You make a persuasive argument, but on the other hand, yes.
Are you insane?!! Only an idiot would not see the clarity and logic of the arguments for 'no'! It's people like you who are ruining the internet and rational discourse with your constant contrarianism. A pox on you!!
And of course, everyone knows the latest Synamic-brand line of trojans and worms was secretly written by Symantec, who then tried to sell the confusingly named Anti-Synantec as a means of combating the very malware they wrote. It's all very confusing, but all you need to walk away from this with is: Symantec = Evil incarnate
They still have a free version but they just don't advertise it.
That's right, they've outsourced their advertising to WHOOSH, a small, but persistently oblivious content-writing firm with members all over the world, most commonly found posting in this thread.
You'd need some sort of mechanised exoskeleton before thinking about venturing outside.
Better make it extra-large (I'm thinking 50+' tall), too. Who knows what sort of terrors the outside world will hold? You'll need all the armor and firepower you can get.
Airbus A330-200 dimensions:
Overall length: 58.8 m
Fuselage diameter: 5.64 m
Wing area: 361.6 sq. m
Total silhouette area (target area for meteorite): 58.8 x 5.64 + 361.6 = 693.232 sq. m
FlightAware says there are about 5000 airborne commercial aircraft flying into or out of U.S. airports right now. For arguments sake, let's assume 5 times that amount for total currently-airborne global commercial flights (25,000 planes in the air).
Let's also assume (for arguments sake) that all those airplanes have the "target" area of an Airbus A330-200 (total target area of all airborne planes then equals 18,080,000 sq. meters, or 18 sq. km).
Let's also assume (however absurd) there has been this many planes, of this size, in the air since 1959.
Taking the high-end estimate (approx. 84,000/yr, or 4.2M since 1959) for the number of meteorites greater than 10 grams that strike the Earth's surface each year (assuming, of course, that all of these would bring down an aircraft with any contact) and given the surface area of the Earth at 510,072,000 km, the chance that a meteorite would hit any (as in, just a single) plane within the last 50 years would be about 13.8% (or.138) whereas there have been over 1900 non-meteorite-caused major commercial accidents since 1959.
The upshot of all this, even working with absurd (in the meteorites' favor) numbers, the odds of the Air France Flight 447 accident being caused by a meteorite are astronomical.
One to One odds?! Madness!! If I'm gonna be a part of turning my beloved/. into a "criminal enterprise" you'd have to give me at least 5 to 1 on that. That bill is as dead-in-the-water as a casino boat off the coast of Somalia...
Wow. Nothing gets by you. You're like Dwight Howard, James Harrison, Martin Brodeur, Johnny Bench, and an East German Guard all rolled into one amazing nothing-gets-by-me package.
Wise Heroes Offer Options Only Obtuse Obstinate Slashdotters Hate.
NY already has some of the highest taxes in the country. I think by calling it a fat tax they hope to make it seem less egregious. What they need to do is make serious budget cuts.
Your response:
As far as cutting the budget: there's only about 16% of the budget that's discretionary.
My response to your response:
Are you confusing the Federal budget with the State of New York's?
Basically, what I'm trying to point out is that, because the GP was talking about budget cuts for the State of New York, your mention of the status of the Federal budget and its discretionary spending seems completely irrelevant.
Also, I found it odd that you gave a link to an 18-minute talk, when all the information he mentions regarding the Federal budget and mandatory spending could have been summed up with this image, courtesy of Wikipedia: Basic/Simple Chart
A more in-depth chart is also available from the same source: Complex Chart
Performance is, all by itself, a good enough indicator. And by this metric, if taxing junk food causes a net reduction in their use, that makes it worthy.
Why is net reduction in use of junk food "good performance"? Oh...is it because you believe that you have the wisdom, and the right, to legislate restrictions on the behavior of others because you "know" what's best for them? I'm sorry, I didn't realize that your ability to "look after" the well-being of the individual trumped that individual's personal liberty. I see, now. Well, at least you're in the company of some the most powerful dictators in history...
As far as cutting the budget: there's only about 16% of the budget that's discretionary. The rest is tied up in interest payments and pre-obligated spending. So there's not really all that much that can be cut, without actually changing the laws around spending.
Are you confusing the Federal budget with the State of New York's?
