CaptMurdock
Apr 10, 11:24 AM
I believe the crucial difference is that you believe when government taxes and spends the money on a service, it's better than not taxing at all.
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/CaptMurdock/scarecrow_argument.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/CaptMurdock/scarecrow_argument.jpg
appleguy
Jan 6, 10:01 PM
go to the friends tab within facebook and within, there is a 'sync' tab on the top right of the page. Hope that helps.
Gibson424
Apr 5, 03:36 PM
Check it out, somebody snapped a photo of their iPhone 3G in an old clear plastic case. That's fun. :p
macguy78
Mar 29, 11:03 AM
sold! Picked up my first ipad, 1st gen 32GB version on friday from the local VZ store. I was planning to purchase the 2nd gen but the math makes this deal too good to pass up. :)
more...
robbieduncan
Mar 29, 03:06 AM
I don't think that's true. I pretty much know it's not actually.
Shooting a 50mm on a 5d will produce a focal length of 50mm and a Field of view of 50mm. (50x1+50)
Shooting a 50mm on a 7d will produce a focal length of of 50mm and a field of view of 80mm. (50x1.6=80)
I didn't say on different cameras. I said different lenses on the same, crop, camera.
This is not correct.
A EF-s 50 mm lens is 50 mm on a 1.6 camera. A 50mm EF lens on that same camera is similar in image to a 80mm EF-S lens. The reason for the difference comes into play by the amount of the lens the camera is using to record the image and the proximity of the rear element to the camera sensor.
Look. I own a 7D. I own an EF-s 17-85mm IS USM. I own a EF 50mm prime. I know that if I set the zoom to 50mm and take the same shot as with the prime exact same field of view. EF-s lenses are not corrected for the crop in the way you are saying they are.
Shooting a 50mm on a 5d will produce a focal length of 50mm and a Field of view of 50mm. (50x1+50)
Shooting a 50mm on a 7d will produce a focal length of of 50mm and a field of view of 80mm. (50x1.6=80)
I didn't say on different cameras. I said different lenses on the same, crop, camera.
This is not correct.
A EF-s 50 mm lens is 50 mm on a 1.6 camera. A 50mm EF lens on that same camera is similar in image to a 80mm EF-S lens. The reason for the difference comes into play by the amount of the lens the camera is using to record the image and the proximity of the rear element to the camera sensor.
Look. I own a 7D. I own an EF-s 17-85mm IS USM. I own a EF 50mm prime. I know that if I set the zoom to 50mm and take the same shot as with the prime exact same field of view. EF-s lenses are not corrected for the crop in the way you are saying they are.
rshullic
Jul 14, 01:40 PM
Sort of.
Lets separate reading and writing exFAT. If I can read it, I can pull stuff off of it. So OS X will require the ability to read exFAT in order to make it compatible with non apple devices that will be using this format. HOWEVER, it is not required that Apple choose to read exFAT. You could format with HFS+. Then any device that can read HFS+ could read and write to it.
If I can write to exFAT, then I can place data (even 4GB+ media files) on the card. Apple may create a driver that allows you to read exFAT but not write to it.
This matters if you are going to use the card to store media files (4 GB+), or are planning on using the card with non Apple devices. I could get a 128 GB SDXC card, format 100 GB in FAT32 for a user directory, and format 3 8GB swap spaces (one for OS X, one for Windows, and one for Unix). Then I'd have my user files and swap space with me wherever I go, and it would be cross platform compatible (everyone reads and writes FAT32). Yes, FAT32 does have a maximum partition size, this is why I used a 128 GB SDXC card as the example. And yes, I wouldn't have my media files (movies) on the card (I'd need one of the 2 TB cards to do this).
Since Pretec is selling an ExpressCard SDXC reader, this is what I plan to do with my triple boot MBP (see sig). I'll point my OS X user directory to the directory that will be on this card, I'll do the same for Win7, and BackTrack. Each OS will also have swap space on the card. This increases security too. If I have my SDXC card with me, someone using the laptop can't see my files at all. It also increases speed (maybe and a little) because I'm using a different storage device and bus to put my user files/swap space on.
Let's take a closer look at what we have here.
