See functional programming. Not that it's terribly efficient from what I've seen and heard. I don't do it, myself, but it's something that got my attention and, at times, is really quite elegant. In Haskell:
qsort [] = []
qsort (x:xs) = elts_lt_x ++ [x] ++ elts_greq_x where elts_lt_x = [y | y <- xs, y < x] elts_greq_x = [y | y <- xs, y >= x]
Your browser may mangle that. Slashdot doesn't support <PRE>. Anyway, see Haskell. List comprehensions of the sort seen above are also new in Python 2.0. Very nice.
Uhm, what's wrong with reading code? It's very nice to see how someone did something. Some of the most creative and elegant constructions I've seen ANYWHERE have been in source code. It's really an underrated form of expression.
Two of your reasons are what-ifs. That's a damn poor reason to post a story. Or should I submit a story about a butterfly flapping its wings in Taiwan because it could cause a tornado that could destroy a chip manufacturer? Oh, dear God! News is about what is, not what if. If the "is" part isn't interesting and doesn't matter, then it doesn't belong. It'd be news if the DNS had been hijacked/hacked/whatever, the possibility, itself, is not news. As for this not being Joe's Garage Website... yeah? So? It's one of the most trafficked websites on the planet. It's down. You can tell that by trying to go to it. So...? Every site goes down from time to time. Every site experiences technical difficulties. It's not news just because a big site has technical difficulties. It's less news -- a site with a heavier load than Joe's Garage went down?! Oh, the horror.
Taco pretty much slammed his own readers for posting supposedly insignificant story...
He said it was uninteresting. He said it didn't matter to him. He didn't say it was insignificant. Sheesh. BTW, it is a freekin' stupid story. If/. posted an article every time some site or another was down... Geez. Get over it. The story sucks, he knew it, but people wanted it, so he gave it to them.
[...stuff about it not mattering to CT...] It does to the millions of daily visitors, yes.
Yeah, and they can't figure out it's down by themselves. How many of these Microsofties are reading Slashdot? And how many of the Microsofties reading/. can't figure out a site is down without needing to be told, "Microsoft.com is down?"
Nice casual aside there,...
I believe that's called a joke hence the winking smilie, ya' twerp.
This stuff about Windows needing service packs often is bull. Linux has far more service packs, because Microsoft updates things all at once wheras with Linux you have to update individually.
Uhm, that's not true. Microsoft offers individual fixes to individual packages just like Red Hat. And Red Hat and most other distributions provide a way to fetch fixes all at once. The fixes you're talking about for Linux distributions, BTW, are usually to third-party software and applying a one or two line fix to resolve a minor security problem if you're doing something completely silly. This is a touch different from what a Windows service pack is doing.
Hell my grandmother could install a Windows service pack, but I can't see her upgrading bind when a security hole's found in that.
But you can see your grandmother running DNS? And what's hard about the graphical package installation utilities provided by desktop distributions of Linux?
(a) learn how to spell.
Okay, Mr. "Microsft"... Please. Everyone makes typos or incorrectly types something from time to time. They could be distracted, tired, in a hurry. Grow up. You can read it and it's not distractingly poor.
The server stayed up (and perfectly stable) for 155 days...
Well, if we're going to be dick-waving, I got 74 days and 3 hours uptime on a Linux 2.0 server on broken hardware. It's a good thing, too, because the hard-drive was fucky and the video card fried. MS-DOS wouldn't even install on it, let alone Windows 3.1, Windows95, NT, or 2k. That's a touch more impressive than your 155 days on a Pentium II/III.
What too many Microsoft-haters fail to realize is that Windows 2000 can be every bit as stable as your favorite *NIX OS.
Stop the count, stop the count, stop the count.
For a good month, we heard Republicans cry it. For a good month, We saw the Republicans point to their paragons of moral integrity Like Richard Nixon (Like Richard Nixon?!). For a good month, We hear them say that all the Dems want to do Is keep counting until they get the numbers they like. So maybe they were right. And maybe those that saw significant proof of irregularities were right. But it's over and only one question remains: When do the Repubs stop counting? RU-486 has been in use for 13 years; The FDA reviewed it, found it was okay; But now we should look at it again. And again. And again. It won't survive this filabuster. But we must look at it again, We must recount every vote, We must review every detail. The Science may stand strong And the use cases in Europe may lend support But we must not accept that? Stop the count, stop the count, stop the count.
