for the republican party to become public knowledge.
2) They produce closed source software.
2a) They have made statement against open source competition.
3) They produce buggy software and hardware that are not well secured or designed.
4) They create technological 'solutions' for social problems.
5) They are the industry leader in their field, and they produce a flawed product. They maintain their position through marketing and lobbying.
6) They program in languages owned by Microsoft.

Any one of those would get them hated by at least some slashdotters. They do all of those things. Most of them multiple times. Their infamy here isn't surprising.

1) Good for you Creationism is not science. You can't discover anything with it. It is religion. That's ok. We let people practice religion. We don't teach it as science in our public schools.

2) Yes, it is correct science to ask how chemicals enabled evolution. As a result of such questions we know how fairly complicated chemicals can form from simple situations.

The other of this is our understanding of the various nucleic acids. This has benefited everything from forensics to biological science to medicine.

It is a great question to ask. Asking it has improved our lives and created the groundwork for the next thousand years of biological and medical sciences.

Compare this to "Did god create the universe?" That's a bad question. We can't do anything with the answers. It doesn't lead to new interesting question. It's just a question that we can't answer. If we manage to answer it, we get nothing.

3) Yeah, I don't like people who misuse terminology either.

This is all correct. For instance, we know that ID in the Dover case is creationism dressed up as science, because the textbook originally advocated by the IDers was about Creationism in it's early drafts and was changed after the earlier court cases banning Creationism from being taught in schools. The diff was the cornerstone of the complaint's case.

We know that this is being done to introduce Chrisitanity into public schools, because those supporting ID, the Discovery Institute, said as much in the Wedge Document.

I think atraintocry is suffering from a bit of hubris. This is an ongoing fight that has not yet been won. While circuit and district courts have ruled on the issue, there has been no recent supreme court ruling and ID advocates have found their ways into School Boards across the nation. They have not given up, and this is no time to sit back just because we've won some small victories.

They are liars. They know it. The swarms of selectively ignorant religious folks that support them don't know they are liars or really understand the evolution 'debate'. So long as we are a democracy, we won't have won until we convince the public, not the courts.

So, would a KJ have to pay several hundred dollars for a cd because it is intended for use in public performances? That's somewhat different than the market for consumer CDs. It's also less defensible(morally and legally) because they are using to make money.

I don't mind Adobe going after companies for pirating their product. I think it's retarded(though more or less within their right) for them to do the same with individual end users. I'm not sure if that would be analogous.

Great, now explain Moe without sounding like a pedophile.

[citation needed]