Come back to me when we can create such a perfect system...
All the ones here seem to have giant holes, and the more complex, the more holes they seem to have.
If you think normal users are rough on a system, perhaps just a thought on what entirely hostile users would be like might persuade you of the folly of trying to control everyone and everything.
You can't "get through" to a politician in the US higher than your local city council.
They have become supremely isolated to any individuals issues. They simply don't have to care to get re-elected, so why should they? They have a good thing going, from their perspective. People even still think it's respectable - at least, respectable enough to continue *paying for*.
Your words would be commendable, but we have every day knowledge of how women are actually treated by proponents of the religion, in the current time. They would be more commendable if you didn't create arguments that no one has made - e.g "all moslems must be following that instruction mindlessly".
You are the only one making that argument, and you do it so you don't have to fact the actual reality of what is happening.
When was the last time you saw a couple guilty of adultery begin stoned to death at the city gates?
Well, they generally just stone the *woman* now, so that's ok?
You can claim the "no true scotsman" argument only up to the point you have actual governments that have implemented policies. It is then no longer just the die hard fundies - they have inculcated the society to accept their basic premises. This is easily seen by the lack of prosecution of people who murder their female relatives who have brought "dishonor" upon their house.
Sorry, but you are the one being the brainless fundy, making up your own toy arguments and vanquishing those wooden soldiers.
Your social test is basically authoritarian governance by social convention. It's really not any different than being comfortable with the same scheme run by government fiat.
You might not think of yourself as an authoritarian, but your comments belie your caveat.
The fact is that in either case, unless there is an over-riding reason for jumping through the hoop, neither is appropriate. Creating "social tests" that merely create more hoops for people to jump through, with no real reason is merely tyranny by another name.
Is it really counted as a choice if it is mandated?
I thought that was kind of a definition of choice - that you decide, not that someone else decides for you.
I am pretty sure that there is no real argument to be made for the FAA "helping" someone to make choices through this manner.
In fact, I am pretty sure than an argument can be made against having freedom as you define it if there is any sort of artificial (that is something not inherent in the choice itself) coercion or incentive.
I have yet to see an Android phone (in my country anyway) which doesn't feature a simple checkbox that allows you to install apps that didn't come from the market.
What percentage of owners have this checked by default in their version of Android? What percentage of owners won't change it?
That's one group you are cut off from. I suspect it's a quite large group. And you can't do anything about it.
Next, unless you submit to every other market place that someone might want to search for your app and submit it, you are cut off from people who use those secondary markets.
While this one you may be able to do "something" about it seems like that "something" is going to be quite time consuming in the end.
I hope you know that it's not a "trick" it's an observed result of stimulus to a human being. Repeatable and effective, even if you know about the "reason" behind it.
You seem to believe that once you know about it you would be immune - "affect you momentarily".
This simply does not make any sense. It's not the type of thing where you go "Ha ha, oh, now i see the trick - just do *this*!"
It's probably more the type of thing where it takes experience, practice and a conscious effort of will to continue speaking. Even then, I would suspect that your brain is taking up a bunch of extra cycles that you could have used to be more effective in the communication.
I suggest you find a way to try it and report on how easy it was before posting something like this again.
You are forgetting to add in the CONTINUED ABUSE, DECADES LONG.
That's an established fact based on previous famines.
EACH of which was alleviated by outside help! So, no. We don't know that the regime won't change. We haven't tried this.
What we *have* established is that continuing to be a enabler of NK's abusive behaviours continues to cause famines. Over and over again. Now for 50 years! How many more decades of famines do we need to witness before stopping this? Is another 50 years enough to try something else?
but killing tens of millions of innocent people in order to bring down a regime you don't like is not acceptable to any decent human being.
Oh, so now it's because "I don't like the regime"! Of course! It has nothing to do with the type of human atrocities you are accusing me of trying to perpetrate.
So, what you find acceptable is to financially support a government that 1) kills its people with impunity and 2) oppresses them in one of the most severe states in the WORLD.
The only thing the bread is doing is allowing the NK circus to continue. That's it. You are in effect responsible for all the people that NK abuses here after. After all, by your logic it is *my* "fault" that NK would allow - as you say "tens of millions " to die rather than change the regime. Yeah, by not giving aid, I "caused" NK to kill it's own.
This logic is fucked up, and most of the world doesn't even see it. So why are you continuing to abuse all those people in NK? Why is your money going to help abuse them? Perhaps you should do something about that.
You are all so focused on the people currently living NOW. I am trying to focus on the least cost solution over all. Sometimes, that can be a bit disturbing, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't also look at it.