For references we have: http://www.sans.org/reading_room/whitepapers/forensics/reverse-engineering-microsoft-exfat-file-system_33274 and the blog rshullic.wordpress.com
First, the SDXC card is set to be exclusively exFAT. You may be able to format the card as FAT32, or HFS or NTFS as FAT32 can be formatted to 2TB although you can't use Microsoft utilities to do so. Microsoft will read a 2TB FAT32 file system and write to it, they just won't let you create anything over 32GB. If you want to use the SDXC card exclusively with the Mac, then you could format the card with almost any file system. I have formated a 256MB (yes MB, it is SD Version 1.00) SD card as exFAT. But put that card with exFAT into a camera, like the Panasonic Lumix which has SDXC support, and it says that the card is not formatted properly and won't let you use the card until you reformat it. A SD card is speced for FAT, a SDHC card is speced for FAT32 and a SDXC card is speced for exFAT, and some camera manufacturers enforce the proper file system. So, if you intend to use the sdxc in a camera or a phone or other consumer device, formatting it as anything other than exFAT may not be an option.
And Apple might need to license exFAT just to read it even if not to write. (might need, I don't really know as there are now forensics tols that read exfat but I don't think those guys are licensing it, maybe read only is ok and doesn't violate licensing agreements?)
The SDXC card actually begins at 48GB, which is the equivalent of a dual layer Blu-Ray disc. I have seen 48GB and 64GB so far, and the 64GB (at a low i/o speed) can be gotten at amazon for about $200. But the card are running in the $350-$600 range with speeds claimed to be 30MBs (that is mega-bytes per second) so it will be a while for the prices to come down and the speeds to increase near the SD 3.0 level of 104 MBs, let alone the SD 4.00 spec of 300 MBs.
Lets separate reading and writing exFAT. If I can read it, I can pull stuff off of it. So OS X will require the ability to read exFAT in order to make it compatible with non apple devices that will be using this format. HOWEVER, it is not required that Apple choose to read exFAT. You could format with HFS+. Then any device that can read HFS+ could read and write to it.
If I can write to exFAT, then I can place data (even 4GB+ media files) on the card. Apple may create a driver that allows you to read exFAT but not write to it.
This matters if you are going to use the card to store media files (4 GB+), or are planning on using the card with non Apple devices. I could get a 128 GB SDXC card, format 100 GB in FAT32 for a user directory, and format 3 8GB swap spaces (one for OS X, one for Windows, and one for Unix). Then I'd have my user files and swap space with me wherever I go, and it would be cross platform compatible (everyone reads and writes FAT32). Yes, FAT32 does have a maximum partition size, this is why I used a 128 GB SDXC card as the example. And yes, I wouldn't have my media files (movies) on the card (I'd need one of the 2 TB cards to do this).
Since Pretec is selling an ExpressCard SDXC reader, this is what I plan to do with my triple boot MBP (see sig). I'll point my OS X user directory to the directory that will be on this card, I'll do the same for Win7, and BackTrack. Each OS will also have swap space on the card. This increases security too. If I have my SDXC card with me, someone using the laptop can't see my files at all. It also increases speed (maybe and a little) because I'm using a different storage device and bus to put my user files/swap space on.
Let's take a closer look at what we have here.
For references we have: http://www.sans.org/reading_room/whitepapers/forensics/reverse-engineering-microsoft-exfat-file-system_33274 and the blog rshullic.wordpress.com
First, the SDXC card is set to be exclusively exFAT. You may be able to format the card as FAT32, or HFS or NTFS as FAT32 can be formatted to 2TB although you can't use Microsoft utilities to do so. Microsoft will read a 2TB FAT32 file system and write to it, they just won't let you create anything over 32GB. If you want to use the SDXC card exclusively with the Mac, then you could format the card with almost any file system. I have formated a 256MB (yes MB, it is SD Version 1.00) SD card as exFAT. But put that card with exFAT into a camera, like the Panasonic Lumix which has SDXC support, and it says that the card is not formatted properly and won't let you use the card until you reformat it. A SD card is speced for FAT, a SDHC card is speced for FAT32 and a SDXC card is speced for exFAT, and some camera manufacturers enforce the proper file system. So, if you intend to use the sdxc in a camera or a phone or other consumer device, formatting it as anything other than exFAT may not be an option.
And Apple might need to license exFAT just to read it even if not to write. (might need, I don't really know as there are now forensics tols that read exfat but I don't think those guys are licensing it, maybe read only is ok and doesn't violate licensing agreements?)
