I'm an American, though no supporter of our current regime, er, dictatorship, er, democracy, er, form of government... I think Australians should rally against this - it's total BS. (Oh, wait, is that incitement? Oops - I didn't say that, then.)
But I'm curious: after the US decides he's served his time, is he simply sent back home to Australia? Does the US pay for his flight? Is he kicked out onto the street and told to find his own way home? What happens when he's done with his jail time?
I think they're all a bunch of scallawags, and don't you dare call me a Clinton apologist, but there's that little matter of the Republican-controlled Congress and their never-ending quest for a scandal with which to nail Clinton. I have to believe that, barring the wasted effort expended to investigate and defend against Whitewater, Travel-gate, Lewinsky, etc., that Clinton _and_ the Congress could've better used that time doing something productive. Who initiated those investigations? Very doubtful it was Clinton, so I'm going to lay a large portion of the blame on Congress for whatever time this country wasted during Clinton's presidency.
> I don't care how hard you fight the damn cat, it's out of the bag, and it's not getting back in.
This is easy. Turn the bag inside-out. Put your hand in the bag, and use that hand to grab the cat. Then, flip the bag right-side-out. Problem solved.:-)
One thing that concerns me is that this kid wants to go into the Marines. I'm not worried about him going "Full Metal Jacket" or something, but, rather, that with this mark against him, and the - nowadays - automatically implied "mentally unstable" tag that goes with writing dark material - what would we do to Edgar Allen Poe? - will the Marines even let him into the service? Ok, given that our armed forces are hard-up for bodies, they might. But, still. Will they put him through extra evaluations? Will he be on double-secret probation, or some-such?
Jackass, over-reacting teacher and administration. Duh, what did she expect? The stuff this kid wrote about is what we see on TV all the time. Well, except the sex with dead bodies part. At least not the TV _I_ watch. I hope the administration sanctions the teacher for encouraging disruptive behavior. Of course, they won't.
Ok, getting sophomoric, here, but what if I putz in class? Doesn't that cause a disturbance? Could I be arrested for passing gas? I mean, say I'd had some really spicy enchiladas...
I don't get the "crazy" reference. Are you crazy because you're pissed off at someone? Geez, I should be locked up, then, half the time. Because she drove 900 miles in a diaper? That seems pretty shrewd to me; why risk unnecessary exposure just to pee? Because she wanted to throttle someone? It's extreme, but not totally unnatural to want to cause serious violent harm on someone else. So how is she crazy?
And I was going to suggest free-love, too, but someone above beat me to it and said it better. Maybe they should _encourage_ the dalliances, rather than, following our Puritan ethos, shun sex. Of course, being married, and a Slashdot reader, I've only heard about sex.
One aspect that I see, as a coach of younger athletes, is that, for a lot of them, winning and losing have lost their value. Without getting into a, "We had to walk uphill, both ways, in five feet of snow," old-folks mind-set, we played to win, when I was a kid. I _hated_ losing; still do. But for kids, now, having grown up with the video console at the house, with cheat sheets and "Save" functions, etc., it doesn't mean so much to lose; just hit "restart" and pick up where you last saved. At the very least, if kids had to earn their quarters - assuming you could play a game with a quarter, anymore - and had to go down to the video arcade and wait in line to play games, I think they'd take winning and losing a little more seriously.
Agreed, for the most part. But, in the main, people can't handle differences. Example: just yesterday, I got a call because a business owner couldn't access her e-mail. Turns out her secretary uses a web client to read their e-mail, and the boss only knows Outlook. It was, literally, two or three mouse-clicks more to use the web tool, but the boss couldn't handle it. Rather than try to educate the boss on how to use the web tool, I just configured Outlook to grab their POP mail. Boss is happy, if unenlightened.
So, is "computer=windows" a bad thing? Well, for those who can handle diversity, a la "Slashdot crowd," yes. For everyone else, I'd have to say no.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't mod you funny, unfortunately, so I'll just say: Bravo. :-)
I'm an American, though no supporter of our current regime, er, dictatorship, er, democracy, er, form of government... I think Australians should rally against this - it's total BS. (Oh, wait, is that incitement? Oops - I didn't say that, then.)