There have been hundreds of studies That show Global Warming is real That pollution is a big problem But, says George W, the jury is still out on this whole thing. And what do dozens, or hundreds, of Nobel Prize winners really know about Science? The 3/5ths rule finds it way back! Every 50 Scientific reports, endorsed by scientists of international acclaim by conservatives and liberals from countries near and afar that claim Global Warming is real, are worth 1 report by Big Oil "debunking the myth." And what do they say? Bias, says George W's cronies, Bias. What about the message? Nothing. But there's the messenger, he's a target. So though we know we over-consume Though it's clear America is wasteful Though it's clear waste is damaging our home And killing our children We must look again and wait and be "sure." Stop the count, stop the count, stop the count.
The jury is still out on evolution, says Bush. For any scientific research, paper, endorsement, or result There is one bane The Bible defeats it with only faith, No numbers, no proof Just blind belief we let defeat What we can plainly see. Ontology recapitulates phylogeny. But what about Adam and Eve? Darwinism, punctuated equilibrium, and other Theories of Evolution. But what about 6 days and 1 to rest? Forget it, says Bush, it's just not clear, yet. Not yet? Not ever. Stop the count, stop the count, stop the count.
Impromptu free-verse brought to you by the local not-ashamed-to-admit-it liberal. Is it too much to ask for a President that believes in a little, insignificant thing like... oh... Science? Compassionate conservative might not be an oxymoron (it is, if you ask me), but I know one thing for sure: Bush is not it.
...it would actually be a good sign if they had broken a body part in the process. That would show they'd been pushing themselves to the limit,...
I would personally take it as a sign that either there were some really freak accidents going on or the actors were out-of-shape coming into the training program (not that they need to enter training in superb shape, but they know the schedule, some working-out, etc., as preparation wouldn't kill them).
Having said all this,...
Weaving was very good. Yuen and the designers and CGI guys were fantastic -- they made this movie work, IMHO. Hopefully, Yuen will stick around. Ray Park also wants in on the sequels and the TPM fight sequence made that movie, too. Seems like good stuff even without Yeoh and Jet Li.
I'm sorry that you think it is a misrepresentation of the story.
I would characterize citing the initial sentence that was later thoroughly debunked by an official source as evidence that Keanu is injured as a misrepresentation of the story. It's true that Coming Attractions is confused, but I was relying more on their reporting of what the publicist had to say in addition to the fact that the story and pictures don't match up (I didn't think about the beard, but that's a great point) and some amateur psychoanalysis. I don't see that the movie is in trouble. Jet Li out, Michelle Yeoh opted out, Carrie has a sprained knee, and the SAG strike might hit in the middle of the production. But why would Keanu's publicist lie about an injury in the face of all of those things? If Carrie's injured (and she apparently is) and Keanu's not seriously hurt (and, if the pictures are real, he's got some constitution to walk on a seriously injured ankle) then why lie? It's not as if Keanu's non-serious injury will hold up the production more than Carrie's non-serious injury.
...you dismiss it completely as a rumor, when there is no proof to that either.
I believe that the publicist flatly denying that Keanu's injured, pictures of dubious value, the lack of any press release, etc., makes it reasonable to label them as rumor. I wasn't dismissing it as rumor, only saying that I don't believe it and I don't think there's any reason to believe it (and, in fact, a lot of reason to seriously doubt it). Anyway, sorry if you took my reply personally, that wasn't my intent.
Keanu Reeves has sustained a serious injury to his left foot while training for the Matrix sequels.
Good job at completely stripping all context! From Coming Attracitons:
We've just spoken to a representative Keanu Reeves' publicity agency who debunked the
Sun and Aftonbladet news reports, as well as the photographs that appeared with them.
Again, we were told at no time did Keanu ever have a cast on his foot, nor was his diagnosed with a broken or injured ankle. As for the photos that popped up earlier this week in European papers, Reeves publicist says the photos showing him hobbling are "bogus."
I missed the Carrie-Anne blurb, since it was really rather small. At the same time, I think it isn't anything major. But, mind you, I didn't say Carrie wasn't injured, I only said it wasn't mentioned (I was wrong, though). I was talking specifically about the submitter saying Keanu had a broken ankle.
My original conclusion stands, the publicist flatly denied that Keanu was ever injured and ever wore a cast or support on the leg (a wrap does not equal a support) and went on to say that those photos are fake. Still, a good job at completely misrepresenting and spinning the content on Coming Attractions. You ought to get into politics or law (and what's the difference).
