gaah. repeat after me...'smell' is a verb, not a noun. one can smell an odor. one can smell without stinking. dog doo doo can stink but it cannot smell.
Debian is all about non-choice. Gentoo is about choice. You do support choice right?
um...debian officially supports *eleven* architectures. if foo runs on x86, it will also run on ppc, mips, s390, etc. how many architectures does gentoo (or mandrake or fedora or suse or...) support? oh. gentoo does not support eleven architectures. feh. some choice, eh?
It's crazy that in the US politicians are involved in drawing district boundaries at all. In the UK, we have an independent electoral commission who are in charge of this.
independent, huh? i suppose these 'independent' commission members have no political interests or leanings? they would not, for example, redraw boundaries so as to help their favorite party win control of parliament? people are people whether they are politicians or not
(4) provide them your name, address, phonenumber, and LAST FOUR DIGITS OF YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER ; and then
interestingly, when a company checks one's credit report, only the last four digits and the person's name is truly needed. for example, a social security number of 123-45-6789 is the same as 111-11-6789. now why would a company want *that* information?
Good distinction. As an aside, isn't it frustrating to have a vocabulary that must be limited for something like 90% of your communications? Adults tend to feel embarrassed when they are hit with a word in conversation that they don't understand, and blame the speaker for obfuscating... so we dumb down... the subtlest form of censorship
it is indeed frustrating. i have occasion to speak publically once a week and am often torn between using the appropriate word and using another that the audience is sure to understand. accuracy and conciseness are two things for which i strive in my verbal and written communication though i often must surrender a bit of each for the sake of being understood. feh.
Why does 'intelligent' sound more sophisticated than 'smart'? Because it comes directly from french rather than Old English?
actually, 'intelligent' comes from latin, not french . the manner in which you phrased your question leads one to infer you think the two words have the same meaning. they are similar but they do not mean the same. 'smart' has the idea of *existing* knowledge. when one needs the answer to a question, one generally asks a smart person because that person is knowledgeable. when one needs to figure out a problem, one asks an intelligent person because intelligence indicates an ability to learn in new situations. for example, if one is reading a book and encounters a new word, a smart person may know the definition of the word but cannot determine the meaning from the context. an intelligent person may not know the definition of the word but may (and probably will) be able to glean the meaning from the context. smart people are often intelligent and intelligent people are often smart, but i have known smart people who could not figure out a problem that was obvious to an intelligent person and i have known intelligent people who could not answer questions as readily as a smart person. overall, it is better to be intelligent than smart, just as it is better to be wealthy than rich.
A few weeks back, I honestly expected the following to happen:...- new code gets quietly released for functions A, F, H and Z in the kernel, gets exhaustively tested by several key Linux people and very quickly appears in the next kernel release
i am amazed at the number of folk who simply assume the claims of sco are accurate, that there is unlawful code in the linux kernel. could it be that the above has not happened precisely because there is no offending code to replace?!
hmm...i wonder what system is running the web site.
Re:Actually, you're wrong.
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
The thread is about USian hardworkers being overtaxed. The subthread is about hardworking USian single parents being WAY overtaxed. In both cases, specially if you compare their taxing to that of wealthy (and possibly USian) people.
the post to which i responded concerned federal income tax a poor, single, working mother pays. the fact is, she does not pay federal income tax. *you* are wrong.
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
When did FICA, medicare, flat rate state and local and all those other pesky, regressive 'payroll' taxes stop being f*cking INCOME TAXES, asshole?
the thread is about federal income tax, kind sir. it is about the tax rates that were recently cut, not about gas tax, not about fica tax, not about state sales tax, not about microsoft tax. it is about federal income tax. a poor, single working mother with young children will likely not pay *any* federal income tax.
How about SALES TAXES? Or Real estate taxes? Where I live, rental property (where the poor are likely to be stuck living) is taxed at COMMERCIAL RATES.. IE 2x what residential pays. Who pays that?
real estate taxes are local and state taxes. again, such taxes are outside the scope of my comments, but i do hope you feel better.
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
If you happpen to be a single mother working 2 or 3 jobs at minimum wage then you don't get tax breaks because you make too little
if you are a single mother working two or three minimum jobs you are not paying income tax thanks to 'dubya's' increased child tax credits. it is difficult to give tax cuts to those who do not pay taxes.
"Formerly the official homepage of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's regime, the site has been scrubbed clean of any traces of the fallen dictator..."
there is no evidence that saddam hussein exists. if he is in iraq, we should have found him by now! i demand an investigation. the war was about oil. saddam hussein was a distraction! there was no saddam hussein!
I come from a part of the world that's under the ozone hole - I want freedom from skin cancer - I WANT the right to stop the US from dumping stuff in the atmosphere that will kill me - it doesn't make me a 3rd world dictator
so you are in antarctica? it seems you *are* free from the risk of skin cancer. i highly doubt you go outside with much exposed skin. if you do, exposure to the sun is at best a secondary concern...