The SDXC card actually begins at 48GB, which is the equivalent of a dual layer Blu-Ray disc. I have seen 48GB and 64GB so far, and the 64GB (at a low i/o speed) can be gotten at amazon for about $200. But the card are running in the $350-$600 range with speeds claimed to be 30MBs (that is mega-bytes per second) so it will be a while for the prices to come down and the speeds to increase near the SD 3.0 level of 104 MBs, let alone the SD 4.00 spec of 300 MBs.
more...
verozov
Sep 6, 09:08 PM
hilarious, seriously...
aiqw9182
Apr 5, 11:36 PM
It certainly isn't useless, it's designed so you can get high-quality stereo audio through it. You can't do that with a mic socket, the power in the socket for the mic can affect the sound quality, it causes a buzz. If you want high quality audio get a USB headset or a USB/FW microphone preamp. For the majority the iPhone headphones/mic or the built-in mic work just fine. Why do you need support for PC-style headsets?
Anyone doing serious recording through a 1/8 jack needs their head examined. The jack is useless in its current state. Why do I need support for 'PC style' headsets? Well for one there are a ton of new high quality headsets I could choose from and for two I could have a free USB port. The headphones that support the audio out microphone capability are either expensive as hell or not good for long periods of time.
Anyone doing serious recording through a 1/8 jack needs their head examined. The jack is useless in its current state. Why do I need support for 'PC style' headsets? Well for one there are a ton of new high quality headsets I could choose from and for two I could have a free USB port. The headphones that support the audio out microphone capability are either expensive as hell or not good for long periods of time.
more...
Michael CM1
Jun 21, 12:45 AM
Thanks for all the input.
I honestly haven't played much of the games some of you listed as platform-specific. I bought a Wii because of the virtual console games from old systems and the Zelda: Twilight Princess game available at launch. It was also $250 at the time versus like $400 and $600. I like a lot of the games I have bought for it, but damned EA Sports and it's awful NCAA Football attempt.
I think I like FPS games, but it of course depends on which one. I've heard a lot about Halo being good. I remember David Pollack talking about playing that with his roommates when he was at UGA. I think that was in the Halo 2 days. I liked playing Half-Life in college on our network, but I didn't play much of the story. SOCOM: US Navy SEALs was pretty awesome on the PS2, but I got stuck at a couple of parts on it.
As I said, I heard about a Magic: The Gathering game on 360 that sounds interesting. In my PC days, there was an online PC version of that game that I enjoyed a bit.
Someone may need to explain the point of such big hard disks to me on the 360 and PS3. I know you can download movies and such, but I'm still a disc whore/Apple whore. I've got a lot of BDs and DVDs that I use, plus I plan on getting an Apple TV whenever Steve-o decides to update it. I watch a TON of my DVDs ripped to my computer. The Wii has storage space mostly for saves and VC games. I have a 4GB SD card in there, which is way more than I need. See I'd buy the $250 system with two free games if not for the insanity of $90 for a WiFi adapter. My Wii has WiFi built in and costs $200 now. Microsoft, c'mon.
One last thing probably is system reliability. I've had a Wii since launch with no problems. I bought a PS2 before the slimming and it stopped playing stuff effectively, which forced me to buy a Slim. I don't know anybody who owned a PS2 who didn't have to do that. Consider me wary of Sony because of that, just this time the hardware has cost twice as much. I have two BD players. Yeah, it would be neat to have a newer one to replace my pre-Netflix streaming system that loads a little slow, but it still plays mostly fine. I've got another much better BD player, both of these Samsungs, and it's kick-ass.
Thanks again for the info. My only hangup right now on deciding on a 360 is the stinkin' Live Gold card. At least I don't have to buy that upfront. Oh yeah, I also don't want to see Tim Tebow's stupid face on NCAA Football for the next year. I would pay $100 for the game if I could get anybody on the cover but that douche. Unfortunately, even a replaced cover won't cover up the art in the game. AUGGH.
I honestly haven't played much of the games some of you listed as platform-specific. I bought a Wii because of the virtual console games from old systems and the Zelda: Twilight Princess game available at launch. It was also $250 at the time versus like $400 and $600. I like a lot of the games I have bought for it, but damned EA Sports and it's awful NCAA Football attempt.
