I take it you prefer 21st Century Technology with 1st Century values (there is very little to distinguish between what progressives call "modern" values and those of the Roman Empire)
A couple months back I read a blog where the blogger coined the term "progluddite" as a description of most self-identified progressives. This group demonstrated the complete aptness of that term.
Apparently you haven't heard of things called hybrids. Have you ever eaten a blood orange? How about a grapefruit? Both of those exist because someone intentionally cross-fertilized fruit bearing plants (which for those of you who don't know is the process of inserting genes from one species of plant into another species of plant in order to create a third species of plant with characteristics from both parent species).
You are correct. Money does not store value. That is not the purpose of money. However, the U.S. dollar has not lost 75% of its value since 2003. If the USD had lost that much value, my grocery bill would have gone up by a lot more than it has.
This does not mean that I approve of how the U.S. government has managed the currency, or that I think your interpretation is completely off base. Things are not hunk dory and if something doesn't change very soon, the U.S. economy (and probably the world economy) will pass the point of no return.
That's fine, lots of people barter, but money is necessary for a trading economy to function. Once upon a time, gold was money. It isn't any more. Gold credits are just like other attempts to make barter systems more like real money.
If I can't pay my grocery bill directly with gold, it isn't money. For that matter, I would like you to list a place where you are paying in "gold credits", not the country currency, when you use a bank card that draws against your gold account.
How much gold does it take to buy a loaf of bread? For that matter, where can you buy a loaf of bread with gold? And how do you measure out that small an amount of gold?
What "real money" are you talking about?
And where is this fantasy land you are talking about that doesn't tax your work and/or crash the value of the currency?
What you are talking about in this post has nothing to with needing a "real leftist party". It has to do with better contract law enforcement and the presence of a vibrant job market. If their are significantly more people available to do a particular job category than there are jobs, it doesn't matter what the laws are, these types of abuses will happen. On the other hand, if you are in a job category where there are more jobs than there are people capable of doing the job, you will not have a problem with this sort of thing, there will be employers clamoring for your services.
I agree that it is a real problem when an employer promises one thing at the hiring interview, but delivers a completely different job setting. There are ways to discover this during the hiring process if you know what you are doing. I have turned down severl jobs because the vibe I've gotten off of those who would be my future co-workers was not consistent with what the hiring manager was saying about the corporate culture.
Amazon not calling the new Mac software store "Mac App Store" was a legal decision not a matter of not goading Apple. While Amazon can make a very good argument that "App Store" is a generic term, there is no way that the Apple trademark for "Mac App Store" would not be upheld by the courts. You an argue either side of the first term (I think it is generic, but there are those who legitimately disagree), but I cannot see how you can argue that people would not expect the "Mac App Store" to be some place to get Macintosh Apps directly from Apple.
According to several things I have seen recently, there is significant question as to whether the purpose of the Great Wall of China was to keep people out. It has been suggested that it was actually designed to keep people in.
I think we are at a point where we cannot answer the question for sure. Streaming technology has reached the point where it is more than adequate for the purpose of watching streamed video of various kinds. The question we cannot answer is whether advances in technology will continue to improve the experience faster than the replacement rate for TVs. There is certainly a good argument to be made for people more and more relying on the streaming devices built into the TV. On the other hand, if the technology has reached a place where it will remain stable for as long as the replacement cycle of TVs (or at least close enough to that that people will find it acceptable to only replace it as often as the TV), it has only just done so.
The question is, will streaming technology continue to evolve faster than the replacement cycle of TVs. I bought a TV eleven years ago, that I am only considering replacing because my wife and I are moving and the new place does not have a good space to place a CRT TV. When I bought that TV the idea of streaming content was just starting to be talked about.
Now, I have configured my TV with all of my streaming settings and preferences. I go out and buy a new TV, how do I transfer those settings to the new TV?
This is not an insurmountable problem, but it is not one that people are used to thinking about and could cause some serious dissatisfaction with TVs that have this functionality built in.
Your interpretation of the situation has a lot of merit, but there are some issues that make that not a sure thing.