> You're right. I didn't mean to imply that the comment was directed specifically at you, but more at people in general, many of whom seem to dismiss the costs of spam. My main disagreement with your post was the statement that the cost is intangible. It is definitely there, and as tangible as wasted paper and ink, even if you have to think about it a little to discover its sources.
spam definitely costs money to the recipient. in most cases, however, the bandwidth the spam uses cannot be calculated. for example, a cable modem user is charged a flat fee for usage. even several megabytes of spam per month is miniscule compared to the total bandwidth available. some isp's charge increasing amounts based on bandwidth usage. even in these instances, the bandwidth used by receiving spam is minor compared to the overall bandwidth used.
> When such a large percentage of email is sent every day, I don't believe you can say the monetary cost is insignificant.
if you will re-read my post, you will notice i did not state the monetary cost of spam is insignificant. i stated the costs of spam is intangible and difficult to calculate.
between unsolicited email and unsolicited facsimiles. unsolicited email (spam) may cost the recipient *indirectly* in rather intangible ways (i.e., used bandwidth) that are very difficult to calculate. unsolicited facsimiles, however, cost the recipient in very tangible ways: paper & toner. i do not allow a store to print advertisements from my printer so why should i have to allow a store/business to print advertisements from my fax machine?
saddam is a threat to the *world*
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
I am sick and tired of hearing people state that Saddam is not a threat to the United States or any other country.
"What if he [Saddam] fails to comply [with disarmament] and we fail to act? He will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then go right on building up his arsenal. Someday, someway, I guarantee you, he'll use that arsenal."
The above statement was spoken by none other than former President Bill Clinton in *1998*. If (read since) the statement is true, why did he (Clinton) not act five years ago? Why is George W. Bush now criticised by Tom Daschle et al for allegedly failing to diplomatically solve the problem? This problem has unfortunately been allowed to fester and grow. We now have an American president willing to use America's power and might to once again fight evil and totalitarianism to protect fellow humans. This war is just and necessary. After his defeat, Saddam will no longer be able to harm, rape, murder, etc. a single person, let alone millions (as he has done) of his own people.
Slashdot Mirror
gaah. repeat after me...'smell' is a verb, not a noun. one can smell an odor. one can smell without stinking. dog doo doo can stink but it cannot smell.
Debian is all about non-choice. Gentoo is about choice. You do support choice right?
...) support? oh. gentoo does not support eleven architectures. feh. some choice, eh?
um...debian officially supports *eleven* architectures. if foo runs on x86, it will also run on ppc, mips, s390, etc. how many architectures does gentoo (or mandrake or fedora or suse or
their web site is running on one of these things... probably in someone's pocket(ow!).
actually, it is running on a beowolf cluster of these...
ba-dum ching.
As soemone who is getting thier Phd in a liberal arts field, let me just say that in reality, like any other field 90% of the stuff I read is crap.
;-)
heh. based on your spelling and grammar i would say your education thus far has also been crap.
hey, it is a joke...not a flame.
It's crazy that in the US politicians are involved in drawing district boundaries at all. In the UK, we have an independent electoral commission who are in charge of this.
independent, huh? i suppose these 'independent' commission members have no political interests or leanings? they would not, for example, redraw boundaries so as to help their favorite party win control of parliament? people are people whether they are politicians or not
Welcome to Managment.
oh, the irony. it hurts...
will the new company be NoSE or NOSE?
sorry...
(4) provide them your name, address, phonenumber, and LAST FOUR DIGITS OF YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER ; and then
interestingly, when a company checks one's credit report, only the last four digits and the person's name is truly needed. for example, a social security number of 123-45-6789 is the same as 111-11-6789. now why would a company want *that* information?
Can't I just download one file, double-click on it to install, and re-boot the computer?
oh, sure you can. in fact, post your email address and i will send you the...uh...kernel. just double-click on it and away you go! (really!)
theo
Good distinction. As an aside, isn't it frustrating to have a vocabulary that must be limited for something like 90% of your communications? Adults tend to feel embarrassed when they are hit with a word in conversation that they don't understand, and blame the speaker for obfuscating... so we dumb down... the subtlest form of censorship
it is indeed frustrating. i have occasion to speak publically once a week and am often torn between using the appropriate word and using another that the audience is sure to understand. accuracy and conciseness are two things for which i strive in my verbal and written communication though i often must surrender a bit of each for the sake of being understood. feh.
Why does 'intelligent' sound more sophisticated than 'smart'? Because it comes directly from french rather than Old English?
actually, 'intelligent' comes from latin, not french . the manner in which you phrased your question leads one to infer you think the two words have the same meaning. they are similar but they do not mean the same. 'smart' has the idea of *existing* knowledge. when one needs the answer to a question, one generally asks a smart person because that person is knowledgeable. when one needs to figure out a problem, one asks an intelligent person because intelligence indicates an ability to learn in new situations. for example, if one is reading a book and encounters a new word, a smart person may know the definition of the word but cannot determine the meaning from the context. an intelligent person may not know the definition of the word but may (and probably will) be able to glean the meaning from the context. smart people are often intelligent and intelligent people are often smart, but i have known smart people who could not figure out a problem that was obvious to an intelligent person and i have known intelligent people who could not answer questions as readily as a smart person. overall, it is better to be intelligent than smart, just as it is better to be wealthy than rich.