But I'm curious: after the US decides he's served his time, is he simply sent back home to Australia? Does the US pay for his flight? Is he kicked out onto the street and told to find his own way home? What happens when he's done with his jail time?
I think they're all a bunch of scallawags, and don't you dare call me a Clinton apologist, but there's that little matter of the Republican-controlled Congress and their never-ending quest for a scandal with which to nail Clinton. I have to believe that, barring the wasted effort expended to investigate and defend against Whitewater, Travel-gate, Lewinsky, etc., that Clinton _and_ the Congress could've better used that time doing something productive. Who initiated those investigations? Very doubtful it was Clinton, so I'm going to lay a large portion of the blame on Congress for whatever time this country wasted during Clinton's presidency.
> I don't care how hard you fight the damn cat, it's out of the bag, and it's not getting back in. This is easy. Turn the bag inside-out. Put your hand in the bag, and use that hand to grab the cat. Then, flip the bag right-side-out. Problem solved. :-)
One thing that concerns me is that this kid wants to go into the Marines. I'm not worried about him going "Full Metal Jacket" or something, but, rather, that with this mark against him, and the - nowadays - automatically implied "mentally unstable" tag that goes with writing dark material - what would we do to Edgar Allen Poe? - will the Marines even let him into the service? Ok, given that our armed forces are hard-up for bodies, they might. But, still. Will they put him through extra evaluations? Will he be on double-secret probation, or some-such? Jackass, over-reacting teacher and administration. Duh, what did she expect? The stuff this kid wrote about is what we see on TV all the time. Well, except the sex with dead bodies part. At least not the TV _I_ watch. I hope the administration sanctions the teacher for encouraging disruptive behavior. Of course, they won't.
Ok, getting sophomoric, here, but what if I putz in class? Doesn't that cause a disturbance? Could I be arrested for passing gas? I mean, say I'd had some really spicy enchiladas...
What about lawyers? Are the Bushies as bad as lawyers?
Monkeys work that cheap? Where can I hire a team?
I don't get the "crazy" reference. Are you crazy because you're pissed off at someone? Geez, I should be locked up, then, half the time. Because she drove 900 miles in a diaper? That seems pretty shrewd to me; why risk unnecessary exposure just to pee? Because she wanted to throttle someone? It's extreme, but not totally unnatural to want to cause serious violent harm on someone else. So how is she crazy? And I was going to suggest free-love, too, but someone above beat me to it and said it better. Maybe they should _encourage_ the dalliances, rather than, following our Puritan ethos, shun sex. Of course, being married, and a Slashdot reader, I've only heard about sex.
What's it matter? We're geeks - we'll never see these so called "breasts" anyway.
Based on the description of DCI, I'm not sure Chuckles would appreciate the association.
One aspect that I see, as a coach of younger athletes, is that, for a lot of them, winning and losing have lost their value. Without getting into a, "We had to walk uphill, both ways, in five feet of snow," old-folks mind-set, we played to win, when I was a kid. I _hated_ losing; still do. But for kids, now, having grown up with the video console at the house, with cheat sheets and "Save" functions, etc., it doesn't mean so much to lose; just hit "restart" and pick up where you last saved. At the very least, if kids had to earn their quarters - assuming you could play a game with a quarter, anymore - and had to go down to the video arcade and wait in line to play games, I think they'd take winning and losing a little more seriously.
Agreed, for the most part. But, in the main, people can't handle differences. Example: just yesterday, I got a call because a business owner couldn't access her e-mail. Turns out her secretary uses a web client to read their e-mail, and the boss only knows Outlook. It was, literally, two or three mouse-clicks more to use the web tool, but the boss couldn't handle it. Rather than try to educate the boss on how to use the web tool, I just configured Outlook to grab their POP mail. Boss is happy, if unenlightened. So, is "computer=windows" a bad thing? Well, for those who can handle diversity, a la "Slashdot crowd," yes. For everyone else, I'd have to say no.