I'm not a Physicist, but I know some, and none of them have expressed anything but reverence for Hawking. Kip Thorne, who I would consider fitting any definition of True Physicist, seems to regard Hawking as a Real Physicist. But I suppose you're going to say Kip Thorne is equally crap? Rai Weiss? Vladimir Braginsky? Eanna Flanagan? I don't know. I've never heard your particular view of it and it's not as if I've never met a physicist or talked about Hawking with a verifiable physicist before. Given that, I'm still inclined to believe you're a troll.
Well let me tell you, in the physics community, no one gives a shit about Hawkins and his books.
You're a troll, of course, and a bad liar. Black holes are just a part of what Hawking has studied, documented, and explained. But I suppose "you physicists" (yeah, right) just call it Hawking radiation for no good reason, though.
These rumors about the trouble with the Matrix sequels are, just that, rumors. Keanu Reeve's publicist flatly denied that the actor has broken his ankle and that we was ever wearing a cast or support for the ankle. See the Matrix 2 page on Coming Attractions (http://www.corona.bc.ca/films/) for a more in-depth look at the state of the rumor. There's nothing about Carrie Moss's injury. My tendency is to chalk these up as 'net rumors. How would a Swedish newspaper scoop the entire world on Keanu Reeves breaking an ankle? Why does he have a cast but not crutches if he has a broken ankle? Why would a publicist deny his client is injured when the client is already has a starring role in a project that cannot reasonably be made without him? The simplest explanation seems to me to be that none of it's true, Keanu doesn't have a broken ankle and the pictures are either mis-dated or fake.
You suspect they're suing under UCITA?! EULAs?! What have you been smoking, man? It's a fairly standard copyright case. Nintendo owns the copyright to X and Daily Radar is copying X without permission from Nintendo. And, really, if corporations can get away with making profit from the innovation and work of others, where's the incentive to actually innovate? It seems like this is a fairly standard copyright case that falls directly inline with the meaning and intent of copyright. Which isn't to deny the existence of illegitimate copyright/patent cases that don't uphold the original intent of the law -- those exist. But I don't think this is one of them.
That's the problem there not, edison and pg&e are going under becuase they have to purchase electricity at ridicilous prices...
But they do have to purchase electricity at ridiculous prices (by their own design). They thought they were going to make a killing on it by having the power pool price fixed and they could consistently sell over it. It wouldn't fluctuate, so they could buy low and resell high. There's part of your corporate bail-out and that's fact. My theory for how we got in the current fix is: Davis comes along and sees the ridiculous price-gouging going on with this system, bails out San Diego consumers (that seems like a pro-market move to me, but conservatives seem to think the only way to save the market is to stimulate it at the top and that trickle-down Hoover/Reagan BS). The power companies know they're not going to get away with that scam for long if they don't come up with some explanation, so they start engaging in market manipulation and create an artificial scarcity. It's a game of politics, IMHO. The power companies are trying to bully legislators and Governor Davis off of their turf by beating up utility consumers (e.g., voters). Which is not to say that we're not over-consuming -- conservation is a good thing to do now to avoid later problems, but the current fix is just that, a fix.
No your presuming what people are reporting is facts...
No, you're presuming that because NPR was created by liberals that it is inherently biased through-and-through and does not report any fact or reports only one-sided facts. In other words, you, like your conservative brethren, are attacking the messenger and not the message. It's amazing, though, what conservatives can get away these days. Nothing, and I mean, nothing, sticks to them. Meanwhile, Clinton gets splooge on an intern's dress and he can't get credit for anything else.
For the purpose of full disclosure, I like Clinton. I think he's done some awfully stupid, narrow-minded, bull-headed, jackass things as far as policy goes, but he has done an overwhelmingly fine job. And thought he did push California-style deregulation, I can forgive that because he didn't require exactly that model. There are some other bad policies, as well, and Clinton-Gore probably aren't as liberal in their politics as I am. But that doesn't mean I vote strictly liberal, that I ignore the Wall Street Journal, etc. The party system is of dubious value within government, and of great harm within the population. People, not sheeple (sheep-people).
Commerce? Since when does a $28 billion bail-out for massive corporations qualify as commerce? How does forcing consumers to pay for the stupidity and wastefulness of power companies mean commerce? Hrm?
... but it's outright fraud to call it deregulation.