My first thought was that this looks like the "Arab" book, or the "Bedouin" book since all of the computer books I know of that are called the "animal" book have a picture of that particular animal on the cover.
The correct response is to ask some of your other patients to write positive reviews on that site (or even just reviews). I know that I would be quite happy to write a positive review of my doctor if she were to ask. But even if your other patients are not as satisfied with you as I am with my doctor, they might write a review that would reflect much better on you than the one you have received.
Your post reminded me to go and rate my doctor, she is very good.
I had never really paid attention to Ubiquity before, but with this discussion I decided to go take a look at it. The idea that they will replace the URL bar with something like Ubiquity scares me to death. I don't know about others, but every so often I will need to do something that I know is possible on the computer, but don't remember how. I will go to Google to look it up. Most of the time I have to spend 10-15 minutes trying different ways of phrasing the task I want to accomplish before the search results actually reflect what I want to do. Now imagine having to do that everytime you want to navigate to a new website.
I think IBM is more or less the Apple of the server industry,...
That comparison seems so bizarre, considering that IBM had overwhelming market dominance for business computers of any sort (which were mostly servers of one kind or another at the time) when Apple was founded.
There are several countries which explicitly state that they can prosecute anyone for crimes committed anywhere in the world. It is known as "universal jurisdiction". Your point seemed to be that somehow the U.S. was uniquely evil for using its power to defend its government's interests (and sometimes just that of well connected individuals) in foreign countries and that is just not true. Every nation does that to the extent that it is able.
I am not convinced that what Ray Davis did in Pakistan was "clear murder". Considering that he was in all likelihood in Pakistan looking for Al-Qaeda members being hidden there by Pakistan's ISI (up to and including Usama Bin Laden), there is no reason to trust the "witnesses".
Slashdot Mirror
I take it you prefer 21st Century Technology with 1st Century values (there is very little to distinguish between what progressives call "modern" values and those of the Roman Empire)
A couple months back I read a blog where the blogger coined the term "progluddite" as a description of most self-identified progressives. This group demonstrated the complete aptness of that term.
Apparently you haven't heard of things called hybrids. Have you ever eaten a blood orange? How about a grapefruit? Both of those exist because someone intentionally cross-fertilized fruit bearing plants (which for those of you who don't know is the process of inserting genes from one species of plant into another species of plant in order to create a third species of plant with characteristics from both parent species).
You are correct. Money does not store value. That is not the purpose of money. However, the U.S. dollar has not lost 75% of its value since 2003. If the USD had lost that much value, my grocery bill would have gone up by a lot more than it has.
This does not mean that I approve of how the U.S. government has managed the currency, or that I think your interpretation is completely off base. Things are not hunk dory and if something doesn't change very soon, the U.S. economy (and probably the world economy) will pass the point of no return.
Of course not, it is a Bennett Hassleton post. None of his posts have any point that I have ever been able to discern.
That's fine, lots of people barter, but money is necessary for a trading economy to function. Once upon a time, gold was money. It isn't any more. Gold credits are just like other attempts to make barter systems more like real money.
If I can't pay my grocery bill directly with gold, it isn't money. For that matter, I would like you to list a place where you are paying in "gold credits", not the country currency, when you use a bank card that draws against your gold account.
How much gold does it take to buy a loaf of bread? For that matter, where can you buy a loaf of bread with gold? And how do you measure out that small an amount of gold?
What "real money" are you talking about?
And where is this fantasy land you are talking about that doesn't tax your work and/or crash the value of the currency?
What you are talking about in this post has nothing to with needing a "real leftist party". It has to do with better contract law enforcement and the presence of a vibrant job market. If their are significantly more people available to do a particular job category than there are jobs, it doesn't matter what the laws are, these types of abuses will happen. On the other hand, if you are in a job category where there are more jobs than there are people capable of doing the job, you will not have a problem with this sort of thing, there will be employers clamoring for your services.
