To display the most relevant entries to you in priority,
vote for the stories you are interested in
()
and reject those that you are not interested in
()
C'est ce qu'ont affirmé les avocats des parties civiles mercredi lors d'une audience
consacrée à la description de l'évasion, en 2003, du braqueur italien de la
maison d'arrêt de Fresnes. Ils ont souligné l'évidente intention de tuer les
deux surveillants des miradors pris pour cibles.
C'est ce qu'ont affirmé les avocats des parties civiles mercredi lors d'une audience
consacrée à la description de l'évasion, en 2003, du braqueur italien de la
maison d'arrêt de Fresnes. Ils ont souligné l'évidente intention de tuer les
deux surveillants des miradors pris pour cibles.
pimg class="float_right" src="/~~/f?id=482098a2796c7a2300f553e6maxX=389maxY=258" border="0"
alt="Eric Schmidt 1.jpg" title="Eric Schmidt 1.jpg" width="389" height="258" /Did Google really
walk away from the Yahoo search deal because of the "risk" of litigation, as Google suggested at
the time? No. Because of theem certainty/em of it. When Google walked, the Justice Department was
three hours away from suing it for violating the Sherman Act:/p p style="padding-left: 30px;"a
href="http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2008/12/hogans-litvack.html"AmLaw: /a"We were going
to file the complaint at a certain time during the day," says [Sandy Litvack, the bulldog litigator
who the goverment brought in to handle the case]. "We told them we were going to file the complaint
at that time of day. Three hours before, they told us they were abandoning the agreement.".../p p
style="padding-left: 30px;"strongThe never-filed government complaint would have charged that the
agreement violated Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act... /strong"It would have ended up strongalso
alleging that Google had a monopoly and that [the advertising pact] would have furthered their
monopoly,"/strong Litvack says./p p style="padding-left: 30px;"strongThe complaint would have
sought a preliminary injunction to stop the agreement from going forward/strong. "strongThe fact
that we filed a lawsuit would not by itself have stopped them," he says. "We would have had to get
an injunction from the court, and we would have sought that."/strong/p pAfter Google walked away,
the DOJ released a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2008/November/08-at-981.html"a statement
/asaying that it had informed the companies it was planning to file suit. The release did not
specify how close Google came to getting sued, however, and Google's explanation for why it walked
didn't mention the government's explicit intention:/p p style="padding-left: 30px;"a
href="http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/11/google-walks-away-from-yahoo-search-deal"Google counsel
David Drummond on November 5: /a[A]fter four months of review, including discussions of various
possible changes to the agreement,strong it's clear that government regulators and some advertisers
continue to have concerns about the agreement. Pressing ahead risked not only a protracted legal
battle/strong but also damage to relationships with valued partners./p pAnd remember who was behind
the effort to get regulators to block the deal? That's right: Microsoft. Payback for Google's
(currently successful) attempt to break up a possible Microsoft-Yahoo deal./p p
style="padding-left: 30px;"a
href="http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2008/12/hogans-litvack.html"AmLaw:/a Litvack
acknowledges that a href="http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx"Microsoft Corporation/a and
other companies lobbied the department to block the agreement, both publicly and and in private
meetings. Litvack insists, though, that Microsoft's lobbying had no bearing on his recommended
course of action or on the division's ultimate decision./p p(Via a
href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/28037962/site/14081545?__source=yahoo|headline|quote|text|par=yahoo"Jim
Goldman at CNBC/a)/p pa
href="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~at/J4HjbT9GE42sPVfToFXAKz_tOwM/a"img
src="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~at/J4HjbT9GE42sPVfToFXAKz_tOwM/i" border="0"
ismap="true"/img/a/pdiv class="feedflare" a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?a=OJH5NMt9"img
src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?i=OJH5NMt9"
border="0"/img/a a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?a=vlxSw5LT"img
src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?d=52"
border="0"/img/a a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?a=hCXjojGr"img
src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?d=80"
border="0"/img/a a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?a=Fb3OwzSo"img
src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?i=Fb3OwzSo"
border="0"/img/a a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?a=5KRPeozg"img
src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?d=131"
border="0"/img/a a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?a=BUe4EcZR"img
src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?d=336"
border="0"/img/a a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?a=m3n9gTiV"img
src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?d=41"
border="0"/img/a a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?a=Q7mWJnvP"img
src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider?d=50"
border="0"/img/a /divimg
src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/alleyinsider/silicon_alley_insider/~4/2lV3gDUqP-c"
height="1" width="1"/
I've seen a lot of posts wishy-washy about this. So, to clear things up, the iVoiceIII works with
1G iPod Touch on Firmware 2.2, no modding, right out of the box. I bought one last year with the
intention of jumping the pins and all that but never got around to it. Two nights ago, I came
across it in my old laptop bag and decided to give a go using Fring and my VoipCheap account. It
worked perfectly.