That may be so, but it's not liberal/leftist fraud -- it's conservative/right-wing fraud first, and centrist (Clinton) stupidity second. They pushed it, after all, after Republican energy regulators grew infatuated with the Power Pool system overseas. It was a price-fixing scam through-and-through and a $28 billion bail-out to the vertically-integrated power giants. And consumers are footing the bill. BTW, what is deregulation if deregulating electricity generation doesn't count? Sorry. I'm not buying the, "it's not what we said it was, and it's your fault," line.
I predicted that leftists would be screaming "failure of the market" when I heard of their electric woes.
No-one's yelling failure of the market. They're pointing out the obvious failure of deregulation here and in many other places where it has not been as successful as you would like it to be. Sure, there are successes and it might work on paper, but it hasn't been panning out. In some places, it has been a moderate success. Of course, I would point out that in many of these situations, consumers would have been reaping rewards regardless of deregulation. But you want to attribute every success to deregulation and every failure to liberals.
NPR rarely does a good story on anything.
In other words, you're politically opposed to certain facts, and therefore the reporters are liars, cheats, and fools. Grow up. Anyone that isn't blindly and foolishly right-wing or left-wing knows damn well that it is deregulation, that it was introduced by Republicans, pushed as a model program by Clinton, and it's a fucking scam.
Yeah. Right. You and I are going to take on the gub'ment with our shotguns and hunting rifles. Wee-haw, Billy Bob. Here's the plan: you take on the tanks, the missiles, the bombers, the fighter jets, the army, the navy, and the marines; I'll handle PR.
California would be a really great state if you could only get rid of those wackos making the stupid laws...
Except that we vote in the government and vote directly on propositions. That is, all those wackos making the stupid laws are *US*, the people of California.
The problem with nuclear in America is the Federal Government.
Yeah, blame the government. Nevermind that people are afraid of it, and the government tends to react when the voters show disfavor. It's clearly the government. Please. People are freaked over genetically engineered vegetables (but not pesticide-laced ones?) and irradiated meat, and there's no reason to believe properly applying either is harmful (whereas nuclear plants produce nuclear waste when operating properly). But, clearly, it's the Federal Government's fault.
Slashdot Mirror
Uhm, what's wrong with reading code? It's very nice to see how someone did something. Some of the most creative and elegant constructions I've seen ANYWHERE have been in source code. It's really an underrated form of expression.
Two of your reasons are what-ifs. That's a damn poor reason to post a story. Or should I submit a story about a butterfly flapping its wings in Taiwan because it could cause a tornado that could destroy a chip manufacturer? Oh, dear God! News is about what is, not what if. If the "is" part isn't interesting and doesn't matter, then it doesn't belong. It'd be news if the DNS had been hijacked/hacked/whatever, the possibility, itself, is not news. As for this not being Joe's Garage Website... yeah? So? It's one of the most trafficked websites on the planet. It's down. You can tell that by trying to go to it. So...? Every site goes down from time to time. Every site experiences technical difficulties. It's not news just because a big site has technical difficulties. It's less news -- a site with a heavier load than Joe's Garage went down?! Oh, the horror.
He said it was uninteresting. He said it didn't matter to him. He didn't say it was insignificant. Sheesh. BTW, it is a freekin' stupid story. If /. posted an article every time some site or another was down... Geez. Get over it. The story sucks, he knew it, but people wanted it, so he gave it to them.
Yeah, and they can't figure out it's down by themselves. How many of these Microsofties are reading Slashdot? And how many of the Microsofties reading /. can't figure out a site is down without needing to be told, "Microsoft.com is down?"
I believe that's called a joke hence the winking smilie, ya' twerp.
Uhm, that's not true. Microsoft offers individual fixes to individual packages just like Red Hat. And Red Hat and most other distributions provide a way to fetch fixes all at once. The fixes you're talking about for Linux distributions, BTW, are usually to third-party software and applying a one or two line fix to resolve a minor security problem if you're doing something completely silly. This is a touch different from what a Windows service pack is doing.
But you can see your grandmother running DNS? And what's hard about the graphical package installation utilities provided by desktop distributions of Linux?
Okay, Mr. "Microsft"... Please. Everyone makes typos or incorrectly types something from time to time. They could be distracted, tired, in a hurry. Grow up. You can read it and it's not distractingly poor.
Well, if we're going to be dick-waving, I got 74 days and 3 hours uptime on a Linux 2.0 server on broken hardware. It's a good thing, too, because the hard-drive was fucky and the video card fried. MS-DOS wouldn't even install on it, let alone Windows 3.1, Windows95, NT, or 2k. That's a touch more impressive than your 155 days on a Pentium II/III.
