Streams, my new personalized feed reader, is now live. It replaces the old blogroll and friends links. I use it to keep up to date on all the blogs I like to read and streams enables me to do so by splitting the old blogroll into more relevant subcategories.
Apple recently came out with iTunes 7.
If you haven’t upgraded yet, don’t go rushing to do so. This version is a bit buggy, to say the least.
For me personally, music just wouldn’t play cleanly anymore: it would be filled with static, jittering and distortion that was a result of iTunes, since playing the exact same MP3s with another player would work fine.
I thus decided to revert to iTunes 6, because I like iTunes and have a lot of useful data in my library (my entire smart playlist set up, several months worth of song ratings, etc.) that I don’t want to have to duplicate in another player. I know Apple will release an iTunes 7 fix soon, but I don’t want to wait.
Step 1: Backup
Back up your iTunes 7 settings, so that you can keep them around in case you want to go back.
Go into your My Documents folder, then your My Music folder. Copy the iTunes folder inside there to somewhere else. That’ll save your settings.
Note: That’s the default location, if you’ve moved things around it’ll be somewhere else. If you need help finding it, search for files ending in .itl on your hard drive.
Step 2: Uninstall iTunes 7
Now, uninstall iTunes 7. Go to your Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, iTunes and hit Uninstall.
Reboot as it asks you to when it’s done.
Step 3: Download iTunes 6.0.5
Download iTunes 6 from Apple:
http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/itunes605forwindows.html
Step 4: Install iTunes 6.0.5
Install iTunes 6 by running the installer.
Step 5: Try to run iTunes 6
You should get this error message:
The file "iTunes Library.itl" cannot be read because it was created by a newer version of iTunes.
Step 6: Restore your old library
Go back into My Documents/My Music. Now go into the iTunes folder. Rename your iTunes Library.itl as iTunes Library.itl.old. Go into the Previous iTunes Libraries folder. Take the newest file (for me this was iTunes Library 2006-09-14.itl) and copy it back up to the iTunes folder. Rename it iTunes Library.itl. Run iTunes 6 and you should be all set, with your library restored.
It’s not a perfect solution, but it’s better than losing your library entirely. Plus, since you’ve backed up your iTunes 7 library, when Apple releases an iTunes 7.0.1 you should be able to reverse the procedure above and use your most current library before upgrading to iTunes 7.0.1.
I hope this is helpful to someone :)
Pope Benedict is getting heat for quoting a 14th century emperor:
I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by professor Theodore Khoury (Muenster) of part of the dialogue carried on — perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara — by the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both.
It was probably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than the responses of the learned Persian. The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible and in the Koran, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship of the “three Laws”: the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Koran.
In this lecture I would like to discuss only one point — itself rather marginal to the dialogue itself — which, in the context of the issue of “faith and reason,” I found interesting and which can serve as the starting point for my reflections on this issue.
In the seventh conversation (”diálesis” — controversy) edited by professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the jihad (holy war). The emperor must have known that sura 2:256 reads: “There is no compulsion in religion.” It is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under [threat]. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Koran, concerning holy war.
Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the “Book” and the “infidels,” he turns to his interlocutor somewhat brusquely with the central question on the relationship between religion and violence in general, in these words: “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
The emperor goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. “God is not pleased by blood, and not acting reasonably (”syn logo”) is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats…. To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death….”
The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: Not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God’s will, we would even have to practice idolatry.
As far as understanding of God and thus the concrete practice of religion is concerned, we find ourselves faced with a dilemma which nowadays challenges us directly. Is the conviction that acting unreasonably contradicts God’s nature merely a Greek idea, or is it always and intrinsically true?
Pope Benedict characterizes these comments as “brusque,” and is using them to underline his point that religion should not be spread through violence. Why does he point this out? Because radical Islam is spreading religion via violence. Has Christianity ever spread itself by violence? Yes, and that was wrong too. Benedict’s point is that spreading a religion by violence is evil and inhuman, regardless of what religion is spreading. His point is not that Mohammed is evil and inhuman, only that his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached is.