divimg alt=""
src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/40836?ns=guardianpageName=World+news%3A+A+toxic+legacych=World+newsc3=The+Guardianc4=Guantanamo+Bay+%28News%29%2CObama+White+House+%28News%29%2CBarack+Obama+%28News%29%2CUS+foreign+policy%2CUS+news%2CHuman+rights+%28News%29%2CWorld+newsc5=Not+commercially+useful%2CUS+Electionsc6=Julian+Borgerc7=2008_12_04c8=1128354c9=articlec10=GUc11=World+newsc12=Guant%C3%A1namo+Bayc13=c14=h2=GU%2FWorld+news%2FGuant%C3%A1namo+Bay"
width="1" height="1" //divpEver since January 11 2002, when the first 20 prisoners were flown in
from Afghanistan in orange jumpsuits and shackles, the Guantaacute;namo Bay detention camp has been
a hefty burden around the Bush administration's neck. /ppThe defence secretary at the time, Donald
Rumsfeld, picked the Cuban enclave as the "least worst place" to hold captives accused of
terrorism. But the effort to run a camp outside the reach of US or international law, so that
"enemy combatants" could be held indefinitely without charge, steadily corroded America's standing
in the world. The images of the inmates languishing in small metal cages in Camp X-Ray, the
rudimentary first phase of the complex, and the steady stream of reports of human rights abuses,
have taken a daily toll. The camp's existence has angered and embarrassed Washington's closest
allies, and become a recruitment tool for its enemies. /ppNearly six years on, there is no debate
over whether "Gitmo" should be closed - only how. As it approaches the end of its term, the Bush
administration is anxiously attempting to dispose of its own toxic legacy. John Bellinger, the
state department's top lawyer, has been trying to persuade other governments to accept detainees
cleared for release. More than 500 have already been sent back to their homelands or to third
countries, but there are still 250 prisoners left who cannot go home for fear of persecution and
who no one else will accept. They are now Barack Obama's problem./ppThe president-elect has
frequently stated his intention to close Guantaacute;namo. In an interview since the election, he
repeated that pledge, saying it was "part and parcel of an effort to regain America's moral stature
in the world". But the question of what to do with the remaining inmates still divides his
ideologically diverse national security and justice teams./ppObama's inaugural speech on January 20
will be closely scrutinised around the world for signs of how bold or cautious he decides to be.
His policy on Guantaacute;namo will be widely seen as a benchmark for his intentions as president.
/ppA report by a non-partisan panel of US security and human rights experts, entitled Closing
Guantaacute;namo: From Bumper Sticker to Blueprint, estimates that the camp could be emptied within
a year if the Obama administration decided on a clean break from Bush policies and devoted enough
resources to the job. The report advocates the establishment of an independent commission to review
the cases of all the detainees, to assess the evidence against them and order the immediate release
of the innocent./ppThe first task will be to complete the Bush administration's effort to find
homes for the 150-200 prisoners who, according to lawyers familiar with their stories, have no case
to answer but who cannot be sent back to their native countries for fear they would be victimised,
tortured or killed. /ppThe clearest example of inmates stuck in this limbo are the 17 Uighurs,
separatists from a Muslim minority in China who were seized in Pakistan during the Afghan war. They
have all been cleared for release by the US authorities, most as long ago as 2003, but have so far
not been accepted by any third countries. Albania agreed to take in five other Uighur detainees in
2006, but has refused to take any more. /ppBellinger's efforts to find any other government to
receive the Uighurs have been undermined by the adamant refusal of the US authorities to allow them
to live in America because of the presumed threat they pose to the US, in part because of presumed
animosity caused by six years of detention without charge. Obama's envoys may find they have better
luck than Bellinger./pp"I don't think anyone is inclined to do this administration any favours, but
Obama will find he has a lot of goodwill to draw on," a European diplomat says. But that goodwill
will be greatly enhanced if the new administration stops fighting the resettlement of inmates in
the US./ppA second category of prisoners will be referred for prosecution outside Guantaacute;namo,
but that raises the question of whether that prosecution should be conducted by military courts
martial in the US or the civilian legal system. That will be a decision that goes to the
philosophical heart of the issue - should the US approach terrorism as a military threat or as a
criminal enterprise, or some hybrid of the two? Obama has refrained from using the phrase "war on
terror", but he is said to be under pressure from the more conservative national security experts
on his team to leave his options open and not bind himself with the procedural constraints of the
civilian judiciary./ppOn the other side of the debate is a "rule of law" camp within the embryonic
administration which argues that anything short of a complete return to constitutional normality
would rob Obama of the international goodwill he might otherwise gain by scrapping
Guantaacute;namo./ppThat debate underlies the toughest dilemma the new administration is likely to
face on closing the offshore camp: whether there should be a third category of prisoners, deemed
too dangerous to release but too difficult to prosecute. The evidence against them may be in the