I think I like FPS games, but it of course depends on which one. I've heard a lot about Halo being good. I remember David Pollack talking about playing that with his roommates when he was at UGA. I think that was in the Halo 2 days. I liked playing Half-Life in college on our network, but I didn't play much of the story. SOCOM: US Navy SEALs was pretty awesome on the PS2, but I got stuck at a couple of parts on it.
As I said, I heard about a Magic: The Gathering game on 360 that sounds interesting. In my PC days, there was an online PC version of that game that I enjoyed a bit.
Someone may need to explain the point of such big hard disks to me on the 360 and PS3. I know you can download movies and such, but I'm still a disc whore/Apple whore. I've got a lot of BDs and DVDs that I use, plus I plan on getting an Apple TV whenever Steve-o decides to update it. I watch a TON of my DVDs ripped to my computer. The Wii has storage space mostly for saves and VC games. I have a 4GB SD card in there, which is way more than I need. See I'd buy the $250 system with two free games if not for the insanity of $90 for a WiFi adapter. My Wii has WiFi built in and costs $200 now. Microsoft, c'mon.
One last thing probably is system reliability. I've had a Wii since launch with no problems. I bought a PS2 before the slimming and it stopped playing stuff effectively, which forced me to buy a Slim. I don't know anybody who owned a PS2 who didn't have to do that. Consider me wary of Sony because of that, just this time the hardware has cost twice as much. I have two BD players. Yeah, it would be neat to have a newer one to replace my pre-Netflix streaming system that loads a little slow, but it still plays mostly fine. I've got another much better BD player, both of these Samsungs, and it's kick-ass.
Thanks again for the info. My only hangup right now on deciding on a 360 is the stinkin' Live Gold card. At least I don't have to buy that upfront. Oh yeah, I also don't want to see Tim Tebow's stupid face on NCAA Football for the next year. I would pay $100 for the game if I could get anybody on the cover but that douche. Unfortunately, even a replaced cover won't cover up the art in the game. AUGGH.
DaveGee
Apr 16, 03:48 PM
And hopefully Fiore will do a cartoon about it :p ... well maybe not, his app could be banned again :eek:
Yea unless he's awarded another Pulitzer that is... :rolleyes:
Apple is really disgusting me with this $#*(%&*( behavior. They really need to completely reevaluate their criteria and make it CRYSTAL EFFING CLEAR what IS and was IS NOT acceptable and then stand by it. None of this 'reject Google Voice because it duplicates functionality' and then 'approve the Opera web browser'. Reject an APP because it 'ridicules public figures' and then plead that the author to resubmit it once he's awarded a Pulitzer...
This wishy washy crap is really showing everyone just how UNDERHANDED they treat the whole process.
Yea unless he's awarded another Pulitzer that is... :rolleyes:
Apple is really disgusting me with this $#*(%&*( behavior. They really need to completely reevaluate their criteria and make it CRYSTAL EFFING CLEAR what IS and was IS NOT acceptable and then stand by it. None of this 'reject Google Voice because it duplicates functionality' and then 'approve the Opera web browser'. Reject an APP because it 'ridicules public figures' and then plead that the author to resubmit it once he's awarded a Pulitzer...
This wishy washy crap is really showing everyone just how UNDERHANDED they treat the whole process.
more...
bearbo
Oct 10, 03:19 PM
do you think these updated macbooks will have a true video card and not an intergrated one? :confused:
I'd assume still an integrated one? no evident, just a feeling... i just don't see apple to upgrade macbook that much yet.. i mean, it was updated a lot from ibook so..
I'd assume still an integrated one? no evident, just a feeling... i just don't see apple to upgrade macbook that much yet.. i mean, it was updated a lot from ibook so..
zMudvayne
Apr 30, 12:19 PM
So, how long does GameStop take to send the beta code? I just preordered... wish I could start the download while I'm waiting for the code...
more...
JoEw
Aug 20, 01:47 PM
horrible facebook update can't login and when i was able to log in i was not able to to view any of my messages.
i guess it's touch.facebook.com until they can fix.
i guess it's touch.facebook.com until they can fix.
vettori
Apr 19, 10:06 AM
This task switcher is nice but probably Apple used the icons (option 2 or 2222?) because they're more recognizable than some little screenshot to decide which app to open.
more...
netdog
Oct 27, 03:07 AM
It is surely embarrassing for Apple that a 3rd party developer can write an app that will download and upload from the iDisk far faster than their own Finder.