Maybe. But 90% aren't.
Impromptu free-verse brought to you by the local not-ashamed-to-admit-it liberal. Is it too much to ask for a President that believes in a little, insignificant thing like... oh... Science? Compassionate conservative might not be an oxymoron (it is, if you ask me), but I know one thing for sure: Bush is not it.
means, "Busty school girls with big eyes are great. Please have freaky circus sex with me."
means, "Are you enough of a loser to go out with me?"
See?
I would personally take it as a sign that either there were some really freak accidents going on or the actors were out-of-shape coming into the training program (not that they need to enter training in superb shape, but they know the schedule, some working-out, etc., as preparation wouldn't kill them).
Weaving was very good. Yuen and the designers and CGI guys were fantastic -- they made this movie work, IMHO. Hopefully, Yuen will stick around. Ray Park also wants in on the sequels and the TPM fight sequence made that movie, too. Seems like good stuff even without Yeoh and Jet Li.
I would characterize citing the initial sentence that was later thoroughly debunked by an official source as evidence that Keanu is injured as a misrepresentation of the story. It's true that Coming Attractions is confused, but I was relying more on their reporting of what the publicist had to say in addition to the fact that the story and pictures don't match up (I didn't think about the beard, but that's a great point) and some amateur psychoanalysis. I don't see that the movie is in trouble. Jet Li out, Michelle Yeoh opted out, Carrie has a sprained knee, and the SAG strike might hit in the middle of the production. But why would Keanu's publicist lie about an injury in the face of all of those things? If Carrie's injured (and she apparently is) and Keanu's not seriously hurt (and, if the pictures are real, he's got some constitution to walk on a seriously injured ankle) then why lie? It's not as if Keanu's non-serious injury will hold up the production more than Carrie's non-serious injury.
I believe that the publicist flatly denying that Keanu's injured, pictures of dubious value, the lack of any press release, etc., makes it reasonable to label them as rumor. I wasn't dismissing it as rumor, only saying that I don't believe it and I don't think there's any reason to believe it (and, in fact, a lot of reason to seriously doubt it). Anyway, sorry if you took my reply personally, that wasn't my intent.
Good job at completely stripping all context! From Coming Attracitons:
I missed the Carrie-Anne blurb, since it was really rather small. At the same time, I think it isn't anything major. But, mind you, I didn't say Carrie wasn't injured, I only said it wasn't mentioned (I was wrong, though). I was talking specifically about the submitter saying Keanu had a broken ankle.
My original conclusion stands, the publicist flatly denied that Keanu was ever injured and ever wore a cast or support on the leg (a wrap does not equal a support) and went on to say that those photos are fake. Still, a good job at completely misrepresenting and spinning the content on Coming Attractions. You ought to get into politics or law (and what's the difference).
I'm not a Physicist, but I know some, and none of them have expressed anything but reverence for Hawking. Kip Thorne, who I would consider fitting any definition of True Physicist, seems to regard Hawking as a Real Physicist. But I suppose you're going to say Kip Thorne is equally crap? Rai Weiss? Vladimir Braginsky? Eanna Flanagan? I don't know. I've never heard your particular view of it and it's not as if I've never met a physicist or talked about Hawking with a verifiable physicist before. Given that, I'm still inclined to believe you're a troll.
You're a troll, of course, and a bad liar. Black holes are just a part of what Hawking has studied, documented, and explained. But I suppose "you physicists" (yeah, right) just call it Hawking radiation for no good reason, though.
These rumors about the trouble with the Matrix sequels are, just that, rumors. Keanu Reeve's publicist flatly denied that the actor has broken his ankle and that we was ever wearing a cast or support for the ankle. See the Matrix 2 page on Coming Attractions (http://www.corona.bc.ca/films/) for a more in-depth look at the state of the rumor. There's nothing about Carrie Moss's injury. My tendency is to chalk these up as 'net rumors. How would a Swedish newspaper scoop the entire world on Keanu Reeves breaking an ankle? Why does he have a cast but not crutches if he has a broken ankle? Why would a publicist deny his client is injured when the client is already has a starring role in a project that cannot reasonably be made without him? The simplest explanation seems to me to be that none of it's true, Keanu doesn't have a broken ankle and the pictures are either mis-dated or fake.