form of intelligence material that cannot be disclosed in court, or that falls short of legal
proof. Confessions would also be ineligible if they were obtained under torture, as in the case of
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks who was "waterboarded"
(subjected to simulated drowning) by the CIA. And few if any of the inmates of Guantaacute;namo
were reminded of their right not to incriminate themselves, which is standard police
practice./ppThe Bush administration has been seeking international agreement for a new form of
preventative detention that would allow inmates in this third category to be held in the US and
abroad. "The problem is you've got 200-plus very dangerous people, and the question is what do you
do with them. And these are people who say regularly: 'If I'm let out of here, I will go
immediately and start killing Americans again,'" Condoleezza Rice, the outgoing secretary of state,
said during a visit to London this week. She argued that "even though you know that this person is
a future threat, we don't really have a legal framework for that, which is why it's been done
within a war framework. But if you don't hold a person who you know is a future threat, then you
risk the deaths of thousands of innocents. So I do think that this is something for the
international community to take up."/ppThere is little sign, however, that the international
community has any appetite for such a departure from established human rights law. The decision on
preventative detention will be Obama's alone. Several of his advisers and allies, liberals
included, think that terrorism is such a pernicious threat, and the security risks of releasing
suspects are so great, that new legislation allowing for preventative detention is unavoidable. The
political risk of a released inmate carrying out an attack are also enormous. Such an event could
prove crippling to a new administration. /ppOn the other hand, any new system of preventative
detention would be seen around the world as Guantaacute;namo redux, human rights lawyers say. It
would be every bit as effective as an al-Qaida recruiting tool, and would perpetuate the
extremists' self-image as warriors rather than mere criminals. Within the internal debate under way
in the transition team, liberal activists want foreign governments to lobby Obama against creating
a new legal limbo. /ppIt is one of the toughest decisions the new president has in his in-tray.
What Obama decides will say a lot about his presidency. Sarah Mendelson, a senior fellow of the
Centre for Strategic and International Studies and author of the Closing Guantaacute;namo report,
says it is uncertain which way Obama would lean. But she adds: "My sense is the president-elect has
taught courses in the constitution in one of the most reputable law schools in country. He ran on
opting back into the international system. The idea of going for a new legal regime that will
result in more years in litigation is not going to appeal. It will not be the clean break he needs
to make."/ph2A history of the prison camp/h2p· January 11 2002: First prisoners
arrive/pp· February 27 2002: First hunger strike begins/pp· April 29 2002: The first
prison, Camp X-Ray, closes, replaced by a more solid concrete construction, Camp Delta/pp·
November 10 2003: US Supreme Court agrees to hear appeals from inmates that they are being held
illegally/pp· February 13 2004: Bush administration agrees to establish review panels to
establish whether inmates still pose a threat/pp· March 19 2004: Five British detainees
freed/pp· February 16 2006: The UN calls for the closing of Camp Delta, arguing that the
treatment of some inmates amounts to torture/pp· June 10 2006: Three inmates hang
themselves/pp· June 21 2006: President Bush first expresses the wish to close the
camp/pp· September 6 2006: Fourteen "high-value" detainees are transferred from secret CIA
prisons around the world to Guantaacute;namo, including Khaled Sheikh Mohamed, Abu Zubaydah and
Ramzi Binalshibh, three alleged planners of the 9/11 attacks/pp· June 12 2008: US Supreme
Court rules that inmates have the right to challenge their incarceration in the US courts/pdiv
style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"ullia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/guantanamo"Guantánamo Bay/a/lilia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/obama-white-house"Obama White House/a/lilia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/barackobama"Barack Obama/a/lilia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/usforeignpolicy"US foreign policy/a/lilia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/usa"United States/a/lilia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/humanrights"Human rights/a/li/ul/diva
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk"guardian.co.uk/a copy; Guardian News Media Limited 2008 | Use of
this content is subject to our a
href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html"Terms Conditions/a | a
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html"More Feeds/a pa
href="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~at/DnF9th1tAua-YMzXf_qz88giof4/a"img
src="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~at/DnF9th1tAua-YMzXf_qz88giof4/i" border="0"
ismap="true"/img/a/p
divimg alt=""
src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/62952?ns=guardianpageName=Sport%3A+England+prepare+to+fly+out+after+India+all-clearch=Sportc3=The+Guardianc4=England+in+India+2008-09%2CIndia+cricket+team%2CEngland+cricket+team%2CEngland+cricket+series%2CCricket%2CSportc5=Not+commercially+useful%2CCricketc6=Mike+Selveyc7=2008_12_04c8=1128468c9=articlec10=GUc11=Sportc12=England+in+India+2008-09c13=c14=h2=GU%2FSport%2FEngland+in+India+2008-09"