So. I see it as I said. Do it now. Stop being an enabler of an abusive government. That's a good thing in itself.
"We've played this game before, we know how it ends, but what's the alternative?"
Let the implode. Let China deal with that problem, that they are creating, and have created.
Let them do whatever they want, just don't give any energy until *after* a reversal.
In my honest opinion, we are creating more suffering with our "help" through extending the lifelines of these Dictators than both the downward spiral and the short sharp shock that would follow from the people tyrannizing their former oppressors.
I just don't believe the analysis that they are a threat to the US.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, all I know is I'm not fixed precision. :)
Come back to me when we can create such a perfect system...
All the ones here seem to have giant holes, and the more complex, the more holes they seem to have.
If you think normal users are rough on a system, perhaps just a thought on what entirely hostile users would be like might persuade you of the folly of trying to control everyone and everything.
Wrong story, sorry!
Do people feel that this agreement would allow Google to do any of the following:
1) Use a picture you gave them for their own advertising purposes.
2) Sell a picture you gave them for advertising purposes of their business partners.
3) Create a derivative work that uses your uploaded music in a video on YouTube.
4) Publish your content in dead tree form and sell it.
If not, what prevents them?
From a naive reading of the policy, all of these would be acceptable uses.
Yes.
The nerd rage comes in when you are told that you can't, shouldn't or that it is illegal to do so -- and the Masters won't.
As with most closed source proprietary software.
To pretend that the same ethos can even apply to a commercial closed source business is absurd.
Please give me a list of keywords to search for to back up your allegation.
I feel you are probably provably full of shit, so a list of key words or names could prove you right.
I doubt they will be forthcoming.
You can't "get through" to a politician in the US higher than your local city council.
They have become supremely isolated to any individuals issues. They simply don't have to care to get re-elected, so why should they? They have a good thing going, from their perspective. People even still think it's respectable - at least, respectable enough to continue *paying for*.
Since one could define a softness scale for flower petals, this is scientifically testable.
Since we do define ppm's for airborne chemicals, this also appears scientifically testable.
Regards.
Wait, what "international trade laws" are being broken here?
Yes, it seems that for certain business models the global economy is indeed becoming global and they are having a hard time competing.
It's too bad that their model seems to need price discrimination to survive, because if that is true they won't survive.
Hey, I'm only telling you how it is, I'm not endorsing either side.
The corporation does not *deserve* to make money, nor do they *deserve* to stifle the global economy just to they can make more money.
There is no obligation on courts or individuals to support such a failed model.
Your talks about "how it is" are more "how the corporations wish it would be.
And as such, you come off as an apologist for the status quo and the current law set.
Regards.
Technically, you probably should worry about getting a heart from a serial killer.
It has been proven that emotions can damage your body, including organs, and there has been shown to be some hints about anger and heart disease.
Hmm. What's that about magical thinking, now?
I totally agree.
Most of the so called critical thinkers retreat into facetious analogies and straw men built from their own fears.
Congratulations on continuing the trend...
Your words would be commendable, but we have every day knowledge of how women are actually treated by proponents of the religion, in the current time. They would be more commendable if you didn't create arguments that no one has made - e.g "all moslems must be following that instruction mindlessly".
You are the only one making that argument, and you do it so you don't have to fact the actual reality of what is happening.
When was the last time you saw a couple guilty of adultery begin stoned to death at the city gates?
Well, they generally just stone the *woman* now, so that's ok?
You can claim the "no true scotsman" argument only up to the point you have actual governments that have implemented policies. It is then no longer just the die hard fundies - they have inculcated the society to accept their basic premises. This is easily seen by the lack of prosecution of people who murder their female relatives who have brought "dishonor" upon their house.
Sorry, but you are the one being the brainless fundy, making up your own toy arguments and vanquishing those wooden soldiers.
Regards.
You are simply wrong.
All it takes is one patent that *cannot be worked around*.
Since Oracle has not patented any laws of nature with these software patents, one might just as well remember the code of the algorithm:
There is more than one way to do it.
Regards
ABSOLUTELY!
How are those not relevant?
If the hearing doesn't bring up anyone who has a "conflict of interest" for the program, the hearing itself is just theater.
How the fuck can you not understand this?
Regards.
Your social test is basically authoritarian governance by social convention. It's really not any different than being comfortable with the same scheme run by government fiat.
You might not think of yourself as an authoritarian, but your comments belie your caveat.
The fact is that in either case, unless there is an over-riding reason for jumping through the hoop, neither is appropriate. Creating "social tests" that merely create more hoops for people to jump through, with no real reason is merely tyranny by another name.
