יום רביעי, 15 ביוני 2011

karina smirnoff playboy cover

karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina Smirnoff, Playboy May
  • Karina Smirnoff, Playboy May


  • Tommyg117
    Sep 26, 06:53 AM
    8 cores? That's a lot, maybe a little too much for my computing needs.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. karina smirnoff playboy cover.
  • karina smirnoff playboy cover.


  • Lau
    Aug 29, 04:52 PM
    My point is that Greenpeace would be far better served educating the public how to help. They get even 10% of the world's population to make some radical changes in their lives and the changes to the planet would be amazing.

    I agree corporations need to set examples and do teh best they can. I don't think its where environmentalists should be pointing fingers.

    You , me and everyone else are the biggest polluters.

    I'm as guilty as teh next guy. Nothing stopping me from peddling a mile up the street to Trader Joe's tonight for my dinner. Except laziness. :D

    It's definitely true that educating people how to (and actually convincing them to) make a difference is incredibly important. And I'm not a huge fan of Greenpeace, but if the figures are true, Apple (along with a lot of other companies could do better, and should.

    However, I think environmentalists should be pointing fingers everywhere. At the same time. In my opinion, half the reason we're in this state is people saying "Well, big compainies pollute, so why should I care", "Well, other countries pollute, so there's no point in me bothering", "Well, the supermarket's easier to shop at, so it's not my fault", etc. If we all just got on with it, at the same time, without worrying about whether so and so was better or worse, we'd be a hell of a lot better off.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina smirnoff playboy x
  • Karina smirnoff playboy x


  • aristobrat
    Mar 18, 09:10 AM
    Forcibly changing my plan with zero evidence of anything is illegal and they will pay for it. Tme to start blasting them on Facebook, twitter, everywhere possible.
    Wait, you have evidence that AT&T has zero evidence?

    Didn't think so.

    For all you know, they're doing the same deep-packet inspections on their data network that wired broadband providers have been doing for years.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina Smirnoff //
  • Karina Smirnoff //


  • faroZ06
    May 2, 06:27 PM
    I just received an email with this site

    http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/coming-soon-to-a-mac-near-you-serious-malware/3212?tag=nl.e589

    Mac getting targetted after many years

    Bert

    Eh, I'll see after 5 years how much my computer has been successfully attacked. :cool:




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina Smirnoff Playboy
  • Karina Smirnoff Playboy


  • DanielCoffey
    Apr 15, 09:28 AM
    What's LGBT?

    I believe it is Lesbian, Gay, Bi and Trans (or something similar).




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina Smirnoff Playboy
  • Karina Smirnoff Playboy


  • Grimmeh
    Mar 18, 11:11 AM
    AT&T will never have my business anymore. I used AT&T’s service for my older iPhone 3G I had bought off eBay. After a year, they decided to take it upon themselves to have me buy their data plan. I have, and never have had, a need for a data plan. I rarely find myself without Wi-Fi or I do without for those rare occasions (as if their service never has it’s outages). I told them I don’t need it, or ever use it.

    They feel it’s fair to require me to pay for service I don’t need. My phone’s hardware is no different than the dinky little flip phone I’m forced to use until the contract expires (it was the only way for them to keep from charging me for data). Just because of the name of my phone they are telling me I need to buy more from them. That is terrifying if it’s legal.

    Now, they are telling people that because their service is split amongst devices you need to pay more, too? Hah! What if you had to pay extra to have more than one phone on your land line? Or you had to pay extra for having more than one computer on your home Internet? Or more if you use a wireless router?

    Wireless service companies in the U.S. (can’t speak for elsewhere) have people by the balls. I don’t like it.

    P.S. Isn‘t it illegal if they sniff your data? Against privacy laws?




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina Smirnoff is gracing the
  • Karina Smirnoff is gracing the


  • javajedi
    Oct 13, 05:56 PM
    yeah, that's certianly possible. I'm not sure if that is or is not the case, but wouldn't be suprised if it is. I'll find out.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina Smirnoff#39;s Playboy
  • Karina Smirnoff#39;s Playboy


  • ehoui
    Apr 27, 05:59 PM
    No gods exist. There is not a shred of evidence, ontological or otherwise.

    Perhaps we do not possess the mental capacity to observe or understand that he (or they) exist? How can one be sure that we do?




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. karina smirnoff playboy cover.
  • karina smirnoff playboy cover.


  • Rodimus Prime
    Mar 12, 01:44 PM
    BTW, this Japanese plant was built in 1971, which is *older* than the 30+ years you deride the old Soviet plants for being. So there's more of your 'expert because I've got two degrees' opinion lying in more not so expert after all rubble. Speaking of deriding:
    :p

    I might like to point out that the Chernobyl plant was designed to produced weapons grade plutonium and produce power. That put some major problems on the design and put safety at risk. Control rods would have to be able to removed WHILE the reactor was running and fairly often. Not something you do unless you plane on making weapons grade plutonium. It also had to be much larger in size because it needed to produce power.