width="1" height="1" //divpEngland are ready to resume their tour of India after a security report
from Chennai alleviated safety concerns. That, coupled with the prospect of similar assurance from
Mohali, has convinced the England and Wales Cricket Board that it is safe for the two Test matches
to go ahead./ppWith the exception of Ryan Sidebottom, ruled out by a side strain, and Stuart Broad,
who is being allowed a few more days to recover from a hamstring injury suffered during the recent
abandoned one-day series before flying out to Chennai, it will be a full England squad - including
Andrew Flintoff and Steve Harmison, and reinforced by nine members of the performance squad - that
will fly to Abu Dhabi today for a holding camp, where they will practise before moving on to
Chennai on Monday. The first of two Tests is scheduled to begin there on December 11./ppThe
announcement from Lord's of the intention to resume the tour came after two days of meetings
between ECB officials, security advisers and government departments. "The only consideration in all
our discussions has been the safety and security of the team and support staff," explained Hugh
Morris, the managing director of England cricket. "We have been delighted by the input of the
Professional Cricketers' Association and also the willingness of the Board of Control for Cricket
in India to act upon our recommendations regarding security. While we have sought to reassure
players that their safety is paramount we have not pressurised any player into making the trip
against their will./pp"Those who leave for Abu Dhabi are all anticipating travelling to India if
both the head of the PCA, Sean Morris, and I are happy that Reg Dickason's security plans have been
activated. The board and players will be kept fully informed." /ppHe added: "The PCA and ECB have
worked extremely closely on this issue, and the players have been fully supportive throughout. We
will access the highest calibre of security advice on a regular basis so that we can provide the
players with the latest accurate information. I have been assured by the ECB that they would never
compromise the players' safety and security." Both Hugh and Sean Morris were due to travel to India
last night to meet Dickason and will fly on to the United Arab Emirates to brief the players./ppThe
key to the unanimous decision to return was the positive assessment of conditions by Dickason, the
ECB security expert. Dickason was in Chennai yesterday, inspecting the team hotel, the /ppMA
Chidambaram Stadium and the route between the two, and has expressed himself satisfied with the
strong arrangements that will be put in place by the Chennai police under its commissioner, Thiru K
Radhakrishnan./pp"We can provide absolute total security," the police chief said yesterday after
Dickason had completed his tour. Dickason will now carry out a similar exercise in Mohali, before
completing his reports. Yesterday the chief executive of the ECB, David Collier, praised the way
the Indian authorities had handled the situation. "Everyone has been highly cooperative and
helpful," he said. "Everything that Reg has asked for has been agreed."/ppIf it has been viewed as
an expensive extravagance to bring the tour party home for such a brief period, then to persuade
the Test party in its entirety to return when so much talk was of dissidents is something of a
triumph. There had been suggestions from influential figures that several players, possibly
Flintoff and Harmison, were intent on staying at home regardless of the outcome of the security
report./ppMeanwhile, it was confirmed that West Indies will tour England in the early summer in
place of Zimbabwe. Sri Lanka had been pencilled in provisionally, but player commitments to the
Indian Premier League, given the backing of their cricket board, meant it was no longer a viable
option. The tour will feature two Tests, at Lord's and Chester-le-Street, and three ODIs. West
Indies' visit will provide a lead into a busy summer that also includes the Twenty20 World Cup and
an Ashes series. Its timing, with the opening Test scheduled for May 6, precludes any hope of a
large window of opportunity for England players to ply their trade in the IPL./pdiv style="float:
left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"ullia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/englandinindia200809"England in India 2008-09/a/lilia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/indiacricketteam"India Cricket Team/a/lilia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/englandcricketteam"England Cricket Team/a/lilia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/englandcricketseries"England cricket series/a/lilia
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/cricket"Cricket/a/li/ul/diva
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk"guardian.co.uk/a copy; Guardian News Media Limited 2008 | Use of
this content is subject to our a
href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html"Terms Conditions/a | a
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html"More Feeds/a pa
href="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~at/Vnl8B9fUgtdd1RMSpOSTMcXV1KI/a"img
src="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~at/Vnl8B9fUgtdd1RMSpOSTMcXV1KI/i" border="0"
ismap="true"/img/a/p
Minuteur 5.0.6Minuteur is an egg timer and a stopwatch. The intention was to have
a timer which is simple and immediate in use. Minuteur is also very flexible and extremely
configurable. Particular attention has been paid to the ergonomics of the programme. The basic
functionality of Minuteur is intuitive enough to be used right from the start.