If I'm going to iDisk, I use Transmit. Otherwise it's not worth it.
I'm in no hurry. Would rather not buy Transmit. iDisk is incredibly slow, but no skin off my back (I don't use it too much). Interesting to learn that it is the application, and not something inherently sluggish on the host end.
If I'm going to iDisk, I use Transmit. Otherwise it's not worth it.
I'm in no hurry. Would rather not buy Transmit. iDisk is incredibly slow, but no skin off my back (I don't use it too much). Interesting to learn that it is the application, and not something inherently sluggish on the host end.
ShiftClick
Apr 24, 12:30 AM
1) 4G
2) USB 3.0
3) Thunderbolt
4) up to 8GB ram option
Mainly 1 and 2 but 3 and 4 would be nice as well. Don't give a hoot about BL keyboards. I always turn it off as it sucks power.
2) USB 3.0
3) Thunderbolt
4) up to 8GB ram option
Mainly 1 and 2 but 3 and 4 would be nice as well. Don't give a hoot about BL keyboards. I always turn it off as it sucks power.
more...
BladeJB343
Apr 20, 06:32 PM
Multifl0w is one of my favorite, if not my no.1 jailbreak app.
Here's hoping that the next iOS has Expose built in.
Here's hoping that the next iOS has Expose built in.
wasimyaqoob
Oct 27, 02:29 AM
Looks amazing, Worth it i think. Already been a member for 3+ years :)
pmz
Aug 19, 11:35 AM
If you use this, you're an idiot. Plain and simple. No debate or discussion.
logandzwon
Feb 25, 07:58 AM
It looks to me they ARE basically killing server...
From what I see they are migrating the server features they've built in the past into an optional module for the base OS. (like Ubuntu vs Ubuntu Server, server is just additional software.)
From what I see they are migrating the server features they've built in the past into an optional module for the base OS. (like Ubuntu vs Ubuntu Server, server is just additional software.)
boch82
Apr 27, 12:50 PM
Mpeg stream clip was exactly what i was looking for.
What are your recommendations for exorting?
I will be editing in Final Cut. I just want high quality video as the main importance but keeping the file sizes to a minimum.
Thanks
Final Cut Pro - ProRes LT highest quality settings unscaled size option
Final Cut Express - Apple Intermediate Codec highest quality settings unscaled size option
What are your recommendations for exorting?
I will be editing in Final Cut. I just want high quality video as the main importance but keeping the file sizes to a minimum.
Thanks
Final Cut Pro - ProRes LT highest quality settings unscaled size option
Final Cut Express - Apple Intermediate Codec highest quality settings unscaled size option
solvs
Sep 16, 12:33 AM
Originally posted by fourthtunz
Sounds like your not using X.2 or a New Mac.
Why do you waste your time on here?
Again, find a better deal than the New dual 867 on the Pc side, I'll buy it.
Daniel
I was speaking mostly of what others see when comparing. Believe it or not it, matters. True, numbers don't mean that much. It's all about the real-world performance. But you know what? Apple gets their butt kicked most of the time. You can quote benchmarks all you want, and for light stuff who cares? But for the hardcore stuff, Macs need to be faster and cheaper. That's all there is to it. They want to entice more Audio/Video/Image editing people, that's what they're gonna have to do.
Why is it anytime anyone critizes the Mac, they are automatically written off as trolls? Are you just going to accept whatever Apple does? They aren't perfect you know (though they do seem that way next to a PC). I've had many, many computers. Several of them were Apples. My 6400 was slow as molasess and froze all the time, but it got the job done (most of the time). I've since sold off or given away all but a custom built AMD running Windows 2000. I would have had a new G4 Tower, but my project lost funding and now I'm moving.
For the record, after I get settled in the new place, I was going to get an iBook and a Tower later (or a new PowerBook maybe). Why you ask? Because video editing in Windows sux. But it still bothers me that a very fast computer I built for a very small amount of money bests a $3,000 "SuperComputer". I'd rather use FCP (I've played with it, it's nice) instead of Premier. And OS X instead of Windows (any version, don't get me started on why XP sux so much).
