Yeah! If/. wasn't here, no one would have noticed the huge voting discrepencies in 2000, 2002, and 2004 that were reported on everywhere else as well. Go us!
Saying "you have no right to complain" doesn't infringe your right to free speech? Wow, that sounds like something Tony Snow could have said.
And a non-voter could validly say "if I had voted, it still wouldn't have changed anything because I wasn't going to vote for the entrenched 2-party system."
I have a phpBB forum, and I changed the forms in the registration to be a bit different and still have been bitten by spammers every day, so it's not foolproof. Of course, I don't have any control data on that -- it was changed from the beginning, so I don't know if really it helps or not. I just know that it's far from perfect.
When you are using those "facts" to try proving something irrelevant to those "facts," yes it is. If the unflattering "facts" were all about GPLv3 (which was supposed to be the point) and not RMS, then you would be correct.
> Articles like this will probably backfire by actually getting more readers to understand what the GPL is really all about
I fear that you are incorrect. People who read Forbes won't necessarily read more about the topic, they'll probably just remember that "using Linux could hurt our business in the future."
1/2 power does not necessarily mean that each outlet is running at half power. It could mean (and what I meant) is that half of your outlets are at full power, the rest at none. If you use redundant power supplies, with one plug going to each outlet, then you are still operating at *gasp* full power. Or consider the possibility of having a cluster, where half of them run on one generator, the other half on the other. You may run at half of full operational capacity, wut you are still available.
> Odds of rolling a critical failure statistically double.
But a critical failure of one out of two means you still have one running -- half power, as opposed to none. You are assuming that 1/2 power == 0 power.
Isn't that assuming that one of the two generators failing would bring everything down? If you only had one to begin with, one failure guarantees no power. One of two means half power. Not sure how you'd deal with that, but as long as the second one was just a backup, a third one would just be a backup-backup.
Or are you suggesting a shared load between the three when two would do the job during normal operating conditions? Sorry, power distribution certainly isn't my specialty...
> > 2. a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule. > I think that were the poster's theory correct definition #2 would clearly apply.
So that means... getting a rare speech disfunction is "human folly?"
Slashdot Mirror
AFAIK, vote counters are not paid, so no: it would NOT be more economically viable to use computers, it would be less so.
Yeah! If /. wasn't here, no one would have noticed the huge voting discrepencies in 2000, 2002, and 2004 that were reported on everywhere else as well. Go us!
They were removed to "fix" the polling/result discrepancies.
Yeah! Then I'd have to vote the way I was paid to vote, and that's just unconscionable.
Mutes can clap. People with no hands can yell. If you have no voice and no hands, you have bigger things to worry about.
They are in perpetual Beta. What's good for GMail is good for the country!
Saying "you have no right to complain" doesn't infringe your right to free speech? Wow, that sounds like something Tony Snow could have said.
And a non-voter could validly say "if I had voted, it still wouldn't have changed anything because I wasn't going to vote for the entrenched 2-party system."
I have a phpBB forum, and I changed the forms in the registration to be a bit different and still have been bitten by spammers every day, so it's not foolproof. Of course, I don't have any control data on that -- it was changed from the beginning, so I don't know if really it helps or not. I just know that it's far from perfect.
> I fail to see how having a football chaped controller will allow one to digitally play games like catch
Not "catch," just "throw." Get a tall net right in front of you to catch it and have it sloped so it rolls back down.
You, sir, are truly a nerd :)
That's what I was thinking, and it surprised me that no one mentioned it earlier... This could be a parent's nightmare.
"Go play ball or something." "OK!!!" *BANG, CRASH*
"What did I just tell you?" "But I was DOING what you told me!"
> but unless you actually practice, you won't develop the physical or mental aptitude.
Yeah! Quit playing Rainbow Six: go buy a sniper rifle and try killing people for REAL, or else you'll never get good at it!
Maybe they are not trying to be football stars, they just want to play a frigging video game.
Naw, at least I, and maybe someone else, got a chuckle out of it. Laughter is priceless, not worthless.
> So now, unflattering facts are "FUD"?
When you are using those "facts" to try proving something irrelevant to those "facts," yes it is. If the unflattering "facts" were all about GPLv3 (which was supposed to be the point) and not RMS, then you would be correct.
> Articles like this will probably backfire by actually getting more readers to understand what the GPL is really all about
I fear that you are incorrect. People who read Forbes won't necessarily read more about the topic, they'll probably just remember that "using Linux could hurt our business in the future."
> if you're not allowed to write certain software, then are you really free?
If you're not allowed to kill someone, are you really free? It's not your point I am disputing, it is part of the logic you used to come to it.
"Bender, you know there's no such thing as two."
(two, two-fifty-seven... similar context)
1/2 power does not necessarily mean that each outlet is running at half power. It could mean (and what I meant) is that half of your outlets are at full power, the rest at none. If you use redundant power supplies, with one plug going to each outlet, then you are still operating at *gasp* full power. Or consider the possibility of having a cluster, where half of them run on one generator, the other half on the other. You may run at half of full operational capacity, wut you are still available.
> Ierusalimschy isn't a name, it's a bad Scrabble hand.
Actually, to get that you would have to be cheating... badly.
> Odds of rolling a critical failure statistically double.
But a critical failure of one out of two means you still have one running -- half power, as opposed to none. You are assuming that 1/2 power == 0 power.
> you would double your probability of failure.
Isn't that assuming that one of the two generators failing would bring everything down? If you only had one to begin with, one failure guarantees no power. One of two means half power. Not sure how you'd deal with that, but as long as the second one was just a backup, a third one would just be a backup-backup.
Or are you suggesting a shared load between the three when two would do the job during normal operating conditions? Sorry, power distribution certainly isn't my specialty...
I suppose it would... :)
> > 2. a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.
> I think that were the poster's theory correct definition #2 would clearly apply.
So that means... getting a rare speech disfunction is "human folly?"
> Just because there's no news for a topic doesn't mean that topic should be turned into something else...
That's right: they still have the Amiga category and haven't changed it to "News about Checkered Balls".... yet.
If you knew where it was... it's not deja-vu.