To set the timer quickly, type the required delay on the numeric keypad. To set a period of
30 minutes, type 3000 (for 30 minutes, 0 seconds). Type 300000 for 3 hours, or just 30 for 30
seconds. The countdown starts immediately.
To set the alarm to go off at a specific time, hold Option/Alt and type the time in the
format hhmm.
To start the stopwatch, hold Option/Alt and press Enter.
To stop any timing, press Return, Enter or Escape.
To pause Minuteur, press Spacebar.
To make the most of the deeper features however, you should spend a few minutes reading the
help. Particular attention has been paid to the ergonomics of the programme. The basic
functionality of Minuteur is intuitive enough to be used right from the start.
WHAT'S NEWVersion 5.0.6:
Voilà une nouvelle qui risque de ne pas réjouir grand monde dans le domaine du
stockage et de la gravure. L'éditeur SlySoft annonce en effet son intention de revoir
drastiquement sa politique...
Chris Pullman was the VP of
Design at WGBH in Boston for 35 years.
Viewers of PBS will recognize Pullman's work in the opening title sequences of "Masterpiece
Theatre" and "Antiques Roadshow" and the WGBH animated on-air signature, which is used at the end
of every program produced by the public broadcaster.
Birds of a feather flock together. That is a natural thing. Most of the people here at WGBH are
here (or certainly stay here) because of our mission. Certainly, my long tenure has been largely
because of the people in this room with whom I've shared such personal and heart-warming
recollections of our time together. Since April, when I first announced my intention to leave
WGBH, the private expression of these feelings has been so gratifying, both personally and
professionally, that I recently suggested that maybe we should institute the policy of
encouraging individuals to make periodic "mock retirement" announcements, with the goal of
releasing more regularly the flow of kind remarks for the nourishment of the individual, since we
are otherwise so reticent to praise or encourage others in our busy, self-centered daily lives.
When I invest time and energy in a particular topic, I truly try to do so for reasons as
non-political as possible. And my engagement of TJ316C (The John 3:16 Conference) has been for
the very same reasons that motivated me to write The Potter's Freedom. As a result, I
really have not been looking to see what else is going on in the blogosphere concerning this. The
few things I've noted were pointed out to me by participants in my chat channel. But this morning
my RSS feed picked up Timmy Brister's timeline of events. My name appears most often, but I
followed some of the other links and found some fascinating material. I was unaware that the
chart that had been used at the Conference was actually produced by Tony Byrne, the chief source
of the false accusation against me of hyper-Calvinism. In a comment Mr. Byrne left on Brister's
blog he wrote the following:
Also, consider this: Where are the Calvinistic bloggers who are even slightly supportive or glad
that my chart was distributed to all those attending the conference (about 800)? I did it to help
them all (even the speakers) to accurately understand the theological and historical differences
among the varieties of Calvinism and Arminianism. Think of it: If the non-Calvinists read it
carefully, they will not be so prone to straw man orthodox Calvinism (whether moderate or high)
as hyper-Calvinism. They will have no grounds for portraying Calvinists as if they do not believe
1) God loves all mankind, that 2) God desires the salvation of all mankind in his revealed will,
that 3) God is gracious to all mankind, that 4) the Gospel should be offered to all mankind, that
5) some Calvinists actually believe that Christ suffered for the sins of mankind, that 6) most
Calvinists affirm some sense of ability (natural) in the unregenerate, that 7) all orthodox
Calvinists believe that men are evangelically responsible to believe.
Let's look at the points Tony posted. 1) Yes, God does, but God's love is not
monolithic, right, Tony? Can Tony Byrne affirm that the love of God for the elect, i.e.,
redemptive love, is particular? Can God, like man, have different kinds of love? And would those
at the Conference recognize the difference? Would Tony affirm, with me, that God will not be
standing on the parapets of hell for eternity mourning the loss of the object of His eternal,
redeeming love? Would those at the Conference?