So what’s wrong with what Pope Benedict said?
The first question we must ask is: is it true? Well, yes, spreading religion by violence deprives folks of their religious liberty.
Secondly we must ask, is it offensive? Well, it is a critique of certain policies Mohammed advocated. Did Mohammed actually advocate these policies? History shows that this is the case. So is it wrong to point out that Mohammed advocated policies that deprive people of their religious liberty and thus are evil and inhuman? No, it’s just the truth.
Furthermore, does the significant radical movement within the Islamic world actually advocate spreading Islam via violence? Well, yes. That’s kind of the entire problem. Radical Islamists are advocating killing everyone who says anything against Islam at all. Did Christians something along these lines? Yes, the Inquisition remains a black eye upon our history. Can we undo what the Inquisition did? No. But do we do this now? No, Christianity is not currently spreading itself via violence. Islam is. That’s the difference right now and that difference must be recognized because it’s simply a truthful statement of fact.
Political correctness cannot and must not destroy truthful discussion. It’s important that it be clear that spreading religion by violence is evil and inhuman is something that will not be tolerated. It is wrong.
Finally, Benedict is quoting. This is not his opinion, this is the opinion of the 14th century Emperor. Can we no longer quote history in our society? If no, then do we not consign ourselves to ignorance and thus doom ourselves to repeat the mistakes of those that have gone before us, for we close our ears against what they said for fear it might offend someone somewhere?
Do you see Christians screaming bloody murder anytime says something about injustices done by Christians in Christian history? No. In fact Pope John Paul the Great himself apologized for the errors of the Christianity. Did that apology undo those errors? No, of course not. But did it cast the light of truth upon them? Have leaders of Islam done something of the same sort, apologizing for the injustices done by radical Islamists in history? No, they haven’t.
And note the phrase “bloody murder.” That’s what some of these radical Islamists are actually advocating to anyone who says anything remotely negative about the activities of radical Islamists: murder them.
Truth must take precedence over political correctness in our free society, or else political correctness will be used as a cover for those who would end the free society and replace it with a totalitarian society. If we don’t speak up against radical Islam truthfully, it will operate under the cover of political correctness until such a time as it which it can rise up and destroy the free society and replace it with a sharia society. Is this fantasy? No. This is the truth, which can be gleaned from what the radical Islamists are actually saying. We’d be stupid to think that “oh well they don’t really mean that.” They don’t? Why would we think that, especially considering what we saw happen in America five years and four days ago today?
We need more rational and honest dialogue in the world. Rational dialogue, ruled by reason, not by emotions. If we don’t have rational dialogue we’re going to doom ourselves to the inevitable result of inflamed passions: violence. Only reason can sheathe the sword and only by Truth.
You can discuss this at Selfev, an online community promoting discussion and analysis of the free society engaged with modern democracy.casino albuquerque party nightinternet casino merchant ecommerce accountcasino to windsor 1 trip dayaccount casino merchant en internet languagereno alantis casinogambling addictive storiesindian casino 2002 gamblingcasino 1000 games Map
Businesses today are becoming increasingly large and enamored of their own size and clout. Too many companies have forgotten that they are producing products not for the product’s sake, but for the customer’s. Businesses need to refocus on the customer and provide better support and contact with the customer. The distrust between businesses and customers has grown, especially with the increase in telemarketing. Customers no longer enjoy purchasing goods and dealing with a business, they regard it as a chore. Businesses need to reestablish contact with their customers.