Regards.
Is it really counted as a choice if it is mandated?
I thought that was kind of a definition of choice - that you decide, not that someone else decides for you.
I am pretty sure that there is no real argument to be made for the FAA "helping" someone to make choices through this manner.
In fact, I am pretty sure than an argument can be made against having freedom as you define it if there is any sort of artificial (that is something not inherent in the choice itself) coercion or incentive.
Regards.
Stereotypes often exist for good reason.
No, they don't. They merely serve to let people stop thinking. I guess you are right, then. Some people do find that a good reason.
Regards.
Are you sure it wasn't Indian rap or hip-hop?
They must not have been paying attention to politics or governments or business, then.
You don't often see a lot of innovation coming out of QA,...
Well, perhaps you should look a bit deeper at what Dr. Whittaker has done in the past before saying stuff.
This particular QA Manager is also a CS PhD.
You might be perhaps interested in his dissertation:
Markov Chain Techniques for Software Testing and Reliability Analysis
Perhaps that would by why we care about what this QA Manager thinks about software testing.
At approximately a 50% chance, it's around noon.
That is a day clock for you.
Or, it can be 1 millisecond to midnight!! OMHFGAAAAHHH! If you only use the last 1.1 msec of the day.
bah.
False. You're cut off from no-one.
False, you are cut off from a lot of people.
I have yet to see an Android phone (in my country anyway) which doesn't feature a simple checkbox that allows you to install apps that didn't come from the market.
What percentage of owners have this checked by default in their version of Android?
What percentage of owners won't change it?
That's one group you are cut off from. I suspect it's a quite large group. And you can't do anything about it.
Next, unless you submit to every other market place that someone might want to search for your app and submit it, you are cut off from people who use those secondary markets.
While this one you may be able to do "something" about it seems like that "something" is going to be quite time consuming in the end.
You are pretty funny.
"Merely a psychological trick".
I hope you know that it's not a "trick" it's an observed result of stimulus to a human being. Repeatable and effective, even if you know about the "reason" behind it.
You seem to believe that once you know about it you would be immune - "affect you momentarily".
This simply does not make any sense. It's not the type of thing where you go "Ha ha, oh, now i see the trick - just do *this*!"
It's probably more the type of thing where it takes experience, practice and a conscious effort of will to continue speaking. Even then, I would suspect that your brain is taking up a bunch of extra cycles that you could have used to be more effective in the communication.
I suggest you find a way to try it and report on how easy it was before posting something like this again.
Regards.
No.
You are forgetting to add in the CONTINUED ABUSE, DECADES LONG.
That's an established fact based on previous famines.
EACH of which was alleviated by outside help! So, no. We don't know that the regime won't change. We haven't tried this.
What we *have* established is that continuing to be a enabler of NK's abusive behaviours continues to cause famines. Over and over again. Now for 50 years! How many more decades of famines do we need to witness before stopping this? Is another 50 years enough to try something else?
but killing tens of millions of innocent people in order to bring down a regime you don't like is not acceptable to any decent human being.
Oh, so now it's because "I don't like the regime"! Of course! It has nothing to do with the type of human atrocities you are accusing me of trying to perpetrate.
So, what you find acceptable is to financially support a government that 1) kills its people with impunity and 2) oppresses them in one of the most severe states in the WORLD.
The only thing the bread is doing is allowing the NK circus to continue. That's it. You are in effect responsible for all the people that NK abuses here after. After all, by your logic it is *my* "fault" that NK would allow - as you say "tens of millions " to die rather than change the regime. Yeah, by not giving aid, I "caused" NK to kill it's own.
This logic is fucked up, and most of the world doesn't even see it. So why are you continuing to abuse all those people in NK? Why is your money going to help abuse them? Perhaps you should do something about that.
You are all so focused on the people currently living NOW. I am trying to focus on the least cost solution over all. Sometimes, that can be a bit disturbing, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't also look at it.
So. I see it as I said. Do it now. Stop being an enabler of an abusive government. That's a good thing in itself.
Regards.
"We've played this game before, we know how it ends, but what's the alternative?"
Let the implode. Let China deal with that problem, that they are creating, and have created.
Let them do whatever they want, just don't give any energy until *after* a reversal.
In my honest opinion, we are creating more suffering with our "help" through extending the lifelines of these Dictators than both the downward spiral and the short sharp shock that would follow from the people tyrannizing their former oppressors.
I just don't believe the analysis that they are a threat to the US.
Regards