The workplace statistics show that Americans, on average, are overworked. Employment statistics back this up: there are fewer people in a given job than there were 10 years ago, doing the same amount of work.
So no, that isn't what OP was saying, at all. It's rather the opposite.
They weren't smart enough to vote the bums out, and now we have what we have because of it. And just because they "didn't let them do it", it doesn't mean they didn't do it anyway.
No, they didn't do it anyway. This discussion was about V-chips and Clipper Chips. The Clipper Chip, for example, was a chip that was supposed to be put in every phone in America -- by law -- supposedly to "encrypt" your conversation and make it "more secure".
Nobody who knew anything about it in those days thought it was a good idea. And they said so.
But people post 9-11 got all scared and let the government pass all kinds of shitty laws, in spite of warnings from the people who knew better. And we are just starting to see the effects of that now.
So, yeah. Plain old history says folks in the 90s WERE smarter, in that respect. At least they listened to warnings, back then, and were LESS likely to trust government.
Given our recent experience with people trusting government, I sincerely hope they learned something.
Citibank spent $500 million on Y2K, converting all their old COBOL to... COBOL.
Right. But that's still along the line with what I was saying: it's not a new project, it's an established base.
I worked for a company in 2000 that was still writing code for its business software system running on 70s-80s WANG "minicomputers" (the size of a large desk plus a cabinet or two). That's not quite as old but it is still ancient by computing standards.
Why were they still using that stuff 20+ years later? Because they had spent millions of dollars on that infrastructure back in the day and it still worked fine.
8 States and DC have laws against wearing masks. That is a small minority. In general, they are either very Leftist states, or states in which KKK was known to operate in the past.
Further, in almost all of those states, it is only unlawful to wear masks for the purpose of committing a crime or evading the authorities.
So, NO. In general, wearing a mask is not "probable cause" in itself, nor illegal in itself, unless it is done in order to commit a crime.
There are a few exceptions, in a few places. That is all.
By they way: I prefer the Guy Fawkes mask, myself.
Wearing a mask in public is already considered "probable cause" for detain and search. While I agree with the reasons, this product will go nowhere except Halloween parties.
Now, I don't normally say this, because this is not Wikipedia. But [citation needed]. I do not believe this is true.
Wearing a mask in a bank might be probable cause (and pretty stupid). But in public? I don't know of a single case in the United States in which wearing a mask was by itself considered probable cause for a search. If it were, Mardi Gras would no longer exist.
I'm not claiming you're wrong, but I think you are. I would like to see some evidence before I'm convinced otherwise.
And the 90s? What leads you to believe it was better then, when the democrats were pushing for clipper chips, V-chips, and other restrictions on encryption?
Here's what was better: people were smart enough in the 90s to not let them do it.
Also, even the government had to get a warrant to tap a phone and call it anything remotely like "legal".
Yeah, they did pass ITAR regulation, which was really dumb, and very bad, but that only applied to exports. It didn't have anything at all to do with our internal communications. With FISA, in effect they're doing something kind of resembling ITAR on crypto but far worse, turning it on their own people.
If that's what happens when a studio buys something, I don't want to see the mess involved for Netflix to acquire streaming rights for different countries.
Yes, it generally is. I was amused by this quote in OP:
Because of complex and irritating legal reasons, Disney was not able to acquire those as well.
Well, boo-hoo. Disney is perhaps most famous for its own injection of "complex and irritating legal reasons" into their own contracts. Who are they to complain?
Ukraine didn't "take" Crimea either, it was assigned to their jurisdiction when both were completely subservient to the USSR, and then amicably* left with them when the republics separated. That doesn't seem to be stopping Putin now; neither does international law. Our missiles probably would, though.
However (see my other comment in this thread), Crimea is close and accessible, while Alaska is remote and in fact on another continent. Crimea is relatively easy for them to take and then defend. Alaska would be very difficult for Russia to either take or defend; that was largely why they sold it in the first place.
I generally let people know up front when I'm doing that.
but PHP is the most popular language on the internet, and shows no signs of decreased usage whatsoever.
So? COBOL was the most popular computer language for Government and big corporate projects, for a very long time after newer and better things had come along. That was my point. Your numbers mean one thing, and one thing only: that PHP worked and was popular for a long time, before better things came along. They prove nothing else. They simply reflect "established base", in precisely the way COBOL programming jobs hung around for decades because of the established base.
This led many people to believe that COBOL was actually the better and preferred language to learn and use, even after much better languages, better suited to the task, were available.
