No, the caucus has rules which define a 'tie', and this isn't it.
Math is incredibly important, but sometimes rules and laws differ from it for very important reasons. The statistical definition of 'equal' may not be the only or even the most relevant definition of 'equal' in use. Sometimes, rules take into account psychology, social pressures, historical lessons, and all sorts of factors that aren't present in an overly simple 'p > 0.95' analysis.
Plus, people tend to have more than one TV in the house. The raspberry pi, or some other small dongle, can be easily moved around... so if you want to put it in the kid's room for a few hours, that's no problem.
Plus, it just seems more fun to hack on. Being able to run emulators seems like a no-brainer requirement.
I agree. You need computers in some classes, of course; not just computer programming, but things like drafting, multimedia production, and so on. In most other classes, they are just a distraction. Not just an initial expense, but an ongoing maintenance nightmare and constant nuisance.
And certainly, using high-end tablets such as iPads is a ridiculous idea, and speaks to how this is a fad. Something like a low-end Kindle or Nook would provide the primary benefit: Elimination of textbooks.
Unfortunately, most of the cameras are owned by private companies and are located on private property. And we on/. know the private corporations are sacrosanct, don't we!
Not corporations. Private property is sacrosanct. Corporations just happen to have private property just like you and me.
I have a beef with any user who posts the same shit on multiple articles that doesn't mean what he's trying to say it means.
Exactly. Bonch would be just as annoying if he spouted pro-google talking points over and over again. This isn't an apple vs google thing; this is simply a question about low quality posters. Bonch isn't contributing to slashdot; he's degrading it, in nearly the same way a guy selling fake Nike shoes would be degrading the quality of slashdot by posting the same stuff repeatedly in every thread.
Good catch. It's generally painfully obvious when you read something that has been prepared in advance like that, or is written to hit certain bullet-points or catch-phrases.
Sometimes you'll see an Apple advocate mention in a post that he likes product X because 'it just works'. It's hard to imagine that somebody writes that with a straight face, but I think they're deadly serious. They think they're making a point, not realizing that they're admitting to the world that their thought processes are controlled by a marketing campaign.
The thing is, I think Apple products are generally really high quality (except for their ported software... itunes and quicktime are terrible). However, I'm constantly being driven away from them by the quality of their advocates. I now view iphones and ipads as vaguely creepy in the effect they have on some people.
Right. Take this same reasoning and apply it to books. Pretty much all paperbacks are the same price... and if I buy one, it's because I want to read that book. A discount on a book I'm not interested in is not going to seduce me away.
Don't forget statistics and probability. Both of those would benefit everybody, everyday; it would make them better citizens. Being able to pick apart statistics quoted to you by the media is an invaluable skill, far more generally useful than being able to factor an equation.
You're writing as if there is no difference between anarchism and libertarianism. They are different words for a reason. You can attack anarchism all you want, but you're not making legitimate criticisms of libertarianism when you do so.
Fraud, theft, and murder are violations of rights, which the government is responsible for protecting. (Well, some fraud.) It's a straw-man attack to pretend libertarians don't want the government to protect rights; they overwhelmingly do.
If you have to misrepresent libertarianism in order to criticize it...
Now, the weakness in libertarianism is in figuring out how a government that does behave in an ethical and limited fashion (protecting human rights from being infringed by other humans) is funded. That's harder.
This doesn't follow at all. You might as well say prison inmates will always vote for big government, for the same reason.
They do tend to vote for big government. They're statistically more likely to be Democrat. That's why the dems favor giving ex-cons voting rights while reps typically oppose it.
Oh, come on. I normally don't jump on the accusation bandwagon, but you're just trolling, here. I don't even think you're shilling; nobody would recommend ASP.NET, and a shill wouldn't want to raise red flags by saying something so obviously wrong.
Everybody is free to make their own conclusions, of course. I'm not anti-Microsoft, and I think they make some fine development tools. But ASP.NET? With a straight face? Come on.
I find it odd that the editors take submissions from people like bonch, or other known partisan trolls here. If you read slashdot with any regularity, you learn to recognize and disregard those names quickly. I'm forced to conclude that the editors either don't read slashdot, or like to post trolling headlines.
The backlash of a US attack would be huge. Not only because the Iranians (as every other nation) has the right to defend themselves against foreign attacks, but they'd need also a NATO approval.
There wouldn't be a huge backlash, because the only way the US would engage is after the Iranians committed hostilities. Nobody thinks the US is going to do a first strike here.
And no, the US needs no approval from NATO, any more than any other country does. The only decision NATO has is whether to consider an attack on the US by Iran as an attack on all NATO states... which is their reason for existing. In effect, their only choice is whether to join in or not. And they probably will, although just in token numbers.
in a serious shooting match between First World (and here we include the Ruskkies and the Chinese) powers the US would have its ass handed to it on a platter.
Not at all. It wouldn't be a cakewalk, but it would be clearly and massively one-sided. The only way the US could be seriously threatened is if it was attacked by a coalition of major powers.
Slashdot Mirror
You are trying to complain, but you're supporting the person you're arguing with.
The proper response to your comment is "Yes...?"
No, the caucus has rules which define a 'tie', and this isn't it.
Math is incredibly important, but sometimes rules and laws differ from it for very important reasons. The statistical definition of 'equal' may not be the only or even the most relevant definition of 'equal' in use. Sometimes, rules take into account psychology, social pressures, historical lessons, and all sorts of factors that aren't present in an overly simple 'p > 0.95' analysis.
Would a recount be any more accurate?
It's better to have clear procedures followed to the letter, than recounts and bickering.