    Yet another reason why this is not be Chernobyl.
    We can also add unlike Soviet Russia Japan would not of cut huge safety corners to save cost at the time and over the past 30 years they sure as hell would of improved the plants safe.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina Smirnoff Playboy Cover
  • Karina Smirnoff Playboy Cover


  • Bill McEnaney
    Mar 28, 04:47 AM
    Huh? What in the world are you talking about? Dude, lay off the communion wine. ;) You're making no sense, seriously.
    I should go to bed now. But before I do that, maybe a question will help explain part of my point about the difference between me and a property might gain or lose. If I asked "Who are you?" when we happened to see each other, would you reply that you were gay? I doubt it. You probably would say, "I'm Lee Kohler."




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. karina smirnoff playboy cover.
  • karina smirnoff playboy cover.


  • MacCoaster
    Oct 12, 12:20 PM
    Originally posted by benixau
    for crying out load, who cares if a pc can do its sums better than a mac. My brother does maths better than me but i kick him in english.

    In other words if i am more productive on my mac then it doesnt matter that it might be a little 'slower' it is a faster machine because i can work faster. End of story. New Thread.
    Believe me, a lot of people do. Thanks to my UNIX knowledge, I am so much more productive in Linux/BSD on a PC than a Mac. For beginners to computers, sure Macs could be much more productive.

    We were just discussing the G4--it was never intended to be an explict vs war between Mac and PCs. It's not a software thread. It's a frickin' hardware thread where we are discussing the inferiority of the G4.

    Research scientists should think twice before using a Mac for research--since the G4 blows so much. That's where it matters. It's faster for them to use PCs than Macs. Gee, by 100 seconds. Think about it... a lot of scientific formulas are a lot more complex than our simplistic benchmark programs--100 minutes is sure much longer than 5 minutes.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. karina smirnoff playboy cover.
  • karina smirnoff playboy cover.


  • capvideo
    Mar 20, 01:32 PM
    It's not just iTunes, but all copyright law. A CD is a license to use the track, not ownership of the song's music or lyrics. An AAC from iTunes is the same. Same with movies and software, etc. In any situation, you are buying a license to use the song, not to take ownership of the song (unless you're buying the *rights* to a song, then you really do own it).

    No, this is completely wrong. Copyright is nothing more nor less than a monopoly on distribution of copies of the copyrighted work.

    Anyone purchasing a copy of the copyrighted work owns that copy. They do not have a license to that copy, they own that copy. They don't need a license to do anything with that copy except for re-distributing copies of it. Because the copyright holder holds the copyright monopoly, only the copyright holder may copy the work in question and then distribute those copies. Anyone else who wants to re-distribute further copies must get a license from the copyright holder.

    But no license is required to purchase a work or to use that work once it is purchased. Copyright is a restriction on what you can do with the things you have purchased and now own.

    This is how the various open source licenses work, for example. They only come into play when someone tries to redistribute copies. That's the only time they *can* come into play; without any redistribution of copies, copyright law has no effect.

    For example, you can, and have every right to, sell things that you have purchased. No license is required to sell your furniture, your stereo equipment, or the CDs that you have purchased or the books that you have purchased. At the turn of the century, book publishers tried to place a EULA inside their books forbidding resale. The courts--up to the Supreme Court of the United States--said that the copyright monopoly does not cover that, and thus no EULA based on the copyright monopoly can restrict it.

    In the Betamax case, the Supreme Court used the same reasoning to say that time-shifting is not a copyright violation. The copyright monopoly is a restriction on what owners can do with the things that they have purchased and now own, and must be strictly interpreted for this reason.

    When you buy a book, a CD, or anything else that is copyrighted, you own that copy, and may do whatever you want with that copy, with the exception that you cannot violate the copyright holder's monopoly on making copies and redistributing those copies. You can make as many copies as you want, as long as you don't distribute them; and you can distribute the original copy as long as it is the original. Neither of those acts infringes on the copyright holder's monopoly on copying and redistributing.

    This is why the DMCA had to be so convoluted, making the act of circumvention illegal, rather than going to the heart of what the RIAA, etc., wanted.

    I rant much more about this at my blog:

    http://www.hoboes.com/Mimsy/?ART=9

    Jerry




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Credit: Playboy
  • Credit: Playboy


  • Mord
    Jul 12, 01:54 PM
    I am very disappointed in you Hector , you of all people should know better then to post something like this. Do u not realise that the Intel deal ment apple dosen't have to do it's own R&D anymore when it came to chip sets.

    APPLE IS USING INTEL STOCK PARTS incase you didn't know , so mixing the MacPro with Conroe/Woody would not cost a dime more. they will use a basic P965 chipset for Conroe and 5000X Chipset for Woody.

    any and ever motherboard has been designed with the chips lay out and logic requested by the vendor, in this case apple, the fact that they don't develop their own electronics changes nothing, freescale/IBM made the chipsets before the switch nothing has changed, apple outsourced the design of the board to intel sure but they are paying intel to do so somehow, anyway, the cost of support and manufacture rockets up too.


    more i'm disappointed in you, i haven't seen you post in a year or so and your still the same childish n00b who completely misses the point.

    the mac pro will be a pro machine, apple has never done a consumer tower and likely never will.

    woodcrest is just conroe with SMP, overclocking is exactly the same, as in non existent due to EFI. professionals do not overclock their macs.

    go play with your toys.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina Smirnoff Playboy Cover
  • Karina Smirnoff Playboy Cover


  • DeathChill
    Apr 20, 10:09 PM
    Outside of Apple's app and music apps, all other applications go into a saved state; i.e. not running in the background.