A few weeks back, I honestly expected the following to happen:...- new code gets quietly released for functions A, F, H and Z in the kernel, gets exhaustively tested by several key Linux people and very quickly appears in the next kernel release
i am amazed at the number of folk who simply assume the claims of sco are accurate, that there is unlawful code in the linux kernel. could it be that the above has not happened precisely because there is no offending code to replace?!
As an upper mid-level management member of corel
...we set about the massive undertaking of synnergizing
...escalating the sales curves
and
and
i think i see the problem with corel.
hmm...i wonder what system is running the web site.
The thread is about USian hardworkers being overtaxed. The subthread is about hardworking USian single parents being WAY overtaxed. In both cases, specially if you compare their taxing to that of wealthy (and possibly USian) people.
the post to which i responded concerned federal income tax a poor, single, working mother pays. the fact is, she does not pay federal income tax. *you* are wrong.
When did FICA, medicare, flat rate state and local and all those other pesky, regressive 'payroll' taxes stop being f*cking INCOME TAXES, asshole?
the thread is about federal income tax, kind sir. it is about the tax rates that were recently cut, not about gas tax, not about fica tax, not about state sales tax, not about microsoft tax. it is about federal income tax. a poor, single working mother with young children will likely not pay *any* federal income tax.
How about SALES TAXES?
Or Real estate taxes? Where I live, rental property (where the poor are likely to be stuck living) is taxed at COMMERCIAL RATES.. IE 2x what residential pays. Who pays that?
real estate taxes are local and state taxes. again, such taxes are outside the scope of my comments, but i do hope you feel better.
If you happpen to be a single mother working 2 or 3 jobs at minimum wage then you don't get tax breaks because you make too little
if you are a single mother working two or three minimum jobs you are not paying income tax thanks to 'dubya's' increased child tax credits. it is difficult to give tax cuts to those who do not pay taxes.
"Formerly the official homepage of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's regime, the site has been scrubbed clean of any traces of the fallen dictator..."
there is no evidence that saddam hussein exists. if he is in iraq, we should have found him by now! i demand an investigation. the war was about oil. saddam hussein was a distraction! there was no saddam hussein!
I come from a part of the world that's under the ozone hole - I want freedom from skin cancer - I WANT the right to stop the US from dumping stuff in the atmosphere that will kill me - it doesn't make me a 3rd world dictator
so you are in antarctica? it seems you *are* free from the risk of skin cancer. i highly doubt you go outside with much exposed skin. if you do, exposure to the sun is at best a secondary concern...
> You're right. I didn't mean to imply that the comment was directed specifically at you, but more at people in general, many of whom seem to dismiss the costs of spam. My main disagreement with your post was the statement that the cost is intangible. It is definitely there, and as tangible as wasted paper and ink, even if you have to think about it a little to discover its sources.
spam definitely costs money to the recipient. in most cases, however, the bandwidth the spam uses cannot be calculated. for example, a cable modem user is charged a flat fee for usage. even several megabytes of spam per month is miniscule compared to the total bandwidth available. some isp's charge increasing amounts based on bandwidth usage. even in these instances, the bandwidth used by receiving spam is minor compared to the overall bandwidth used.
> When such a large percentage of email is sent every day, I don't believe you can say the monetary cost is insignificant.
if you will re-read my post, you will notice i did not state the monetary cost of spam is insignificant. i stated the costs of spam is intangible and difficult to calculate.
between unsolicited email and unsolicited facsimiles. unsolicited email (spam) may cost the recipient *indirectly* in rather intangible ways (i.e., used bandwidth) that are very difficult to calculate. unsolicited facsimiles, however, cost the recipient in very tangible ways: paper & toner. i do not allow a store to print advertisements from my printer so why should i have to allow a store/business to print advertisements from my fax machine?
I am sick and tired of hearing people state that Saddam is not a threat to the United States or any other country.
"What if he [Saddam] fails to comply [with disarmament] and we fail to act? He will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then go right on building up his arsenal. Someday, someway, I guarantee you, he'll use that arsenal."
The above statement was spoken by none other than former President Bill Clinton in *1998*. If (read since) the statement is true, why did he (Clinton) not act five years ago? Why is George W. Bush now criticised by Tom Daschle et al for allegedly failing to diplomatically solve the problem? This problem has unfortunately been allowed to fester and grow. We now have an American president willing to use America's power and might to once again fight evil and totalitarianism to protect fellow humans. This war is just and necessary. After his defeat, Saddam will no longer be able to harm, rape, murder, etc. a single person, let alone millions (as he has done) of his own people.
are you suggesting all those ballot-stuffing votes for cowboyneal were not legitimate? i actually meant some of them!
95% of statistics are wildly inaccurate or out of context.
this is untrue. a full 87% of statistics are simply *made up* while the remaining 72% are true.