Makes more sense if you just assume the "Me" and "Him" are (repeated) typos of "Meh" and "Hmmm". I found this also helps flesh out the character of the pensive repair guy and the apathetic photographer.
My 15yo thinks Star Wars has more action than Trek, he says Trek is just "people sitting around, talking".
If you want to change/reverse your son's view on Star Trek and Star Wars, I'd just let him watch Episode I... Planetary trade blockades (oooh scary!), Negotiations with Gungans, Galactic politics (who isn't thrilled by a prospect of a "vote of no confidence"), Jedi Council debate, et al.
But seriously, there is a reason one is called Wars and one is called Trek. Personally, that's why I like TNG the most. I felt it captured the exploratory spirit that Rodenberry (I'm assuming) felt would be at the core of the motivations of a utopian society. It's kind of sad to see people who want their favorite franchises/stories/worlds to span every possible genre just so they can be 'appreciated' by those who only seem able to appreciate movies/t.v. shows of a single genre (be that action, mystery, romance, etc). Mayhaps encouraging those around you to experience/seek more variety/flavor would bring greater happiness than clamoring/hoping for each production to be "everything to everyone".
The degree to which you fail at either: 1) Comprehending satire, or 2) Having a sense of humor, or 3) Both of the above, literally boggles the mind. I'd have come up with something better than this to say but my mind is a little too thoroughly boggled. Ye gods!
Slashdot Mirror
...see how much it would affect the surfing of a typical westoner
Really?! Is that all we're known for?!
You make a persuasive argument, but on the other hand, yes.
Are you insane?!! Only an idiot would not see the clarity and logic of the arguments for 'no'! It's people like you who are ruining the internet and rational discourse with your constant contrarianism. A pox on you!!
Don't ask me why someone would want to code it this way... breaks reverse engineering tools too
I think you answered your own question.
Synamic products = Virus Anti-Synantec = Anti-Virus
And of course, everyone knows the latest Synamic-brand line of trojans and worms was secretly written by Symantec, who then tried to sell the confusingly named Anti-Synantec as a means of combating the very malware they wrote. It's all very confusing, but all you need to walk away from this with is:
Symantec = Evil incarnate
They still have a free version but they just don't advertise it.
That's right, they've outsourced their advertising to WHOOSH, a small, but persistently oblivious content-writing firm with members all over the world, most commonly found posting in this thread.
You'd need some sort of mechanised exoskeleton before thinking about venturing outside.
Better make it extra-large (I'm thinking 50+' tall), too. Who knows what sort of terrors the outside world will hold? You'll need all the armor and firepower you can get.
Airbus A330-200 dimensions:
.138) whereas there have been over 1900 non-meteorite-caused major commercial accidents since 1959.
Overall length: 58.8 m
Fuselage diameter: 5.64 m
Wing area: 361.6 sq. m
Total silhouette area (target area for meteorite): 58.8 x 5.64 + 361.6 = 693.232 sq. m
FlightAware says there are about 5000 airborne commercial aircraft flying into or out of U.S. airports right now. For arguments sake, let's assume 5 times that amount for total currently-airborne global commercial flights (25,000 planes in the air).
Let's also assume (for arguments sake) that all those airplanes have the "target" area of an Airbus A330-200 (total target area of all airborne planes then equals 18,080,000 sq. meters, or 18 sq. km).
Let's also assume (however absurd) there has been this many planes, of this size, in the air since 1959.
Taking the high-end estimate (approx. 84,000/yr, or 4.2M since 1959) for the number of meteorites greater than 10 grams that strike the Earth's surface each year (assuming, of course, that all of these would bring down an aircraft with any contact) and given the surface area of the Earth at 510,072,000 km, the chance that a meteorite would hit any (as in, just a single) plane within the last 50 years would be about 13.8% (or
The upshot of all this, even working with absurd (in the meteorites' favor) numbers, the odds of the Air France Flight 447 accident being caused by a meteorite are astronomical .
So sorry. That last pun was just over the coppertop.
Coulda been worse :-P
400 for a kindle is pretty steep for a lot people, even during the best of times.
And during the blurst of times the quality of the writing is so low it's not worth buying the books.
I swear it's like they get a bunch of monkeys to write these things...
Oh dear, it was the fault of the Jews all along, was it...who'd have guessed it!
Eric Cartman?
Or that search company...what's it called? Gloople? Gorgon? Giggle?
