I came here to suggest this. There is always one teacher I wished to write a letter to. Not as big a deal as yours, but same principle. Teachers are fallible, but they need reminded of that. Some think they are not.
Being young, their decisions can have a lasting impact on some.
"I expect a great reward in heaven," he said in an interview Tuesday, during which he was cheerful, often smiling. "I am looking forward to glory." Sound familiar? I hear there are some really hot and dry places out east where a few people talk like this.
and banning a device the purpose of which is to kill is a good idea. While you are quite right about the misuse of guns, you do not address the issue that banning a gun will not prevent criminals from having a real advantage over John Q. Public by illegally carrying and using guns. Banning guns will keep them from being used off the cuff when someone is angry, but I'd speculate that that is a rare case of gun violence.
If the issue is irrational people having firearms, then the license system should be changed so that it attempts to exclude those irrational people. It shouldn't keep guns from legal citizen thus giving any would-be robber a one-up on home invasion.
It is quite possible for a society to have sensible and effective gun laws. For one such society, please look at Switzerland
I agree that this isn't "censoring", it's stupid, it's a lazy way to protect against virii, but it's not censorship. To call it such weakens the definition and power of the word censorship and makes it look like the community is being knee-jerk and unreasonable, weakening any argument.
I think it's because the culture in America doesn't wish to have a phone that does everything. It's there, there is a niche, but most of use just want a cellphone to make calls and do a few other things, not everything under the sun.
IIRC the fees are statutory, unless you have agreement with the copyright holder. Thus you can play anything without permission of the owner, but you had to pay the SoundExchange rate. I think copyleft and public domain fall into the separate permission category. So you shouldn't have to pay anything.
I knew the crowd would reply with a "Oh No! Evil printer companies!" I asked why this was to a guy who dealt with printing all day. His answer was that towards the end of a cartridge, the consistency can degrade to where it may not produce "perfect" results. Since companies by a lot of ink and demand top quality, the cartridges reports when the best time to replace them to retain perfect results.
Most comments on how "horrible" internet service is people bitching. We have it pretty good. You and I seem to have plenty of access. Many people claim that they have horrible service because it's not _perfect_ service. Also, many are case studies.
Europe has better infrastructure because of other factors. WWII destroying many land systems is one of them. When you have a newer infrastructure (built in the 50s instead of 30s) you have a better starting point. In addition, America has many towns with a lot of space between them, making access more difficult then other areas like Europe and South Korea.
Much of America is not as lucky as Europe to be so closely packed. Many areas in America are so spread out that public transportation is impossible. In the cities, it makes sense, in the rural areas, it would be a horrid situation.
I could be easily wrong and my conception of the political environment soured by the internet. This is not the impression I get though. Especially with Guns.
Giuliani is only one Republican. One man is not a demonstration of a variety of viewpoints.
It is possible to argue that a man dressed in a feminine manner can "irritate" me. I do not argue for the allowance of smoking in truly public places (like the subway). But I really do believe that it is up to the business to decide what is allowed there and what is not. A bar near me has a bondage night. The more prudent parts of our society would wish to have that banned because it bothers them. If it was bondage on the train, I would agree with them, but it is not. It is in a private bar. I consider smoking the same. I would agree with you more about workplaces, as people must go to those. We have to be serious with ourselves though. Bars and restaurants are luxuries, they are places we choose to go into and to patronize.
I want a world where smokers can go into smoking bars, and non-smokers can go into non-smoking bars. To exclude everyone from the choice to go to a smoking bar is well.. fascist.
Because our country and political system have become polarized to the point where you can't hold a pro-gun viewpoint without being considered a Conservative or a Republican. It goes the other way too. You can't be pro-choice without being considered a Liberal or Democrat. It's not a healthy system and encourages those with a strong viewpoint on a single issue to take the stand of their comrades on the other issues without thinking them through.
If the Democrats come up with a stand on an issue, the Republicans will take the opposite anywhere it will benefit them and vice versa. It's politics. After the populace becomes polarized, considers the other side evil, and generally distrusts those who aren't in their party, those people will adopt a viewpoint solely because it's the viewpoint of the party.
"If you can give me the name of even one bar in the metro detroit area that is non-smoking, I'll buy you a pack of smokes."
Karra's Bro's. Tavern 225 Jos. Campau, Detroit, Michigan; Tel. 313.259.2767 A non-smoking sports bar, with a rooftop patio, in the heart of downtown with sports on TV, electronic trivia and games.
"Both Miller's Bar and Redcoat Tavern do have non-smoking sections, and you can be very express with them and tell them "*Very* non-smoking, please." which is usually understood and accomodated, but you may have to wait longer for your table."
Re:If you think that is evil
on
Google's Evil NDA
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
"Freedom is about choice, and chosing between eating ar dying isn't really the freedom the founding fathers had in mind."
I'm pretty sure those that are even thinking about working at Google of all places aren't in the class of people who have to choose between eating or dying when considering employment there.
Let me post here instead of a direct response to all those who "hate" smokers because of this man.
First of all. Not all smokers are assholes. To consider them all assholes because of a subset of the population is called stereotyping. Stereotyping is generally considered wrong, except when it comes to smokers for some reason. I don't stereotype black people, gay people, homeless people, and I don't stereotype smokers either. Yes, a good bit of smokers throw their butts, but a good bit of McDonald's eaters toss their entire bag out the window on the interstate too.
Slashdot Mirror
I came here to suggest this. There is always one teacher I wished to write a letter to. Not as big a deal as yours, but same principle. Teachers are fallible, but they need reminded of that. Some think they are not.
Being young, their decisions can have a lasting impact on some.
