echo1

From private sympathizers in the US, not from the US Government.

Apologies for digging up the ancient thread, but the community edition has been released recently. See here

HDMI == Single Link DVI with audio. No quality difference. Single link DVI (and by extension HDMI) only supports up to 1920x1200, for anything above that, you need dual link DVI or Displayport. Dual link DVI is standard on any graphics card made over the past few years AFAIK.

I like the new theme. I haven't been on in a while, so it could well be old news by now.

vim is my IDE. Eclipse and Netbeans make me want to cry.

It seems to me that most gun crime involves hand guns anyway. I think gun laws should be more about making sure that only responsible people get their hands on them, rather than banning things that look like assault rifles. Aren't there states that have bans against black guns? School children running around with guns? That's going to end well.

Wee bit out of date there, they replaced the Dimension branding with Inspiron a few years back. Go look at your nearest Dell site. sesdelta: Depends on how good the PSU inside the Dell is.

You call your own government terrorists. Then you accuse me of jumping to conclusions before elaborating further on how you think your government are terrorists. Lolwut? Also, you never told us which illustrious crue of gun-toting yokels you belong to. Agreed. I'd waiver the right to own a gazillion M16s than have something like the PATRIOT act.

Obama is a terrorist? Gosh darn, I knew it all along!

He sweeps the floor.

Are you a member of a STATE MILITIA?

I'm convinced by now that there's a super-di-dooper top secret black ops echelon inside the US government whose sole purpose is to troll the general public with bizarre aerial contraptions. And it's working.

Dare I ask what happened to the weapons pack?

Well, also certain variants of the Pentium 4 (600 series) and Pentium D (900 series), but that's largely incidental.

I think you're missing the point. From a legal perspective, the people who are not in a sound state of mind are often regarded as incapable of making rational decisions. AFAIK, if someone who has threatened or attempted suicide is brought into a hospital, they are deprived of a lot of their rights to make medical decisions about themselves. And of course, you have things like pleas of insanity in criminal law - if someone suffers from a mental illness that affects their judgment in the particular circumstance, the degree to which they are held responsible for their actions is lessened. I'm sure you'd agree that asking someone to kill you is a pretty serious step to take, and if you have some form of serious depression, you are pretty much automatically incapable of making rational judgments about the value of your own life. So how do you reconcile the ability of such a person to request that their life be ended with the fact that in certain other important matters, the validity of that person's decisions is seen as invalid because of their mental state? Of course, you could argue (correctly) that someone in extreme pain with nothing to look forward to but their own death is not going to be in a 'sound state of mind', but obviously there are varying degrees and types of these things. What I was saying was a criticism of things like the Swiss system where they give manic depressives the right to ask the health system to kill themselves for them. I'm not sure if this sarcasm thing was directed at something that I said. I don't recall being sarcastic. Hyperbolic for effect, sure. The circumcision thing was an example of the latter. Neither was it particularly relevant given that it was example to address a point brought up in relation to something else I had said earlier.