So in the light of actual data, your "strong opinion" that it's like COBOL and "on the way out", is fucking moronic.
So in light of your gross misinterpretation of what the actual data actually means, who is actually being moronic?
There's plenty of valid reasons to criticize PHP, but this isn't one of them.
On the contrary. You have shown us nothing that contradicts my point.
Since our Atty General Mr. Holder, says he can choose which laws to obey, then there are no laws, no rules, except what he chooses to do.
Not to mention: if we had a totally secure, encrypted, spook-proof communications network (barring wiretapping warrants, of course), where would that put us as far as "national security" goes?
Oh, yeah. Back in the 1990s. Seems to me, things were actually better then, in this respect.
You were probably joking, but that deserves an answer.
The primary reason Russia sold Alaska to the U.S. in the first place was that strategically, it would be extremely difficult for Russia to try to defend it. But the U.S. can.
The United States already lost a war against terrorism by instituting ridiculous laws, spying and harassment because the government was scared. That is exactly the goal of terrorism.
They didn't "lose a war against terrorism", they lost a battle against Statist politicians. Not the same things.
But although those Statists won a battle, and made it last a few years, they are losing the war. Slowly but surely.
AND they will go down in history as the Bad Guys. So there's that.
There are even elements within the Russian political scene who would like to 'take back' Alaska from the U.S.
Then they can go straight to Hell.
The U.S. did not "take" Alaska, they bought it, fair and square. Any contingent that wants to "take back" what they sold fairly for hard cash is a gaggle of criminals, by Russian, American, and international law.
I work with PHP and I would not say it is for beginners.
I agree. Something for beginners should at least make sense.
PHP's inconsistency is a nightmare. In my opinion, it does not qualify as a consistent language, it is merely a giant toolbox full of independently-developed utility functions.
That might be a slight exaggeration, but not much of one.
What's wrong with Drupal? It's modular, very flexible, free, secure, and has been demonstrated to be good enough by other major organisations (ie, the Whitehouse, and Australia is essentially America's lapdog these days).
The problem is that it's based on PHP, which is more than just showing its age.
There are better, more stable, and more consistent languages to build your web framework around today. Why anybody would start a new project today and build it in PHP is totally beyond me. In fact I have made quite a bit of money taking sites that were built in PHP and rebuilding them in something more modern.
They're OKAY, as long as they are merely things like feature ads for your product, as opposed to essential interface elements. It's a display, like a rotating billboard. There should be no requirement to interact with it.
And they should be relatively small, the delay should be no more than 6-8 seconds max, and they should be based on JS, not Flash. And one more thing:
For f*s sake, people, get the tags and CSS for your sliders right. If someone uses a script blocker, they should see the first panel of your slider clearly, not the entire set stacked on top of each other. I've seen major websites get this wrong.
1) Free, since this government thinks they should get everything free while screwing over anyone in need...
2) Server must run off a 15Mb/1Mb internet connection since that's what the rest of us are doomed to...
Fine, but these apply to just about any web framework you can name.
In my strong opinion, PHP is on the way out, and Drupal is an attempt to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. There are more web-friendly languages and frameworks out there now.
Government choosing to go with PHP is like government sticking with COBOL. It's understandable for maintaining old infrastructure but I question the wisdom of it for new projects.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, no. That wasn't OP's premise.
The workplace statistics show that Americans, on average, are overworked. Employment statistics back this up: there are fewer people in a given job than there were 10 years ago, doing the same amount of work.
So no, that isn't what OP was saying, at all. It's rather the opposite.
Citation? The US's revisionist history is well know, but I'd like to see some proof contrary to everything that's out there.
Try searching for "Alaska Purchase" on Wikipedia.
It may not be THE definitive source of information, but it's not bad either. First sentence, 2nd paragraph on the page:
Russia wanted to sell its Alaskan territory, fearing that it might be seized if war broke out with Britain.
Wikipedia tries hard to be objective, so if there is another valid point of view, maybe you should write it up.
They weren't smart enough to vote the bums out, and now we have what we have because of it. And just because they "didn't let them do it", it doesn't mean they didn't do it anyway.
No, they didn't do it anyway. This discussion was about V-chips and Clipper Chips. The Clipper Chip, for example, was a chip that was supposed to be put in every phone in America -- by law -- supposedly to "encrypt" your conversation and make it "more secure".
Nobody who knew anything about it in those days thought it was a good idea. And they said so.