2) Please note Tony's own addition/modification in this, the key issue in the false accusation
made by David Allen regarding me: "in his revealed will." Is that not what I have said from day
one, indeed, for years, even in my arguments against hyper-Calvinists? "God commands men
everywhere to repent." It is part and parcel of God's revealed will that all men are to repent
and believe. Every single one, man, woman, and child. All are held accountable to this command.
So as far as "God's law reveals God's will" can take us (and it can take us only so far, as I
have explained over and over again), then "God wills the salvation of all men." Tony knows this,
and Tony knows that I believe it. So, why is my further concern not to attribute to God the
irrationality of decreeing Himself into eternal depression such a problem for him? Why is my
refusal to attribute to the heart of the Triune God an eternal contradiction the sign of
"hyper-Calvinism"? The very portion of my Dividing Line broadcast which Tony transcribed
and provided to David Allen to function as his defense for the false accusation of
hyper-Calvinism makes it painfully clear that I am addressing the idea of making unfulfilled
desires and hence eternal disappointment for God the context of my comments! I can see why
David Allen would misunderstand what I was saying, but why would Tony Byrne? What is
more, would the attendees at the Conference agree with Byrne's distinction regarding the revealed
will of God and the decree of God? Would they not accuse Byrne of the very same error they accuse
me of? I think they would. But for the last time (since you can only say the same thing so many
times), I agree with what Tony says here. Enough of the silly controversy over that!
3) He surely is, for unless I am misreading my entire world news RSS feed this morning, He could
wipe this planet clean in justice at any moment, to be sure!
4) The Gospel should be and must be not just "offered" to all mankind! The Gospel contains offer,
and pleading, yes, but all in the context of command! God command men everywhere to
repent!
5) Yes, some Calvinists do. I do not believe God the Father would pour out His wrath in
perfection upon His Son with no end or intention in sight. I see this as a violation of the
biblical teaching concerning the work of the High Priest, the perfection of His offering, and the
work of His as mediator. And I would ask Tony Byrne: does Jesus mediate for the non-elect? Does
He stand in the presence of the Father pleading the blood He shed for them, knowing full well
that in the eternal decree of the Triune God it had been decided that those individuals would
never be saved?
6) I am uncertain what this specifically means outside of the obvious fact that all Calvinists I
know of ascribe tremendous ability/capacity to the will of the unregenerate man: such a
man will always resist God's truth and will suppress that truth in rebellion. The will of man in
sin will always oppose God and delight in error. The synergists' assertion that "dead in sin"
means "inactive" has been refuted over and over again.
7) Which is why I proclaimed Christ and the necessity of faith to him to all the Muslims in
London just a few weeks ago, and have done the same with Mormons in Salt Lake City and Roman
Catholics and Jehovah's Witnesses, etc. and etc., in all sorts of places and contexts.
So, according to Tony Bryne, I'm just a plain ol' Calvinist. Maybe Tony will call up David Allen
now and we can get back to the key issue: the utter lack of meaningful biblical exegesis
presented by the speakers at TJ316C?
Finally, I read David Miller's letter to Jerry Vines (which Lumpkin very unfairly spun
against Tom Ascol). Since I was not at the conference it was interesting to read someone's take
who was, in fact, there. I was uncomfortable with some of the language used (as I'm sure some
have been with some of the analogies I've used on the DL), but it did show me some of my own
blind spots. For example, as I have been listening I have, somewhere in the back of my mind, been
making mental notes about the quality of the presentations. As I listened to Steve Lemke's
presentation I had noted that it was not very well done. Lots of pauses, disjointed, and just a
bit more than muddled. But I really don't focus on that very much, as my concern was the
substance more than the presentation. But I did find this comment from Miller describing
what I cannot hear (or even see on the DVDs) interesting:
This did however, provide a high level of entertainment as I watched Richard Land fall asleep on
at least 3 occasions during Dr. Lemke's sermon in which he departed from his assigned subject and
drudged on and on as the congregation got quieter and quieter.
I did at this point feel some compassion for yourself as I saw your rear-end at least 3 inches
off the pew giving Lemke physical signs of your discontent. I know it, you know it, and the Lord
knows it! You were sitting there wishing that he would sit down and hush.
I had to chuckle just a bit at that, especially since I have tried, over the years, to be the one
speaker who gets the whole thing back on track time wise when someone else just can't manage the
clock. And now as I think back over Lemke's presentation, I can see things in a little different
light.
I will be going over Lemke's attempts to promote the freedom of man in resisting God's salvific
grace on tomorrow's Dividing Line.