Fortunately, we live in an age when this is economically feasible. The power of the Internet allows specific, personal communications with customers at virtually no cost. This is not a license to spam customers with unwanted information. Rather, companies should jump at the opportunity to serve their customers. They can metaphorically open their doors to their customers, providing information at the customer’s request and allowing the customer to develop a relationship with company. Companies should also construct community websites to promote interest in their product lines and to educate customers. Customers will no longer simply buy a company’s product because it is the only one they know of, they will now buy the company’s product because they are confident that the company’s product is the best for what they need. By educating customers companies enable them to make intelligent choices when purchasing. Customers will feel that the company cares for their business and is not simply treating them as a number on a profit/loss statement. By dedicating time and money to supporting and educating customers, companies will receive more loyal customers who will be inclined to purchase from that company. Essentially, companies should focus not on obtaining more customers who make one purchase and are never heard from again, but should focus on developing relationships with their best customers to encourage them to continuing purchasing from the company. This will aid their business because then the best customers will tell their friends about this great company that actually cares… and research has shown that word of mouth is the most powerful marketing tool.
If companies implement changes and use technology to open dialogues with their customers, they will find a willing audience that has been waiting for the companies to wake up and take notice for a very long time. Those companies that listen to their customers will prove successful, while those that persist in their self-enamored ways will soon find themselves without business. The choice facing companies today is simple and the solution is to focus on the customer.
–
I wrote that back in 2000, as my essay for the Walt Disney Company Foundation Scholarship, replying to the question of “Based on your experience, what do you think is the most urgent problem facing business in the United States? Write your suggestion for solving this problem.” It remains true today, with an even greater degree of relevance thanks to Web 2.0.
A photo taken this August on the WTC site. The cross is the one found in the ruins of the WTC.
I still agree with the majority of the words I wrote exactly 5 years ago:
Our society, America, cannot submit to fear. We are a mighty people, the strongest the planet has ever seen. The tenants of this nation dictate that we not abandon the banner of freedom and liberty merely because antagonism is directed against us. We must stand strong, holding high the American flag amidst tragedy, wearing our swords at our sides and drawing them out to strike only when we have ascertained our enemy.
…
The principle aim of the terrorists, however, will not be accomplished. America will not withdraw from world affairs, wounded and wary, never to stand again as the light of liberty across the world. Though the Towers smolder in ashes and ruin, Lady Liberty yet holds forth her torch, her eyes filled with tears and her fists clenched in righteous anger.
…
The options of our course of action must be weighed carefully, yet we must not lower ourselves to the level of the terrorists. America cannot find true vengeance by slaying innocent peasants whose government has given safe haven to terrorists. If we do so, then we are no better than the terrorists: brutes who slay innocents without just cause. We are the most powerful nation on earth. Our technology and force exceeds that of anything else this planet has ever seen. We have the capability to track down those responsible, apprehend them and bring them to the full force of our justice system.
Have we done as well as we could have done? This is something for our nation to reflect on during this time of reflection. It is a time to look at the past and learn its lessons. It is vital we understand we can never undo the past, nor we can we completely control the future. All we can do is act in the present. It is vital we consider the best current course of action, vital that we hold a national dialogue on our purposes in the War on Terror. I am sad that the current political climate is one of caustic partisanship and that both parties don’t sit down and work together to ascertain not only our goals but the path we wish to take to reach them.
As John Carlton wrote, “We took a hit, and we absorbed the blow and held steady. But we did take a hit.” Things irrevocably changed that day. I do not think we have quite yet understood how they have changed, and I do feel that as a nation we would immensely benefit from greater political dialogue about what has changed and what we are doing, and why, greater political dialogue about where we are going and why. It is time to lay politics aside and engage in a rational, respectful, reasoned discussion about what is best for our nation and how we can best go about reaching towards it.
This is not “mere idealism.” This is realism, because it is intrinsically tied with reality. If we do not know where we are going and why, we have no hope of getting there. This is a far too dangerous time for America to not steer its ship, to let the waves and winds of a hostile world set our course. We must set our course and we must understand the course we set, so that we can go where it is we wish to go. But before we can do that, we must dialogue as a nation to understand where it is we wish to go and why we wish to go there. If we do not do this, we will founder, for the world is far too hostile for us to trust in its waves and winds.
This looks promising; one can only hope and pray it’s done well — no, well wouldn’t cut it… something better than well.
Some late-uploaded photos from a trip to New York this August.