But not all of us can always afford a Lexus when a Toyota will work just fine (notice I didn't say Kia or something. I didn't buy a Gateway).
Don't get me wrong, I'm actually happy with the 167 FSB, the large drive support, the dual CD Drives, etc. The Dual 1.25s look pretty zippy. But compare it to a PC (don't fool yourself, people do. Don't just tell them to buy a PC if they don't like it, cuz you know what, that's exactly what they do), it doesn't look so good. Apple is a business. WinTels are their competitors. We all have to recognize this. Apple has to keep up to stay alive in the long run.
I'd rather have a Mac, but don't fool yourself. You can build a really nice PC for less than $2,000 (with plenty of basic software that helps you crash Windows even faster) that blows the $3,000+ machines out of the water. You get a nice, out of the box experiance with OS X.2, but is it worth it for the higher price and slower performance. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I'm just so tired of PC weenies saying Macs are all style, no substance. And like many computer users who actually use their computers, I'm torn. Speed and price, or style and stability?
Only when Real-Time is really Real-Time, only then will I be truly happy.
Sounds like your not using X.2 or a New Mac.
Why do you waste your time on here?
Again, find a better deal than the New dual 867 on the Pc side, I'll buy it.
Daniel
I was speaking mostly of what others see when comparing. Believe it or not it, matters. True, numbers don't mean that much. It's all about the real-world performance. But you know what? Apple gets their butt kicked most of the time. You can quote benchmarks all you want, and for light stuff who cares? But for the hardcore stuff, Macs need to be faster and cheaper. That's all there is to it. They want to entice more Audio/Video/Image editing people, that's what they're gonna have to do.
Why is it anytime anyone critizes the Mac, they are automatically written off as trolls? Are you just going to accept whatever Apple does? They aren't perfect you know (though they do seem that way next to a PC). I've had many, many computers. Several of them were Apples. My 6400 was slow as molasess and froze all the time, but it got the job done (most of the time). I've since sold off or given away all but a custom built AMD running Windows 2000. I would have had a new G4 Tower, but my project lost funding and now I'm moving.
For the record, after I get settled in the new place, I was going to get an iBook and a Tower later (or a new PowerBook maybe). Why you ask? Because video editing in Windows sux. But it still bothers me that a very fast computer I built for a very small amount of money bests a $3,000 "SuperComputer". I'd rather use FCP (I've played with it, it's nice) instead of Premier. And OS X instead of Windows (any version, don't get me started on why XP sux so much).
But not all of us can always afford a Lexus when a Toyota will work just fine (notice I didn't say Kia or something. I didn't buy a Gateway).
Don't get me wrong, I'm actually happy with the 167 FSB, the large drive support, the dual CD Drives, etc. The Dual 1.25s look pretty zippy. But compare it to a PC (don't fool yourself, people do. Don't just tell them to buy a PC if they don't like it, cuz you know what, that's exactly what they do), it doesn't look so good. Apple is a business. WinTels are their competitors. We all have to recognize this. Apple has to keep up to stay alive in the long run.
I'd rather have a Mac, but don't fool yourself. You can build a really nice PC for less than $2,000 (with plenty of basic software that helps you crash Windows even faster) that blows the $3,000+ machines out of the water. You get a nice, out of the box experiance with OS X.2, but is it worth it for the higher price and slower performance. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I'm just so tired of PC weenies saying Macs are all style, no substance. And like many computer users who actually use their computers, I'm torn. Speed and price, or style and stability?
Only when Real-Time is really Real-Time, only then will I be truly happy.
WillEH
Apr 27, 06:41 PM
I'm embarrassed for him at the moment, for the way he's acting like a spolit 10 year old kid, going on about Obama's birth certificate and college degrees. Has he got nothing better to do?
dernhelm
Apr 5, 11:34 AM
I'm sorry you didn't understand me. I really am and didn't mean to insult you.
But I didn't put a smiley because it wasn't really all that sarcastic. It was a pretty straighforward comment about how Macrumors posters are temperamental and sometimes hypocritical.
Including yourself?
:D
But I didn't put a smiley because it wasn't really all that sarcastic. It was a pretty straighforward comment about how Macrumors posters are temperamental and sometimes hypocritical.
Including yourself?
:D
