With the rapid pace of development in education best practices in e-learning KA is becoming seriously outdated. The math videos, for instance, should be sliced up and have interactive questions with feedback.
Why is it snobbery to say that one does not watch tv? More than it is offensive to you that someone DOESN'T watch tv? I don't freak out and think someone is pede-snob because they don't own a car just as I do not hate people for watching tv. WTF? Sometimes it has to be mentioned when someone is lodging a barrage of questions at you about have-you-seen-this have-you-seen-this, what about..? I can't help it their entire repertoire of metaphor and cognition is composed of television programming. Does it end conversations? Yep, and it never makes me sad, not because I dive into justification and self-deception, but because what was being conveyed was meaningless to begin with. I know plenty of people who have ditched "the tube" and use the internet via Netflix and Hulu or whatnot. Big Deal. I guess they're snobs.
Agreed. As much as I loath his actions I do not wish him harm. He had probably endured a great deal of suffering up to that point. Not to say he will not or should not be dealt with, it is just that it is strange to genuinely feel like you want to do this to anyone.
I like getting the dead tree in the mail for I get to see what the world was like yesterday. In the review of the Dark Knight Rises in the WSJ the last line in the article, which was written and printed before the Colorado incident is, "Happy days are done and gone."
They almost have to do this. Online communities are being poisoned to death. While I value anonymous posting, much of the web is becoming unusable. This could be solved with better (think: out-of-the-box) moderation, but the other alternative to cleaning up something as invective as YouTube is to require real names. I would be willing to pay a small amount in able to join a community and use a handle, with the chance of getting banned by a REAL moderator, to participate in a grown-up conversation.
I see these Otterboxes and wondering about the size of the phones I guess no one really cares since the damn Otterbox doubles its size! Apple goes through hell to shrink the iPhone and the first thing people do is encapsulate it in a gigantic turtle shell. (Yeah, I know the size is not *really* doubled, but still.)
I love it when people can't change their mind in light of factual or superior reasoning. Isn't that just an impressive aspect of some human beings? The weight they must carry is certainly deadening.
The firearms that citizens have access to should be roughly equivalent to those issued to regular soldiers. This was covered as the intent behind the word "arms" in the 2nd amendment per the Federalist Papers. We have already covered that.
It is enough training to establish that you are mindful of your weapon, know exactly how to use it, and are well acquainted with its unsettling destructive power. It does not qualify you to wield a weapon in a "tactical" situation.
Yes, it happened quickly because the shooter knew that if he continued it would have cost him his own life, as highly trained well armed people were likely on the way--fast.
This person who pulled this "tactical" attack meant to ensure that people would die no matter what. He certainly planned on someone having a firearm on them and perhaps he was worried about getting shot by police as well. You are right, a CC holder may or may not have stopped him or limited the damage, and it is not really their job to do so. Like I mentioned, the attacker had already planned this and had contingencies in place (smoke grenade, bullet-proof vest, multiple weapons of varying utility). Although, getting hit with a vest on is still going to stop the perpetrator. I'm very good with a firearm, but I don't know if I would have tried to stop him unless he directly threatened me or I had a clear shot.
The provisions in the Bill of Rights is not open for debate, it simply enumerates rights that the government has no power to infringe/remove/curtail. It is the Supreme Court's duty to prevent any substantial infringement of any rights listed in that amendment. For all intents and purposes the Bill of Rights IS the constitution. The first three articles are just as valuable in establishing a government but wane in importance next to human rights. One of those rights is the right to protect myself *and* to remain a threat to the government. We live in a VERY safe society so it easy now to get all huffy about firearm ownership, but to make them unavailable to anyone for personal protection is inhumane. Being driven to use a firearm is a terrible thing, most of the time the mere presence of one is enough to establish the security of a person. No issue arises in that case and so you do not have the data for which to say that it prevented an altercation. A catch 22. But we do have incidences like this for which there is no answer or solution. If a person is willing to give up their life to hurt others then you will be hard pressed to stop or limit the damage in any case.
Actually, unless legislated for the venue, those signs do not mean anything for a CC. The sign is just expressing the policy of the business and holds no power over CC permit holders.
Slashdot Mirror
With the rapid pace of development in education best practices in e-learning KA is becoming seriously outdated. The math videos, for instance, should be sliced up and have interactive questions with feedback.
He is just being a LEADER. See that guys, a leader!