But people post 9-11 got all scared and let the government pass all kinds of shitty laws, in spite of warnings from the people who knew better. And we are just starting to see the effects of that now.
So, yeah. Plain old history says folks in the 90s WERE smarter, in that respect. At least they listened to warnings, back then, and were LESS likely to trust government.
Given our recent experience with people trusting government, I sincerely hope they learned something.
Citibank spent $500 million on Y2K, converting all their old COBOL to ... COBOL.
Right. But that's still along the line with what I was saying: it's not a new project, it's an established base.
I worked for a company in 2000 that was still writing code for its business software system running on 70s-80s WANG "minicomputers" (the size of a large desk plus a cabinet or two). That's not quite as old but it is still ancient by computing standards.
Why were they still using that stuff 20+ years later? Because they had spent millions of dollars on that infrastructure back in the day and it still worked fine.
I just looked it up.
8 States and DC have laws against wearing masks. That is a small minority. In general, they are either very Leftist states, or states in which KKK was known to operate in the past.
Further, in almost all of those states, it is only unlawful to wear masks for the purpose of committing a crime or evading the authorities.
So, NO. In general, wearing a mask is not "probable cause" in itself, nor illegal in itself, unless it is done in order to commit a crime.
There are a few exceptions, in a few places. That is all.
By they way: I prefer the Guy Fawkes mask, myself.
Wearing a mask in public is already considered "probable cause" for detain and search. While I agree with the reasons, this product will go nowhere except Halloween parties.
Now, I don't normally say this, because this is not Wikipedia. But [citation needed]. I do not believe this is true.
Wearing a mask in a bank might be probable cause (and pretty stupid). But in public? I don't know of a single case in the United States in which wearing a mask was by itself considered probable cause for a search. If it were, Mardi Gras would no longer exist.
I'm not claiming you're wrong, but I think you are. I would like to see some evidence before I'm convinced otherwise.
So, the only thing that scientists agree on are (1-3).
Don't forget to point out THIS.
Alarmists have made a very big habit out of taking anything that might correlate to increase in CO2 and call it "proof". That's just nonsense.
A positive correlation does not imply cause. Period. It can only suggest, and often not even that.
HERE is another example, and HERE is another.
Look! Correlation of 0.99! Obviously, golf causes consumption of cheese, and pets cause football.
We need open hardware. The hardware being made in the factories is not trustworthy.
True. But in the meantime, you can install a $0.50 switch in one of the wires to the microphone, and put a post-it note over the camera.
What's worse is that many of those same CEOs probably aren't constantly focused/productive themselves.
Even worse is that OP's premise doesn't match the actual statistics.
Workplace stress is up. 80% of US workers work 48+ hours a week. Etc.
And the 90s? What leads you to believe it was better then, when the democrats were pushing for clipper chips, V-chips, and other restrictions on encryption?
Here's what was better: people were smart enough in the 90s to not let them do it.
Also, even the government had to get a warrant to tap a phone and call it anything remotely like "legal".
Yeah, they did pass ITAR regulation, which was really dumb, and very bad, but that only applied to exports. It didn't have anything at all to do with our internal communications. With FISA, in effect they're doing something kind of resembling ITAR on crypto but far worse, turning it on their own people.
Come on now, it's not that remote. Putin said he could see Alaska from his house.
Haha! Now that was genuinely funny. Props.
So glad you're liking Obamacare.
This is what is known as "trolling". Just in case you didn't already know. I mean real trolling, not just "I disagree".
Or, I suppose depending on how you look at the comment, it might qualify as "flamebait" instead.
If you don't think so, then please explain to me what Obamacare has to do with (or is even supposed to have to do with) terrorism.
Ah, another newbie to PHP who blames the tool instead of the person using the tool.
Sorry to have to disabuse you of your fantasy, but I've worked with PHP for more than 8 years. And I am glad to be free of it, thank you very much.
If that's what happens when a studio buys something, I don't want to see the mess involved for Netflix to acquire streaming rights for different countries.
Yes, it generally is. I was amused by this quote in OP:
Because of complex and irritating legal reasons, Disney was not able to acquire those as well.
Well, boo-hoo. Disney is perhaps most famous for its own injection of "complex and irritating legal reasons" into their own contracts. Who are they to complain?
Ukraine didn't "take" Crimea either, it was assigned to their jurisdiction when both were completely subservient to the USSR, and then amicably* left with them when the republics separated. That doesn't seem to be stopping Putin now; neither does international law. Our missiles probably would, though.