I agree that it is a real problem when an employer promises one thing at the hiring interview, but delivers a completely different job setting. There are ways to discover this during the hiring process if you know what you are doing. I have turned down severl jobs because the vibe I've gotten off of those who would be my future co-workers was not consistent with what the hiring manager was saying about the corporate culture.
Amazon not calling the new Mac software store "Mac App Store" was a legal decision not a matter of not goading Apple. While Amazon can make a very good argument that "App Store" is a generic term, there is no way that the Apple trademark for "Mac App Store" would not be upheld by the courts. You an argue either side of the first term (I think it is generic, but there are those who legitimately disagree), but I cannot see how you can argue that people would not expect the "Mac App Store" to be some place to get Macintosh Apps directly from Apple.
That was my thought exactly. How long do you think a federal ban on air travel too and from Texas would last? Especially with an election coming up.
You go right on believing that.
Ask the Taliban, or better yet, Osama Bin Laden how that worked out for them.
Duke University isn't that the school that believes in guilty until proven innocent?
According to several things I have seen recently, there is significant question as to whether the purpose of the Great Wall of China was to keep people out. It has been suggested that it was actually designed to keep people in.
I would buy that sooner than Wikipedia.
I think we are at a point where we cannot answer the question for sure. Streaming technology has reached the point where it is more than adequate for the purpose of watching streamed video of various kinds. The question we cannot answer is whether advances in technology will continue to improve the experience faster than the replacement rate for TVs. There is certainly a good argument to be made for people more and more relying on the streaming devices built into the TV. On the other hand, if the technology has reached a place where it will remain stable for as long as the replacement cycle of TVs (or at least close enough to that that people will find it acceptable to only replace it as often as the TV), it has only just done so.
The question is, will streaming technology continue to evolve faster than the replacement cycle of TVs. I bought a TV eleven years ago, that I am only considering replacing because my wife and I are moving and the new place does not have a good space to place a CRT TV. When I bought that TV the idea of streaming content was just starting to be talked about.
Now, I have configured my TV with all of my streaming settings and preferences. I go out and buy a new TV, how do I transfer those settings to the new TV?
This is not an insurmountable problem, but it is not one that people are used to thinking about and could cause some serious dissatisfaction with TVs that have this functionality built in.
Your interpretation of the situation has a lot of merit, but there are some issues that make that not a sure thing.
My first thought was that this looks like the "Arab" book, or the "Bedouin" book since all of the computer books I know of that are called the "animal" book have a picture of that particular animal on the cover.
The correct response is to ask some of your other patients to write positive reviews on that site (or even just reviews). I know that I would be quite happy to write a positive review of my doctor if she were to ask. But even if your other patients are not as satisfied with you as I am with my doctor, they might write a review that would reflect much better on you than the one you have received.
Your post reminded me to go and rate my doctor, she is very good.
I had never really paid attention to Ubiquity before, but with this discussion I decided to go take a look at it. The idea that they will replace the URL bar with something like Ubiquity scares me to death. I don't know about others, but every so often I will need to do something that I know is possible on the computer, but don't remember how. I will go to Google to look it up. Most of the time I have to spend 10-15 minutes trying different ways of phrasing the task I want to accomplish before the search results actually reflect what I want to do. Now imagine having to do that everytime you want to navigate to a new website.
I think IBM is more or less the Apple of the server industry,...
That comparison seems so bizarre, considering that IBM had overwhelming market dominance for business computers of any sort (which were mostly servers of one kind or another at the time) when Apple was founded.
There are several countries which explicitly state that they can prosecute anyone for crimes committed anywhere in the world. It is known as "universal jurisdiction". Your point seemed to be that somehow the U.S. was uniquely evil for using its power to defend its government's interests (and sometimes just that of well connected individuals) in foreign countries and that is just not true. Every nation does that to the extent that it is able.
I am not convinced that what Ray Davis did in Pakistan was "clear murder". Considering that he was in all likelihood in Pakistan looking for Al-Qaeda members being hidden there by Pakistan's ISI (up to and including Usama Bin Laden), there is no reason to trust the "witnesses".