Why is it snobbery to say that one does not watch tv? More than it is offensive to you that someone DOESN'T watch tv? I don't freak out and think someone is pede-snob because they don't own a car just as I do not hate people for watching tv. WTF? Sometimes it has to be mentioned when someone is lodging a barrage of questions at you about have-you-seen-this have-you-seen-this, what about..? I can't help it their entire repertoire of metaphor and cognition is composed of television programming. Does it end conversations? Yep, and it never makes me sad, not because I dive into justification and self-deception, but because what was being conveyed was meaningless to begin with. I know plenty of people who have ditched "the tube" and use the internet via Netflix and Hulu or whatnot. Big Deal. I guess they're snobs.
Hatta, your mom is calling! Your chocolate cake and cheetos are ready. She's waiting at the top of the basement steps.
Grow up.
Agreed. As much as I loath his actions I do not wish him harm. He had probably endured a great deal of suffering up to that point. Not to say he will not or should not be dealt with, it is just that it is strange to genuinely feel like you want to do this to anyone.
Thanks at least for Walpole paraphrase. Learned something new.
No, don't think I can bring myself to see it in a theater. Maybe on Blu-Ray. Maybe.
I like getting the dead tree in the mail for I get to see what the world was like yesterday. In the review of the Dark Knight Rises in the WSJ the last line in the article, which was written and printed before the Colorado incident is, "Happy days are done and gone."
Wow /. has a subscription service? I don't ever see ads on /.
They almost have to do this. Online communities are being poisoned to death. While I value anonymous posting, much of the web is becoming unusable. This could be solved with better (think: out-of-the-box) moderation, but the other alternative to cleaning up something as invective as YouTube is to require real names. I would be willing to pay a small amount in able to join a community and use a handle, with the chance of getting banned by a REAL moderator, to participate in a grown-up conversation.
I see these Otterboxes and wondering about the size of the phones I guess no one really cares since the damn Otterbox doubles its size! Apple goes through hell to shrink the iPhone and the first thing people do is encapsulate it in a gigantic turtle shell. (Yeah, I know the size is not *really* doubled, but still.)
I love it when people can't change their mind in light of factual or superior reasoning. Isn't that just an impressive aspect of some human beings? The weight they must carry is certainly deadening.
The firearms that citizens have access to should be roughly equivalent to those issued to regular soldiers. This was covered as the intent behind the word "arms" in the 2nd amendment per the Federalist Papers. We have already covered that.
It is enough training to establish that you are mindful of your weapon, know exactly how to use it, and are well acquainted with its unsettling destructive power. It does not qualify you to wield a weapon in a "tactical" situation.
Watch out, someone just flipped an ash on your straw man.
Yes, it happened quickly because the shooter knew that if he continued it would have cost him his own life, as highly trained well armed people were likely on the way--fast.
This person who pulled this "tactical" attack meant to ensure that people would die no matter what. He certainly planned on someone having a firearm on them and perhaps he was worried about getting shot by police as well. You are right, a CC holder may or may not have stopped him or limited the damage, and it is not really their job to do so. Like I mentioned, the attacker had already planned this and had contingencies in place (smoke grenade, bullet-proof vest, multiple weapons of varying utility). Although, getting hit with a vest on is still going to stop the perpetrator. I'm very good with a firearm, but I don't know if I would have tried to stop him unless he directly threatened me or I had a clear shot.
In 2008 the DC gun ban was struck down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller
The provisions in the Bill of Rights is not open for debate, it simply enumerates rights that the government has no power to infringe/remove/curtail. It is the Supreme Court's duty to prevent any substantial infringement of any rights listed in that amendment. For all intents and purposes the Bill of Rights IS the constitution. The first three articles are just as valuable in establishing a government but wane in importance next to human rights. One of those rights is the right to protect myself *and* to remain a threat to the government. We live in a VERY safe society so it easy now to get all huffy about firearm ownership, but to make them unavailable to anyone for personal protection is inhumane. Being driven to use a firearm is a terrible thing, most of the time the mere presence of one is enough to establish the security of a person. No issue arises in that case and so you do not have the data for which to say that it prevented an altercation. A catch 22. But we do have incidences like this for which there is no answer or solution. If a person is willing to give up their life to hurt others then you will be hard pressed to stop or limit the damage in any case.
Actually, unless legislated for the venue, those signs do not mean anything for a CC. The sign is just expressing the policy of the business and holds no power over CC permit holders.
BING is a sink-hole.
It's deceptive (and raises false hope in some).
Welcome to the pop-internet.
Windows 8 is hardly Vista. It is leaner and has features that make for a compelling upgrade.
Didn't Vista development cost 6 Billion?
Party at my house, this weekend.