However (see my other comment in this thread), Crimea is close and accessible, while Alaska is remote and in fact on another continent. Crimea is relatively easy for them to take and then defend. Alaska would be very difficult for Russia to either take or defend; that was largely why they sold it in the first place.
Making things up is fun and all
I generally let people know up front when I'm doing that.
but PHP is the most popular language on the internet, and shows no signs of decreased usage whatsoever.
So? COBOL was the most popular computer language for Government and big corporate projects, for a very long time after newer and better things had come along. That was my point. Your numbers mean one thing, and one thing only: that PHP worked and was popular for a long time, before better things came along. They prove nothing else. They simply reflect "established base", in precisely the way COBOL programming jobs hung around for decades because of the established base.
This led many people to believe that COBOL was actually the better and preferred language to learn and use, even after much better languages, better suited to the task, were available.
So in the light of actual data, your "strong opinion" that it's like COBOL and "on the way out", is fucking moronic.
So in light of your gross misinterpretation of what the actual data actually means, who is actually being moronic?
There's plenty of valid reasons to criticize PHP, but this isn't one of them.
On the contrary. You have shown us nothing that contradicts my point.
Since our Atty General Mr. Holder, says he can choose which laws to obey, then there are no laws, no rules, except what he chooses to do.
Not to mention: if we had a totally secure, encrypted, spook-proof communications network (barring wiretapping warrants, of course), where would that put us as far as "national security" goes?
Oh, yeah. Back in the 1990s. Seems to me, things were actually better then, in this respect.
You were probably joking, but that deserves an answer.
The primary reason Russia sold Alaska to the U.S. in the first place was that strategically, it would be extremely difficult for Russia to try to defend it. But the U.S. can.
That hasn't changed.
The United States already lost a war against terrorism by instituting ridiculous laws, spying and harassment because the government was scared. That is exactly the goal of terrorism.
They didn't "lose a war against terrorism", they lost a battle against Statist politicians. Not the same things.
But although those Statists won a battle, and made it last a few years, they are losing the war. Slowly but surely.
AND they will go down in history as the Bad Guys. So there's that.
There are even elements within the Russian political scene who would like to 'take back' Alaska from the U.S.
Then they can go straight to Hell.
The U.S. did not "take" Alaska, they bought it, fair and square. Any contingent that wants to "take back" what they sold fairly for hard cash is a gaggle of criminals, by Russian, American, and international law.
I work with PHP and I would not say it is for beginners.
I agree. Something for beginners should at least make sense.
PHP's inconsistency is a nightmare. In my opinion, it does not qualify as a consistent language, it is merely a giant toolbox full of independently-developed utility functions.
That might be a slight exaggeration, but not much of one.
What's wrong with Drupal? It's modular, very flexible, free, secure, and has been demonstrated to be good enough by other major organisations (ie, the Whitehouse, and Australia is essentially America's lapdog these days).
The problem is that it's based on PHP, which is more than just showing its age.
There are better, more stable, and more consistent languages to build your web framework around today. Why anybody would start a new project today and build it in PHP is totally beyond me. In fact I have made quite a bit of money taking sites that were built in PHP and rebuilding them in something more modern.
Should I use a carousel?
They're OKAY, as long as they are merely things like feature ads for your product, as opposed to essential interface elements. It's a display, like a rotating billboard. There should be no requirement to interact with it.
And they should be relatively small, the delay should be no more than 6-8 seconds max, and they should be based on JS, not Flash. And one more thing:
For f*s sake, people, get the tags and CSS for your sliders right. If someone uses a script blocker, they should see the first panel of your slider clearly, not the entire set stacked on top of each other. I've seen major websites get this wrong.
1) Free, since this government thinks they should get everything free while screwing over anyone in need...
2) Server must run off a 15Mb/1Mb internet connection since that's what the rest of us are doomed to...
Fine, but these apply to just about any web framework you can name.
In my strong opinion, PHP is on the way out, and Drupal is an attempt to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. There are more web-friendly languages and frameworks out there now.
Government choosing to go with PHP is like government sticking with COBOL. It's understandable for maintaining old infrastructure but I question the wisdom of it for new projects.
With all the existing worries over teen sexting, bullying, revenge porn, etc. such a service was probably bound to generate government scrutiny fast.
But "bound to generate government scrutiny" is not the same as "justified lawsuit". That was my point.
There are things the government is not allowed to do for political reasons. Period. Lawsuits are one of those things.