I don't know, maybe you should google it?
Aaaauggghh...terrible advice. Now I'm stuck in an infinite loop wondering WTF 'groople' might be...
One to One odds?! Madness!! If I'm gonna be a part of turning my beloved /. into a "criminal enterprise" you'd have to give me at least 5 to 1 on that. That bill is as dead-in-the-water as a casino boat off the coast of Somalia...
I see several flaws with this scenario:
Wow. Nothing gets by you. You're like Dwight Howard, James Harrison, Martin Brodeur, Johnny Bench, and an East German Guard all rolled into one amazing nothing-gets-by-me package.
Wise Heroes Offer Options Only Obtuse Obstinate Slashdotters Hate.
Seriously, next time we should send our criminals to Antarctica where they can do less damage...
You were talking about the criminals, right?
and one woman's instant is another man's forever...
I see that you too have been forced to wait for "an instant" while your girlfriend/wife does some "quick" shopping.
...even "Linux Lump" might have been more prudent for coining.
Yeah... then when you create your Beowulf cluster of these you can sing all about your lumps, your "lovely linux lumps".
Judging by your name and the pure sadistic evil of your idea, you must be a Woodland Critter.
I can haz over 9000 mod points, but feel I should lurk moar before using them...
As a bicycle owner, I look forward to the day when the smugness of Prius owners causes them to die from the inhalation of their own flatulence.
NY already has some of the highest taxes in the country. I think by calling it a fat tax they hope to make it seem less egregious. What they need to do is make serious budget cuts.
Your response:
As far as cutting the budget: there's only about 16% of the budget that's discretionary.
My response to your response:
Are you confusing the Federal budget with the State of New York's?
Basically, what I'm trying to point out is that, because the GP was talking about budget cuts for the State of New York, your mention of the status of the Federal budget and its discretionary spending seems completely irrelevant.
Also, I found it odd that you gave a link to an 18-minute talk, when all the information he mentions regarding the Federal budget and mandatory spending could have been summed up with this image, courtesy of Wikipedia:
Basic/Simple Chart
A more in-depth chart is also available from the same source:
Complex Chart
Performance is, all by itself, a good enough indicator. And by this metric, if taxing junk food causes a net reduction in their use, that makes it worthy.
Why is net reduction in use of junk food "good performance"? Oh...is it because you believe that you have the wisdom, and the right, to legislate restrictions on the behavior of others because you "know" what's best for them? I'm sorry, I didn't realize that your ability to "look after" the well-being of the individual trumped that individual's personal liberty. I see, now. Well, at least you're in the company of some the most powerful dictators in history...
As far as cutting the budget: there's only about 16% of the budget that's discretionary. The rest is tied up in interest payments and pre-obligated spending. So there's not really all that much that can be cut, without actually changing the laws around spending.
Are you confusing the Federal budget with the State of New York's?
Makes more sense if you just assume the "Me" and "Him" are (repeated) typos of "Meh" and "Hmmm". I found this also helps flesh out the character of the pensive repair guy and the apathetic photographer.
You forgot:
Earthy - filled with dirt
Uranull - filled with urine
My 15yo thinks Star Wars has more action than Trek, he says Trek is just "people sitting around, talking".
If you want to change/reverse your son's view on Star Trek and Star Wars, I'd just let him watch Episode I... Planetary trade blockades (oooh scary!), Negotiations with Gungans, Galactic politics (who isn't thrilled by a prospect of a "vote of no confidence"), Jedi Council debate, et al.
But seriously, there is a reason one is called Wars and one is called Trek. Personally, that's why I like TNG the most. I felt it captured the exploratory spirit that Rodenberry (I'm assuming) felt would be at the core of the motivations of a utopian society. It's kind of sad to see people who want their favorite franchises/stories/worlds to span every possible genre just so they can be 'appreciated' by those who only seem able to appreciate movies/t.v. shows of a single genre (be that action, mystery, romance, etc). Mayhaps encouraging those around you to experience/seek more variety/flavor would bring greater happiness than clamoring/hoping for each production to be "everything to everyone".
The degree to which you fail at either: 1) Comprehending satire, or 2) Having a sense of humor, or 3) Both of the above, literally boggles the mind. I'd have come up with something better than this to say but my mind is a little too thoroughly boggled. Ye gods!