Les avocats des parties civiles ont décrit mercredi l'évasion d'Antonio Ferrara en
2003 comme "un acte de guerre", marqué selon eux par une évidente intention de tuer
les deux surveillants des miradors pris pour cibles, même si le flou demeure sur l'...
On Stanley Kubrick, George Lucas, Robert Morris, Robert Smithson, Jane Jacobs, 2001, Star Wars,
and minimalism: Star Wars: A New
Heap.
Kubrick's film presented a future of company men moving with assurance and clear intention toward
a godlike minimalist object. Lucas, on the other hand, gave us a slapdash world of knuckleheads
pursued by industrial-scale minimalists. Visually, Kubrick's film is as seamless and smooth as
the modernist authority it mirrored. Like the mid-century modernists, 2001 associated abstraction
with the progressive ideals of the United Nations as embodied by its New York headquarters.
Lucas, on the other hand, was a nonbeliever. Even the initially smooth and unitary form of the
Death Star was shown, as the rebel fighters skimmed its surface, to be deeply fissured with an
ever-diminishing body of structural fragments. These crenulated details suggested a depth and
complexity to modern life that modernism's pure geometries often obscured.
And this:
A flying saucer had never been a slum before. The immaculate silver sheen of the saucer was
reinvented as a dingy Dumpster full of boiler parts, dirty dishes, and decomposing upholstery.
Lucas's visual program not only captured the stark utopian logic that girded modern urban
planning, it surpassed it. The Millennium Falcon resisted the modernist demand for purity and
separation, pushing into the eclecticism of the minimalist expanded field. Its tangled bastard
asymmetry made it a truer dream ship than any of its purebred predecessors. It is the first
flying saucer imagined as architecture without architects.
Portal: Still Alive
Publisher: Microsoft
Developer: Valve
Genre: Action
System: XBLA
Price:1200 MS Points
The first iteration of Portal we saw was attached to the sweet-as-a-nut deal The Orange
Box. At the time I paid 60 quid for the Orange Box, and I was noted for saying that I'd have
paid that for Portal alone. This was of course a lie, that would be mad, but Portal's quality and
uniqueness stood out from the other parts of the Orange Box (Half Life 2 and it's episodes, and
Team Fortress 2. The Orange Box as a whole was great, Half Life 2 and it's episodes are a fantastic
play, they age well and converted to the 360 nicely. Team Fortress 2 has a big following even
today. The 'Box was full of Diamonds, and Portal was like a, Golden Diamond.
A number of things set it apart - for one it wasn't a First Person Shooter, it was an FPP (first
person puzzler). Puzzle games until then had largely been restricted to 2D, with no real story to
speak of. Portal showed us unique puzzle situations with a deep and often darkly humorous story,
and a good game mechanic which was well realised. The way the game plays is simple enough, one
trigger puts up one portal, the other trigger, a second portal. You can travel between the two. And
that's it, but I can't explain in words how intricate this game mechanic makes Portal. It sounds
simple, but when you take into account that you can use portals to redirect missiles, take objects
through to use elsewhere, and that momentum and gravity are unaffected by portals, then the game
becomes much more rich and rewarding.
Portal: Still Alive, is a hard one to figure out. To be brutally honest, it's a mutilated version
of the original. There are puzzles I remember that are cut out (perhaps to fit the XBox Live Arcade
maximum size limit). So you get the feel for what the game is, and you get a good taste for the
puzzle element, and most of the story is here in tact. There are no new story bits that I noticed,
but some of the puzzles themselves seemed to have small additions or twists I don't remember from
first time around.
There are extra and new test chambers (puzzles) to be done individually (i.e. not featuring any of
the classic Glados chatter or story). These are simply puzzles and that's it. So I found myself
asking - what is this? It's not a prequel or a sequel, and it's not a remake, because a remake
would warrant extra and updated content. It's more like a dowloadable content pack for Portal. But
it included most of the original game so the only real extras if this were classed as DLC, would be
the 20 or so extra puzzles, and if I paid over 5 quid for 20 short enough puzzles, even for what
was and is one of the greatest games of all time, I'd cry blood. I'd want more than that for
DLC!
But as it stands, Portal: Still Alive is not DLC, it's standalone Arcade game. So where does that
leave my opinion? I love the original Portal, but for this review, I just had to play a bastardized
version of the game I love. Why would I play this game? For the extra puzzles? I want more of the
excellent story! For the achievements? It's a bit lame to be buying something you already completed
just to get extra points (or just to be able to say "rub it up ye, Paddy, I gots more points than
u!") There are also modes where you have to do each test using only a set amount of portals or
footsteps but really, could you be arsed if you've already done them?
