Isnt IOS 6 a free upgrade? And compatible across ~90% of apple devices?
Im gonna guess THAT is why the adoption rate is so high, not because Apple is good at bilking money out of users (which is irrelevant if the update is, in fact, free).
Sure their implementation is new and Apple deserves some slack for thaT
They deserve slack for replacing a well known, well tested, highly reliable and popular service with their in-house verison which is apparently poorly tested and unpopular-- all in the name of a popularity contest?
No, they took a gamble to try to marginalize Google, and apparently its half baked. I see no reason anyone would give them slack.
the state should pay for it....Nobody should be charged for their mandatory ID cards.
Where do you suppose the state gets its money from? We're going to be charged, regardless of whether its an explicit voting tax or hidden in income tax. And there will always be some people who are effectively not paying that particular tax, and are being subsidized by others.
As long as its like a $1 fee or whatever and not likely to restrict someone's ability, Im not seeing the problem. Are people less likely to vote because now they can SEE that it costs money to maintain a democracy?
The irony is that people for this might sincerely argue that it is necessary to trace the votes to prevent one kind of election fraud; but of course it opens up the door for a much more common kind.
I imagine any appeal will argue against it on those grounds-- that there is an implicit right in the constitution necessitated by the chance of coercion. I imagine proponents of the ruling will argue that there is no explicit right and that that is all that matters.
Your argument is based on the ASSUMPTION that these people will start businesses. Most of these people will work for existing corporations, not start their own businesses. Thus they will be reducing the number of jobs not increasing them.
Thats not necessarily true. If the companies are helped to succeed by their employees, more jobs tend to be created by those companies.
Seems to me-- ignorant, non-elected individual that I am-- that the thing to do would be to pass the thing everyone agrees upon (so as not to continue pissing off the constituency), and argue about the other stuff later.
I mean, we could also just lump all of the years issues into one gigantic Megabill, and argue about it for the next 10 years, but that seems counterproductive. But thats just me.
I know it is a comedy show and perhaps can't be taken too seriously,
Despite the comedy nature and Jon Stewart's heavy left-leaning, hes a pretty insightful dude. Ive heard hes moderately popular because of that, in fact.
Trent Lott in an NPR interview once said that the advent of always on media coverage of politics was one of the best, and worst, things to happen to our political system.
(Best because yay transparency, worst because it polarizes the two sides: reaching across the aisle now risks branding you as a traitor / RINO / "fake democrat" / whatever else)
Fox News: "Except George Zimmerman, nah that was gun, he was afraid, it went off in his hand, we at Fox news blame the gun" Is that basically the Fox News position in this?
The position was that self defense has always been an accepted defense, and Fox News believe this to be self defense. I dont believe I heard anyone use your strawman position, but perhaps I wasnt listening closely.
Youre not watching closely if you havent seen all news networks do it. I wont claim that theyre all equal, but ive definately seen my share of nonsense from the other networks.
Youre noticing it most on fox because you tend to be more critical of fox and their views. I notice it on other stations because I disagree with their viewpoint and hence will tend to be more critical of them. We all have our biases, and if youre not careful it leads you to think your ownside is spotless (its not).
As you rant against republicans, just recall that is commonly THEM who are labeled as spouting vitriol. Way to raise the level of political discourse and show how resonable you as a democrat are.
Perhaps the lesson here are that generalizations get you into trouble.
If the constitution says "It is permissible to drink water under all circumstances", and the supreme court says "drinking water is unconstitutional", legally they are right, but factually they remain wrong.
Because its user base is always assumed to just KNOW how everything works, and if you pose a question that some neckbeard thinks is "stupid", he'll let you know it, and you'll be the focal point of mockery and derision.
I think thats a little exaggeration. My time on Ubuntu (several years and several upgrades) involved a lot of troubleshooting, and I spent a lot of time in the Ubuntu IRC channel. Generally people were polite; the only issue is that you may simply not have gotten a response if your problem wasnt "interesting" or complicated enough--you could end up just watching and repeating yourself every 10 minutes for hours.
The forums seem like theyre a lot better-- regardless of distro (even stuff like pfsense forums); youll get a response, it just may take a few days. I dont think Ive ever seen someone called stupid by a "neckbeard".
To give the unbiased view, a hack via website is bad, but one via NFC seems a lot worse (although one hopes you would be suspicious when a stranger starts holding your android up to his; its not exactly "stealthy").
Slashdot Mirror
But the original Hitler came from the west not from a fucked up place.
What exactly do you suppose you would call Germany, post WW1? Hyperinflation isnt typically the mark of a great place to live.
it's a small proportion of Muslims acting in the way rightists here want to depict all Muslims as.
>>Objecting to others stereotyping a group
>>Doing so by stereotyping "rightists"
I see what you did there.
Once again, that tax is there whether you acknowledge it or not.
Isnt IOS 6 a free upgrade? And compatible across ~90% of apple devices?