And yes, I’m aware I haven’t uploaded all of my Arizona photos yet — my experiment in tagging led to the realization that pre-tagging photos just leads to delays in uploading them. I’ll work on getting Arizona photos up as soon as I’m able.
See All Photos from New Yorkblowjob movie 89 freemovie blowjob free 89adult broadband free moviesand and video oral movies sex brutal throat job freemovie clip celebrity free nudeporn free movies couplecum movies free swallowporn free movies divxcumshots free movies facialsfree movies sample fucking
Facebook has, apparently, erupted in furor over a set of changes launched yesterday which make it easier to keep track of changes in friends’ profiles.
I’ve received several invites to “Stop the New Facebook” and am at a loss as to what people are so up in arms about. All the new changes do is make it easier to see what has changed in friends’ profiles. They do not reveal any information that was previously inaccessible, they only make it more accessible.
Apparently many of my fellow facebookers were under the mistaken impression that what they posted on the Facebook or what groups they joined was somehow … private? I fail to see what has changed, save for the accessibility of the information, since now Facebook’s default interface keeps track of friends’ profile changes. Previously, a dedicated stalker could save Facebook pages to disk and then run diff on each one to see what had changed. The changes have always been there, they are just more accessible than before.
Why then this anger and sense of betrayal? Over what? A perceived violation of privacy? Did Facebook install spyware on a user’s computer, dig through the user’s e-mail and auto-post stuff to the user’s profile? No? All the new Facebook changes have done is make what was already there easier to see. Nothing has changed in terms of information availability, only the accessibility. If people aren’t comfortable having their information so easily available now, then they shouldn’t have been comfortable before — the fact that they didn’t have a problem with it before indicates they do not understand that once something is posted on the Internet, it is no longer private, even if it is posted in a registration-only student-only community such as Facebook.
There is no such thing as a “private area” on the Internet. Before you post something online, make sure you’re comfortable with everyone online seeing it and knowing about it. If you’re not comfortable, don’t post it. It’s really that simple.
You think your Facebook profile was secure before these changes? It wasn’t. There was nothing stopping a “friend” of yours from screenshotting your profile, or saving the page to his hard disk, or even going to some campus administrators, logging onto Facebook in front of them and showing them your profile. If there’s something you don’t want people to see, don’t put it online — ever. The entire point of social networking sites such as Facebook is social networking. Networking is about bringing disparate information sources together. The new facebook changes make this easier than before, but they reveal many people’s innate cognitive dissonance: they thought they were “safe” and these changes have shown that they were never safe in the first place.
I for one applaud the Facebook changes: it forces people to confront the reality that information on the Internet lives forever, and once it is shared with others, it is out of your control forever.
You can add a Google Gadget to your Google Personalized Homepage that will countdown the days until an event takes place.
To do this, click on “Add Content” in the upper left hand corner of your Google Personalized Homepage, then click the little “Add by URL” link to the immediate right of the “Search Homepage Content” button.
Then copy-paste in this url, changing the date and and event name as you’d like:
http://dominik.net/hidden/days-until-xml.php?year=2009&month=5&day=10&event=Graduation
That particular date is the date I graduate from law school (982 days until as of today).
If you’re at Ave Maria School of Law and just want to add that without having to go through all the trouble above (which is only really necessary if you want more flexibility in terms of the date and event), you can just click this button here:
To expound on the customizability, you could Add by URL this address:
http://dominik.net/hidden/days-until-xml.php?year=2006&month=10&day=20&event=I turn 23
That would count the days until I turn 23 years old. I hope folks find this little gadget useful and fun!college movie fest fuckfree movies fistingsex movies hotfree movie hentaimovies gangbangmovie pee clipsmovie lolita free samplesshemale movies hardcore Mapretirement credits security 34 socialconusumer acc creditamerican aceonline aceonline credits coaster enthusiastslaboratories abbott credit employeebroker afg 130 1300 loancredits completed 8686 completed creditsabi vc loan bird Map