I seem to be giving this game a bollocking so far, but the best way I would recommend this game,
and this is the important part of this review, this is what I want you to remember - If, AND ONLY
IF, you have never played, and have no intention of ever paying for and playing, the full Orange
Box package, Portal included, then you owe it to yourself to get this. This will probably be the
case if you don't like first person shooters much. And that's fair enough, but Portal is not a
first person shooter, not at all. The rest of the Orage Box however, is. And if indeed you are that
small minority that doesn't like shooting the christ out of anything that moves, then you should
opt for Portal: Still Alive on the Arcade.
It is a great game, even in this slimmed down arcade version, and if you are not a FPS fan, there's
no point going for the full Orange Box, take this and enjoy it, because although it's not a
complete version, it's enough to show you how awesome the world of Portal is, and you will get
almost as much as enjoyment out of this version as the original.
Scores:
En
juillet, Red Hat annoncé son intention de remplacer rhgb par Plymouth,
un nouveau processus de démarrage graphique qui est capable de tirer profit des toutes
dernières capacités graphiques de Linux. La grande nouveauté tient dans
l’utilisation du kernel mode-setting. C’est-à-dire que la
configuration graphique est réalisée par le noyau et non par Xorg. Au boot, la
configuration graphique est chargé pendant l’initialisation du système de disque
RAM (initrd).
La version actuelle de Plymouth est la 0.6.0. Son développement a débuté en mai
2007 et il est effectué sous la coupe de Ray Strode. Toutefois, ce projet n’était
pas très soutenu jusqu’au début de cette année ou la décision
d’introduire Plymouth dans Fedora 10, a remis un coup de pompe au
développement et il est maintenant en plein essor. Plymouth a son code hébergé sur
le serveur Git de FreeDesktop.org. Attention il est important de préciser que Plymouth
n’est pas une solution qui peut être construite ou empaquetée pour votre
distribution, mais qu’elle nécessite une intégration pleinement
maîtrisée dans celle-ci. Toutefois, depuis que le Kernel mode-settings est présent
dans la branche principale du noyau Linux, on verra sans aucun doute d’autres distributions
utiliser Plymouth et développer leur propre interface de démarrage.
Vous l’aurez donc compris, Plymouth propose un certain nombre de plug-ins et d’API
pour créer des effets visuels unique ce qui va ravir les artistes et les développeurs
qui vont pouvoir se lâcher. Il existe un cahier des charges
sur Launchpad qui va permettre d’évaluer l’intégration de Plymouth dans
Ubuntu dans le cadre du projet de remplacement de USplash. Matthew Paul Thomas de Canonical a confirmé sur la liste de diffusion des devs
que l’avenir de Plymouth dans Ubuntu sera également discuté lors du Ubuntu
Developer Summit (UDS) qui aura lieu début décembre.
Il serait certainement intéressant de voir Ubuntu passer à Plymouth.
Si aucun doute ne plane sur le fait que l’intégration de Plymouth ne pourra pas
être effective dans Ubuntu 9.04, il serait néanmoins intéressant
que le noyau Linux 2.6.29 soit intégré afin de bénéficier du
support du nécessaire Kernel mode-setting et ainsi pouvoir commencer à travailler sur
le sujet dans le cas d’une intégration future. Fedora 10 est la seule distribution
stable à l’heure ou ce billet est écrit qui utilise Plymouth.
img width='1' height='1' src='http://rss.feedsportal.com/c/623/f/8165/s/27d0d82/mf.gif'
border='0'/div class='mf-viral'table border='0'trtd valign='middle'a
href="http://res.feedsportal.com/viral/sendemail2_fr.html?title=Gemalto : Gemalto confirme son
intention de ne pas
releve...link=http://www.abcbourse.com/Marches/news_content.aspx?id=135242s=GTOp"
target="_blank"img src="http://rss.feedsportal.com/images/partagez.gif" border="0" //a/tdtd
valign='middle'a href="http://res.feedsportal.com/viral/bookmark_fr.cfm?title=Gemalto : Gemalto
confirme son intention de ne pas
releve...link=http://www.abcbourse.com/Marches/news_content.aspx?id=135242s=GTOp"
target="_blank"img src="http://rss.feedsportal.com/images/bookmark.gif" border="0"
//a/td/tr/table/divbr/br/a
href="http://da.feedsportal.com/r/25853514122/u/89/f/8165/c/623/s/41749890/a2.htm"img
src="http://da.feedsportal.com/r/25853514122/u/89/f/8165/c/623/s/41749890/a2.img" border="0"//a
)
and reject those that you are not interested in
(
)
if you have the Orange Box
if you haven't
Billet original de 