Alot of servers have at least one built in video output head but if it’s an older device you might need to look for an HD15 VGA port… Some servers might have had some sort of micro port or proprietary port/dongle setup as well. Might refer to the documentation for the chassis/motherboard first… It’s possible you have what you need already.
This is the way… Setup and then open a terminal and then boot the machine… Helps to have console output logged on the host machine so you can review everything after… Some boot sequences can be tens of thousands of lines long on complex machines.
This is the silliest shit I’ve ever discussed on the Internet. I will say kudos to you for keeping things mostly amicable. It’s been awhile since I’ve had an argument on topicality and it’s been entertaining for me. Thanks my friend, best wishes.
Velocity is not suggestive because it is defined as speed in a direction.
In your example you are only taking speed, assuming direction and stating velocity.
That’s not how legal systems work… Plenty of things are legal in one place and illegal in another. No Christians are worried about blasphemy against Zeus or Jupiter. Like wise a Zoroastrian is only concerned about blasphemy against Ahura Mazda and not Allah.
Okay… Which one? It’s pretty clear that decaffeinated coffee violates no religions that I’m aware of… And in fact for some religions would be the only allowable way to drink coffee. And if you argue that I just meant in general that it is a slight on to any God then how would you interpret that as anything other than humor or sarcasm?
Do you always feel like a victim or is it just when you aren’t caffeinated enough?
Opinions, such as “all methods of decaffeinating coffee are blasphemy” are subjective in their very nature. What makes this more obvious is that the definition of blasphemy is entirely subjective and can’t even begin to be assessed objectively until at very minimum a religious dogma is declared for the basis of evaluation.
That’s because words on their own all have definitions. The subjectivity is created contextually. I swear it feels like I’m talking to a bot.
How do you gather? You think there isn’t many ways to decaffeinate beans or that some of them aren’t gross? Or that most ways used to decaffeinate beans doesn’t make the coffee taste bad?
These are the very points James makes in the first 2/3rds of the video.
The only point that he and I might delaminate on was that all decaf is blasphemous, and that’s a stretch because he never talks about the religious criminality of drinking coffee?
Why do you think I would offer a video to people about decaf that I didn’t watch? Hint: I don’t hate decaf coffee.
Yikes this is getting drawn out and silly, eh. I’ll save us some time.
You win.
But one thing that I couldn’t help but chuckle at is your interpretation of the coffee capitol point.
You live in a hockey capitol. That doesn’t make you an expert, but I bet if you wanted to buy a hockey stick you would have a number of stores carrying top gear… If you wanted to see a game you probably have a number of hockey teams from pro to amateur you could go watch live.
I have direct access to three of the top 20 roasters in the country. I’m fortunate to have access to some of the best coffee in the world regardless if I’m an expert or not.
And this is sort of the point overall… You added so much of your own arguments to my position that you aren’t even arguing with me or the points that I’m making.
I’m not hiding behind subjectivity, I was the one who posted the video “negating” my so called “opinions”. You still think I did that as a mistake. Which I think is the second example that shows you are coming to this discussion in bad faith.
It’s no wonder you recommend introspection, given you have been arguing only with your interpretation of my opinion.
I’m a huge fan of James Hoffman… I don’t think anyone alive understands coffee better than he does.
I live in a US Coffee Capital…
I make brilliant decaf for my pregnant wife.
My preparation is flawless in drip and espresso
You guys really don’t understand subjectivity or sarcasm and are filling in a ton of the blanks.
No no, that was the only reasonable part. Everything else wrapping that was absurd though.
That’s the funny thing about subjectivity right?
That’s some top shelf stretching there.
There are many ways to decaffeinate a coffee bean… Some more gross than others… All of them blasphemy.
And yes most of them ruin the taste of coffee.
Also it’s obvious you have seen this already. https://youtu.be/yYTSdlOdkn0?si=6Z1RlexQCt2I4OI9
I mean you could always substitute a witch if you are unable to source the live duck…
I never said we invaded for that reason… I said that Iraq had produced WMDs in the past. Which was a well known fact. They also had pursued a nuclear weapons program in the past as well. This is why the falsified intelligence that lead to the 2003 invasion wasn’t farfetched… It’s not as simple as saying well it was a falsified report that led us to invade. It was bad tradecraft to assume that one Iraqi insiders report was all that was leveraged with no confirming Intel reporting of any kind from secondary sources. There was certainly also a level of political expediency that is also impossible to ignore if you are an honest person. Lots of politicians making the decision did seem to be a lot richer after that decision than before it…
But it’s nothing more than just really bad tradecraft on behalf of the Intel community. The report itself simply wasn’t farfetched enough to be dismissed as a lie.
And if you reread my original reply just a little more closely, I already said that while the poster was clearly trying to say that we entered Iraq for stupid reasons… He didn’t say that… He was implying Iraq didn’t have WMDs. Which is just purely false. They have some of the most deadly chemical weapons ever produced.
I don’t really care what you could or couldn’t find because I’m not giving you a report of something I read. I spent more than a year living in the Salah Ad Din province of Iraq. Im giving you facts as a first hand expert on this subject, you can chose to educate yourself or ignore me… It makes no difference to me either way.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28222879
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/07/11/isis-chemical-biological-weapons/
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/world/middleeast/isis-chemical-weapons-syria-iraq-mosul.html
https://www.chds.us/ed/resources/uploads/2010/05/2017_UAPI_Summit_Almemar_ISIS.pdf
https://public.websites.umich.edu/~graceyor/govdocs/pdf/duelfer3_bb.pdf
I’m sure you are probably trying to be critical about the weak intelligence that took us into Iraq in 2003… But you have just dove face first into the stupid end of the pool here bud.
It’s a very well documented fact that Iraq produced shit tons of WMD… The vast majority of it being stored still at the Muthanna Chemical Complex (MCC) which was relatively recently seized by ISIS a few years back… Many of which died after becoming exposed to the various chemical weapons that are still there, improperly stored, and leaking all over the environment…
It’s never been false that Iraq had WMDs… What was false was that they had begun producing them again. It wasn’t as farfetched as you are trying to make it seem.
No chance… The taint stain wipe industry lobbyists are way to powerful and far to rich to let something like that slide…
Oh fantastic, sorry if I missed that detail in the original post. Thought you might have had an old eBay blade server or something. Hope you got it working!