Im gonna guess THAT is why the adoption rate is so high, not because Apple is good at bilking money out of users (which is irrelevant if the update is, in fact, free).
Sure their implementation is new and Apple deserves some slack for thaT
They deserve slack for replacing a well known, well tested, highly reliable and popular service with their in-house verison which is apparently poorly tested and unpopular-- all in the name of a popularity contest?
No, they took a gamble to try to marginalize Google, and apparently its half baked. I see no reason anyone would give them slack.
the state should pay for it....Nobody should be charged for their mandatory ID cards.
Where do you suppose the state gets its money from? We're going to be charged, regardless of whether its an explicit voting tax or hidden in income tax. And there will always be some people who are effectively not paying that particular tax, and are being subsidized by others.
As long as its like a $1 fee or whatever and not likely to restrict someone's ability, Im not seeing the problem. Are people less likely to vote because now they can SEE that it costs money to maintain a democracy?
The irony is that people for this might sincerely argue that it is necessary to trace the votes to prevent one kind of election fraud; but of course it opens up the door for a much more common kind.
I imagine any appeal will argue against it on those grounds-- that there is an implicit right in the constitution necessitated by the chance of coercion. I imagine proponents of the ruling will argue that there is no explicit right and that that is all that matters.
Take it up with the constitution.
This thread was a wonderful demonstration of what the problem with todays politics are.
Republicans dont believe in growth economies? News to me.
Your argument is based on the ASSUMPTION that these people will start businesses. Most of these people will work for existing corporations, not start their own businesses. Thus they will be reducing the number of jobs not increasing them.
Thats not necessarily true. If the companies are helped to succeed by their employees, more jobs tend to be created by those companies.
Seems to me-- ignorant, non-elected individual that I am-- that the thing to do would be to pass the thing everyone agrees upon (so as not to continue pissing off the constituency), and argue about the other stuff later.
I mean, we could also just lump all of the years issues into one gigantic Megabill, and argue about it for the next 10 years, but that seems counterproductive. But thats just me.
We dont have an AAA rating.
I know it is a comedy show and perhaps can't be taken too seriously,
Despite the comedy nature and Jon Stewart's heavy left-leaning, hes a pretty insightful dude. Ive heard hes moderately popular because of that, in fact.
Trent Lott in an NPR interview once said that the advent of always on media coverage of politics was one of the best, and worst, things to happen to our political system.
(Best because yay transparency, worst because it polarizes the two sides: reaching across the aisle now risks branding you as a traitor / RINO / "fake democrat" / whatever else)
How does that happen? Is that a provision of how the bill was introduced? Does someone raise a motion?
Im a little ignorant of how these sorts of things happen, and not exactly sure what to google-- what is this procedure called?
Better not be left, those darn liberals already ruined the Eiffel tower.
Fox News: "Except George Zimmerman, nah that was gun, he was afraid, it went off in his hand, we at Fox news blame the gun"
Is that basically the Fox News position in this?
The position was that self defense has always been an accepted defense, and Fox News believe this to be self defense. I dont believe I heard anyone use your strawman position, but perhaps I wasnt listening closely.
Youre not watching closely if you havent seen all news networks do it. I wont claim that theyre all equal, but ive definately seen my share of nonsense from the other networks.
Youre noticing it most on fox because you tend to be more critical of fox and their views. I notice it on other stations because I disagree with their viewpoint and hence will tend to be more critical of them. We all have our biases, and if youre not careful it leads you to think your ownside is spotless (its not).
As you rant against republicans, just recall that is commonly THEM who are labeled as spouting vitriol. Way to raise the level of political discourse and show how resonable you as a democrat are.
Perhaps the lesson here are that generalizations get you into trouble.
Certainly it makes it one of the easiest to remove antiviruses, which is a pretty major AV feature in my book.
If the constitution says "It is permissible to drink water under all circumstances", and the supreme court says "drinking water is unconstitutional", legally they are right, but factually they remain wrong.
Because its user base is always assumed to just KNOW how everything works, and if you pose a question that some neckbeard thinks is "stupid", he'll let you know it, and you'll be the focal point of mockery and derision.
I think thats a little exaggeration. My time on Ubuntu (several years and several upgrades) involved a lot of troubleshooting, and I spent a lot of time in the Ubuntu IRC channel. Generally people were polite; the only issue is that you may simply not have gotten a response if your problem wasnt "interesting" or complicated enough--you could end up just watching and repeating yourself every 10 minutes for hours.
The forums seem like theyre a lot better-- regardless of distro (even stuff like pfsense forums); youll get a response, it just may take a few days. I dont think Ive ever seen someone called stupid by a "neckbeard".
To give the unbiased view, a hack via website is bad, but one via NFC seems a lot worse (although one hopes you would be suspicious when a stranger starts holding your android up to his; its not exactly "stealthy").