    Uh, that's not true. Applications that don't use any of the seven (I think) multitasking API's go into a saved state; an application that uses one of those API's continues running (the particular task that the API allows).

    The funny thing is that it is almost identical to Android's implementation. Unless an application is explicitly programmed to run in the background it goes into a saved state.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Not Karina Smirnoff.
  • Not Karina Smirnoff.


  • jhande
    Sep 29, 03:35 AM
    FWIW Tom Yager at InfoWorld had an interesting point (http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/09/27/40OPcurve_1.html) re the looming Core Wars (aside: I loved to play that :) and its still going on) that I fully agree with.

    "If I had a vote, I�d have both vendors stop at four cores and focus on fat and fast busses that give those cores something to fill instead of something to wait for. AMD and Intel both face bus bottlenecks, and that�s the bane of multi-core. " - Tom




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Playboy has released the cover
  • Playboy has released the cover


  • ehoui
    Mar 11, 08:55 PM
    I was overwhelmed watching the Tsunami videos on TV. I cannot imagine. My thoughts are with our Pacific neighbors.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. On posing in Playboy, Smirnoff
  • On posing in Playboy, Smirnoff


  • paradox00
    Oct 7, 12:15 PM
    None of these things play any role for the iPhone market share.
    Far more relevant are:
    - cheaper low-end models, iPhone Nano (not that likely)
    - dropping provider exclusiveness (very likely, already happening: UK, Canada, more to come)


    Completely agree.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. Karina Smirnoff
  • Karina Smirnoff


  • theBB
    Sep 12, 04:52 PM
    I don't want to watch movies on my computer, so this sounds like a great product. I assume I can hook a USB drive with movies or music and download iTunes products directly to that same drive without a need for a computer. If I hook iTV to ethernet, maybe that drive can even become a file server of some sort. I can justify the cost of iTV if I can use it as a music streaming device, print server and file server. Let's see how many of these features will actually be there. :)

    However, the price point for movies is wrong for me. I started using Netflix instead of going to Blockbuster, because of price and wider selection. Apple's offer is more than double the price for a movie, even without the cost of iTV unless I watch them twice or more. Apple's library is bound to be smaller for a long time to come as well. I guess instant gratification is the only saving grace. Well, considering I've never bought a TV show or music video, maybe I am not in the target audience anyways.




    karina smirnoff playboy cover. karina-smirnoff2.jpg
  • karina-smirnoff2.jpg


  • Sydde
    Mar 14, 01:13 PM
    in japan though it's a little bit different. thats why there also isn't much open panic: simply for the fact that the majority of japanese don't want to be seen 'losing it'
    I suspect you are somewhat mistaken on that point. Mostly, what happened happened, not much they can do about that now. Some eyewitnesses I hear on the radio were saying they felt eerily calm during the shaking, now they are mostly fatalistic, I would think. Panic just amounts to a waste of energy.


    off topic side note: for other nuclear plant designs this events could have been massivle more dramatic

    That remains to be seen. Right now, they are still struggling to keep this disaster from happening. The situation is hardly what I would call stable.




    aegisdesign
    Oct 26, 05:00 AM
    That was with the flicker filter on max, and a minor color corection using the color corrector.

    Maybe the drives couldn't feed the CPUs fast enough. This is going to be a problem going forward unless Apple gets hardware RAID in there,




    wtfk
    Aug 29, 02:36 PM
    As soon as you mention Greenpeace, morons seem to go on auto-pilot and once they do that you can't stop them.
    Do you think Greenpeace's behavior might have something to do with that?




    appleguy123
    Apr 22, 09:11 PM
    someone hasn't posted in that thread for 5 months ... why would people all of a sudden want to revive it ... today we have this one.

    I would be willing to bet that if given time this thread will be a carbon copy of that one.
    That thread should be stickied, because I can't really think of any issue(relevant to this topic) we didn't cover in it.




    sjo
    Aug 29, 12:48 PM
    As a Norwegian I can say that Apple has way more credibility than Greenpeace over here. We have seen what they are all about. Greenpeace is a bunch of spoiled city kids that has no idea what nature is.

    Yeah, cause you just HAVE to hunt whales and eat whalemeat in Norway in order to survive, such a poor country with poor people. How dare Greenpeace oppose your ancient way of life?




    kainjow
    Oct 25, 10:31 PM
    OK. I know that many of my apps aren't going to take advantage of this level of multithreaded power, but I can't help but get excited by this development. After so many years of sluggish improvement, it feels like we're in the midst of rapid (and radical) change.
    Each process is it's own thread. And most processes have multiple threads. Unless you only always have one program open at a time, more cores always can help speed up your system.



    אין תגובות:

    הוסף רשומת תגובה