Nonsense. The Supreme Court already told us that states don't actually have to count votes, so long as state statute says they don't.
Which is the proper decision, of course.
Plus, people tend to have more than one TV in the house. The raspberry pi, or some other small dongle, can be easily moved around... so if you want to put it in the kid's room for a few hours, that's no problem.
Plus, it just seems more fun to hack on. Being able to run emulators seems like a no-brainer requirement.
It's pretty bad when your kids can on average learn more from surfing the Internet than going to school.
Nah, it's always been that way. You've always been able to learn more in an hour or two of self-directed reading than in a whole day of school.
I agree. You need computers in some classes, of course; not just computer programming, but things like drafting, multimedia production, and so on. In most other classes, they are just a distraction. Not just an initial expense, but an ongoing maintenance nightmare and constant nuisance.
And certainly, using high-end tablets such as iPads is a ridiculous idea, and speaks to how this is a fad. Something like a low-end Kindle or Nook would provide the primary benefit: Elimination of textbooks.
Unfortunately, most of the cameras are owned by private companies and are located on private property. And we on /. know the private corporations are sacrosanct, don't we!
Not corporations. Private property is sacrosanct. Corporations just happen to have private property just like you and me.
I have a beef with any user who posts the same shit on multiple articles that doesn't mean what he's trying to say it means.
Exactly. Bonch would be just as annoying if he spouted pro-google talking points over and over again. This isn't an apple vs google thing; this is simply a question about low quality posters. Bonch isn't contributing to slashdot; he's degrading it, in nearly the same way a guy selling fake Nike shoes would be degrading the quality of slashdot by posting the same stuff repeatedly in every thread.
Good catch. It's generally painfully obvious when you read something that has been prepared in advance like that, or is written to hit certain bullet-points or catch-phrases.
Sometimes you'll see an Apple advocate mention in a post that he likes product X because 'it just works'. It's hard to imagine that somebody writes that with a straight face, but I think they're deadly serious. They think they're making a point, not realizing that they're admitting to the world that their thought processes are controlled by a marketing campaign.
The thing is, I think Apple products are generally really high quality (except for their ported software... itunes and quicktime are terrible). However, I'm constantly being driven away from them by the quality of their advocates. I now view iphones and ipads as vaguely creepy in the effect they have on some people.
Right. Take this same reasoning and apply it to books. Pretty much all paperbacks are the same price... and if I buy one, it's because I want to read that book. A discount on a book I'm not interested in is not going to seduce me away.
but also as an economic socialist and a social conservative.
:)
Wow. I've never seen anybody so bluntly admit that
Anyway, no, you won't find any libertarianism in that. It's the diametric opposite. Libertarians like freedom.
if your ideology determines your career (which is more reasonable), the net effect is about the same.
"It's against my better judgement, but..."
The fact that that statement is so commonly used says something terrible about mankind.
Don't forget statistics and probability. Both of those would benefit everybody, everyday; it would make them better citizens. Being able to pick apart statistics quoted to you by the media is an invaluable skill, far more generally useful than being able to factor an equation.
It is. It's just a difficult science, with little ability to test. Similar to psychology, anthropology, or string physics.
You're writing as if there is no difference between anarchism and libertarianism. They are different words for a reason. You can attack anarchism all you want, but you're not making legitimate criticisms of libertarianism when you do so.
Fraud, theft, and murder are violations of rights, which the government is responsible for protecting. (Well, some fraud.) It's a straw-man attack to pretend libertarians don't want the government to protect rights; they overwhelmingly do.
If you have to misrepresent libertarianism in order to criticize it...
Now, the weakness in libertarianism is in figuring out how a government that does behave in an ethical and limited fashion (protecting human rights from being infringed by other humans) is funded. That's harder.
This doesn't follow at all. You might as well say prison inmates will always vote for big government, for the same reason.
They do tend to vote for big government. They're statistically more likely to be Democrat. That's why the dems favor giving ex-cons voting rights while reps typically oppose it.
And most of my PCs are cheap. I planning on continuing with XP for at least another year.
Oh, come on. I normally don't jump on the accusation bandwagon, but you're just trolling, here. I don't even think you're shilling; nobody would recommend ASP.NET, and a shill wouldn't want to raise red flags by saying something so obviously wrong.
Everybody is free to make their own conclusions, of course. I'm not anti-Microsoft, and I think they make some fine development tools. But ASP.NET? With a straight face? Come on.
I find it odd that the editors take submissions from people like bonch, or other known partisan trolls here. If you read slashdot with any regularity, you learn to recognize and disregard those names quickly. I'm forced to conclude that the editors either don't read slashdot, or like to post trolling headlines.
The backlash of a US attack would be huge. Not only because the Iranians (as every other nation) has the right to defend themselves against foreign attacks, but they'd need also a NATO approval.
There wouldn't be a huge backlash, because the only way the US would engage is after the Iranians committed hostilities. Nobody thinks the US is going to do a first strike here.
And no, the US needs no approval from NATO, any more than any other country does. The only decision NATO has is whether to consider an attack on the US by Iran as an attack on all NATO states... which is their reason for existing. In effect, their only choice is whether to join in or not. And they probably will, although just in token numbers.
in a serious shooting match between First World (and here we include the Ruskkies and the Chinese) powers the US would have its ass handed to it on a platter.
Not at all. It wouldn't be a cakewalk, but it would be clearly and massively one-sided. The only way the US could be seriously threatened is if it was attacked by a coalition of major powers.
Seems like stuff slashdot needs more of. Less mobile phone stories, less political stories, more substantive and detailed tech stories.