That's like asking if software is profitable? Not without a business pan. For some it is, and some it is not.
What's next? Hey, is selling ice cream profitable?
I'm sorry. I feel for you. It most be horrible to live in a place where there is that much snow year round.
I lived in the mountains, if I couldn't afford, or couldn't drive a car, I would have to move into town.
Even podunk West Virginia had buses.
One may not be able to stay in the exact same place without a car, but they could live close enough to it. IIRC half the people in the US don't drive.
Why avoiding the cops? Sounds regulated to me.
If the issue is irrational people having firearms, then the license system should be changed so that it attempts to exclude those irrational people. It shouldn't keep guns from legal citizen thus giving any would-be robber a one-up on home invasion.
It is quite possible for a society to have sensible and effective gun laws. For one such society, please look at Switzerland
I agree that this isn't "censoring", it's stupid, it's a lazy way to protect against virii, but it's not censorship. To call it such weakens the definition and power of the word censorship and makes it look like the community is being knee-jerk and unreasonable, weakening any argument.
I think it's because the culture in America doesn't wish to have a phone that does everything. It's there, there is a niche, but most of use just want a cellphone to make calls and do a few other things, not everything under the sun.
If anyone out there still believes in the slippery slope argument, then now is a time to reevaluate it.
IIRC the fees are statutory, unless you have agreement with the copyright holder. Thus you can play anything without permission of the owner, but you had to pay the SoundExchange rate. I think copyleft and public domain fall into the separate permission category. So you shouldn't have to pay anything.
I knew the crowd would reply with a "Oh No! Evil printer companies!" I asked why this was to a guy who dealt with printing all day. His answer was that towards the end of a cartridge, the consistency can degrade to where it may not produce "perfect" results. Since companies by a lot of ink and demand top quality, the cartridges reports when the best time to replace them to retain perfect results.
They compete on service. Scale is a major factor, but dell skimps on the service, not the parts.
I found one in two seconds on Amazon.
d p/B000BWZZLG/ref=pd_bbs_2/104-1269793-1120768?ie=U TF8&s=software&qid=1182355173&sr=8-2
http://www.amazon.com/Apple-Mac-Tiger-10-4-6-DVD/
As the saying goes.... You get what you pay for.
Don't feed the trolls.
Most comments on how "horrible" internet service is people bitching. We have it pretty good. You and I seem to have plenty of access. Many people claim that they have horrible service because it's not _perfect_ service. Also, many are case studies.
Europe has better infrastructure because of other factors. WWII destroying many land systems is one of them. When you have a newer infrastructure (built in the 50s instead of 30s) you have a better starting point. In addition, America has many towns with a lot of space between them, making access more difficult then other areas like Europe and South Korea.
Much of America is not as lucky as Europe to be so closely packed. Many areas in America are so spread out that public transportation is impossible. In the cities, it makes sense, in the rural areas, it would be a horrid situation.
I could be easily wrong and my conception of the political environment soured by the internet. This is not the impression I get though. Especially with Guns.
Giuliani is only one Republican. One man is not a demonstration of a variety of viewpoints.
Just do it. Then turn the idiots in. I hear the BSA is giving out pretty big chunks of money to whistle blowers.
It is possible to argue that a man dressed in a feminine manner can "irritate" me. I do not argue for the allowance of smoking in truly public places (like the subway). But I really do believe that it is up to the business to decide what is allowed there and what is not. A bar near me has a bondage night. The more prudent parts of our society would wish to have that banned because it bothers them. If it was bondage on the train, I would agree with them, but it is not. It is in a private bar. I consider smoking the same. I would agree with you more about workplaces, as people must go to those. We have to be serious with ourselves though. Bars and restaurants are luxuries, they are places we choose to go into and to patronize.
I want a world where smokers can go into smoking bars, and non-smokers can go into non-smoking bars. To exclude everyone from the choice to go to a smoking bar is well.. fascist.
Because our country and political system have become polarized to the point where you can't hold a pro-gun viewpoint without being considered a Conservative or a Republican. It goes the other way too. You can't be pro-choice without being considered a Liberal or Democrat. It's not a healthy system and encourages those with a strong viewpoint on a single issue to take the stand of their comrades on the other issues without thinking them through.
If the Democrats come up with a stand on an issue, the Republicans will take the opposite anywhere it will benefit them and vice versa. It's politics. After the populace becomes polarized, considers the other side evil, and generally distrusts those who aren't in their party, those people will adopt a viewpoint solely because it's the viewpoint of the party.
"If you can give me the name of even one bar in the metro detroit area that is non-smoking, I'll buy you a pack of smokes."
Karra's Bro's. Tavern
225 Jos. Campau, Detroit, Michigan; Tel. 313.259.2767
A non-smoking sports bar, with a rooftop patio, in the heart of downtown with sports on TV, electronic trivia and games.
"Both Miller's Bar and Redcoat Tavern do have non-smoking sections, and you can be very express with them and tell them "*Very* non-smoking, please." which is usually understood and accomodated, but you may have to wait longer for your table."
"Freedom is about choice, and chosing between eating ar dying isn't really the freedom the founding fathers had in mind."
I'm pretty sure those that are even thinking about working at Google of all places aren't in the class of people who have to choose between eating or dying when considering employment there.
Let me post here instead of a direct response to all those who "hate" smokers because of this man.
First of all. Not all smokers are assholes. To consider them all assholes because of a subset of the population is called stereotyping. Stereotyping is generally considered wrong, except when it comes to smokers for some reason. I don't stereotype black people, gay people, homeless people, and I don't stereotype smokers either. Yes, a good bit of smokers throw their butts, but a good bit of McDonald's eaters toss their entire bag out the window on the interstate too.