On 2008-08-03 18:04:46 -0400, mrbrklyn <spam-killer@nylxs.com> said: On Aug 3, 4:46 pm, Phil <p...@nomail.com> wrote: On 2008-08-03 16:07:33 -0400, mrbrklyn <spam-kil...@nylxs.com> said: Not true. The private sexual deviant behaviors are core prognostigators to potential serial killers, child abusers, and more. In addition, they are responsible for much of the child sex
On 2008-08-03 16:07:33 -0400, mrbrklyn <spam-killer@nylxs.com> said: Not true. The private sexual deviant behaviors are core prognostigators to potential serial killers, child abusers, and more. In addition, they are responsible for much of the child sex trade of South East Asia. And thats before we get into prostitution, and more. Perhaps the single most utter piece of bullshit
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 07:38:23PM +0200, Markus wrote: Good evening, I'm setting off for writing prototype code for an imaging application. For this reason, I'm in need of an extremely fast way to transport large amounts of UDP data to a userland application. A socket implementation does not perform very well, which is the reason why I'm looking for a better solution
On 28 Feb., 15:28, Bernhard Agthe <dark2s...@gmx.net> wrote: Hi, we had the "portable Application" Discussion a few days back. This concept is a completely Windows one, as the problems to overcome are Windows ones. On any Unix variant (which Linux is) you are not even guaranteed that the user will use the same Operating System. Your application may be run on Ubuntu Linux as
>> No, per un semplice motivo: l'immagine proiettata non è più piccola perché l'ottica è più vicina (come dicevi te) ma proprio perché il diametro totale del vetro è più piccolo, e fisicamente ha quella copertura. E' proprio una differenza di progettazione, ma *non* dipende dalla distanza specchio/fondo dell'ottica. vabbè...ma non vale bluffare ! Come no? Così ci sono più