You suspect they're suing under UCITA?! EULAs?! What have you been smoking, man? It's a fairly standard copyright case. Nintendo owns the copyright to X and Daily Radar is copying X without permission from Nintendo. And, really, if corporations can get away with making profit from the innovation and work of others, where's the incentive to actually innovate? It seems like this is a fairly standard copyright case that falls directly inline with the meaning and intent of copyright. Which isn't to deny the existence of illegitimate copyright/patent cases that don't uphold the original intent of the law -- those exist. But I don't think this is one of them.
But they do have to purchase electricity at ridiculous prices (by their own design). They thought they were going to make a killing on it by having the power pool price fixed and they could consistently sell over it. It wouldn't fluctuate, so they could buy low and resell high. There's part of your corporate bail-out and that's fact. My theory for how we got in the current fix is: Davis comes along and sees the ridiculous price-gouging going on with this system, bails out San Diego consumers (that seems like a pro-market move to me, but conservatives seem to think the only way to save the market is to stimulate it at the top and that trickle-down Hoover/Reagan BS). The power companies know they're not going to get away with that scam for long if they don't come up with some explanation, so they start engaging in market manipulation and create an artificial scarcity. It's a game of politics, IMHO. The power companies are trying to bully legislators and Governor Davis off of their turf by beating up utility consumers (e.g., voters). Which is not to say that we're not over-consuming -- conservation is a good thing to do now to avoid later problems, but the current fix is just that, a fix.
No, you're presuming that because NPR was created by liberals that it is inherently biased through-and-through and does not report any fact or reports only one-sided facts. In other words, you, like your conservative brethren, are attacking the messenger and not the message. It's amazing, though, what conservatives can get away these days. Nothing, and I mean, nothing, sticks to them. Meanwhile, Clinton gets splooge on an intern's dress and he can't get credit for anything else.
For the purpose of full disclosure, I like Clinton. I think he's done some awfully stupid, narrow-minded, bull-headed, jackass things as far as policy goes, but he has done an overwhelmingly fine job. And thought he did push California-style deregulation, I can forgive that because he didn't require exactly that model. There are some other bad policies, as well, and Clinton-Gore probably aren't as liberal in their politics as I am. But that doesn't mean I vote strictly liberal, that I ignore the Wall Street Journal, etc. The party system is of dubious value within government, and of great harm within the population. People, not sheeple (sheep-people).
Commerce? Since when does a $28 billion bail-out for massive corporations qualify as commerce? How does forcing consumers to pay for the stupidity and wastefulness of power companies mean commerce? Hrm?
So is death.
That may be so, but it's not liberal/leftist fraud -- it's conservative/right-wing fraud first, and centrist (Clinton) stupidity second. They pushed it, after all, after Republican energy regulators grew infatuated with the Power Pool system overseas. It was a price-fixing scam through-and-through and a $28 billion bail-out to the vertically-integrated power giants. And consumers are footing the bill. BTW, what is deregulation if deregulating electricity generation doesn't count? Sorry. I'm not buying the, "it's not what we said it was, and it's your fault," line.
No-one's yelling failure of the market. They're pointing out the obvious failure of deregulation here and in many other places where it has not been as successful as you would like it to be. Sure, there are successes and it might work on paper, but it hasn't been panning out. In some places, it has been a moderate success. Of course, I would point out that in many of these situations, consumers would have been reaping rewards regardless of deregulation. But you want to attribute every success to deregulation and every failure to liberals.
In other words, you're politically opposed to certain facts, and therefore the reporters are liars, cheats, and fools. Grow up. Anyone that isn't blindly and foolishly right-wing or left-wing knows damn well that it is deregulation, that it was introduced by Republicans, pushed as a model program by Clinton, and it's a fucking scam.
That doesn't impress me at all. Personally, I think the plot from The Matrix came from The Neverending Story.
(Or maybe I'm kidding.)
Yeah. Right. You and I are going to take on the gub'ment with our shotguns and hunting rifles. Wee-haw, Billy Bob. Here's the plan: you take on the tanks, the missiles, the bombers, the fighter jets, the army, the navy, and the marines; I'll handle PR.
They're called sidewalks, parks, and buildings, hun.
Except that we vote in the government and vote directly on propositions. That is, all those wackos making the stupid laws are *US*, the people of California.
Yeah, blame the government. Nevermind that people are afraid of it, and the government tends to react when the voters show disfavor. It's clearly the government. Please. People are freaked over genetically engineered vegetables (but not pesticide-laced ones?) and irradiated meat, and there's no reason to believe properly applying either is harmful (whereas nuclear plants produce nuclear waste when operating properly). But, clearly, it's the Federal Government's fault.