Did the scientists say that an earthquake would not happen? Can you point to specific statements by the geologists that there was no risk of an earthquake?
Unless you're tortured to get a plea bargain, a plea bargain is not torture. It is often coercion, and can be wrong for all those sorts of non-torturous reasons. But threatening someone with jail unless they accept a plea bargain is not torture -- that just waters down the definition of torture.
So if those with money or political influence can cheat, poorer students ask, why shouldn't they?"
Two wrongs don't make a right.
It's similar to affirmative action, except taken by the student instead of the institution. The poor students are explicitly held down by the rich students, so as long as the degree the rich student gets doesn't reflect his effort, the poor students wonder why they have to be held to a higher standard. If they're the only one being held to that standard, then the only result of "Two wrongs don't make a right" is their continued subjugation.
Obviously, you can easily substitute "well-connected" for "rich" above. The caste system is still strong in India.
yes, they would kick out people paying them lots of money to get in. There certainly is no incentive in a pure capitalist university to keep rich well paying people enrolled.
Of course there is; reputation is sometime's a university's best asset.
Oh, and a last note, there are quite a few good Indian engineers out there still, but there are far more mediocre ones, and it's difficult to tell the good from the bad when degrees, references, or anything other a personal recommendation from someone you trust can't be trusted.
I came across a site freelancers.com. Most of the projects on there are for university students cheating on their projects. Just another indicator India has fallen from the bright engineers of the 90's to the dim witted inept engineers that we see today.
Perhaps that, but also because those bright engineers of yesteryear got into it for the interest in the subject. Maybe they were also farsighted enough to see where the position could take them.
These days, tech is strongly, strongly pushed in India as it's seen as a great way to bring in foreign capital. It leads to too many engineers who can't actually hack it, like diploma mills in the US but on a much larger scale.
Immediately I thought of the fictional Mach 2 "Carreidas 160" from the Tintin comic book (written before the Concorde made supersonic jet travel possible). Swing wing design was also used on the F-111, but seems to have fallen out of favor.
The takedown was fake, but there's nothing we can do about that. The real issue is the fact that Google gave the personal information of the account holder to the people filing the DMCA complaint.
This is one reason why I don't use real names when signing up for any web site. They want my real name? Date of birth? Etc? Well fuck them, they don't NEED to know it, and their desire to have it is none of my concern. If you're showing your own face and voice in a Youtube video, privacy can be tricky, but otherwise... don't give out your personal information, even if a web site, of all things, demands it.
Oh please, of course he wanted it public. Why make a "I'm proud to be Gay" public announcement if he didn't want to make his private life public?
Because he's already been outed. Now it's about controlling the message.
, I could care less, right up to the point where people start making press releases and public statements, then it ticks me off
So there should be no more announcements when heterosexual couples get married, right?
There was a day when talking about one's sex life in public was taboo (no matter which way you where).
Tim Cook didn't say "I was banging my boyfriend until 3am last night." That's sex life. Saying you're dating someone else or that you might even *shock* want to get married isn't talking about sex life. You have a double standard. If it's socially acceptable for heterosexual people to talk about those things but then you scream "oh my god, flasher in a trenchcoat," then you're a fucking hypocrite.
Gay sex is a private behavior, and I don't need to hear about it. Just being gay is not.
That was Sara Palin vs Joe Biden, not Sara Palin vs Barak Obama.
Most people thought John McCain would kick the bucket within the year, so you had a much higher chance of President Palin than a President Biden. If you have a healthy president, and the vice president just spins in a circle and makes airplane noises, no one cares. They care very much when the president has to drink the blood of unicorns to stay alive (which is the only explanation that fits).
Hyperbolic, maybe. Certainly not "nonsense." Substitute "few" as the notion this is not really socially defensible is generally learned by high school.
More than one religion certainly stresses that it's not only actions that matter, but what is in your heart. Didn't Jesus say that if you merely looked at a woman with lust, you had committed adultery?
"responsibility" doesn't say anything because it isn't a living being. If an animal starts having sex with you because you got into a certain position, that qualifies as "consent" to me, or to anyone with a brain. Children, again, it depends on the individual. Your black-and-white thinking has no real place in a free, rational society, in my opinion.
Black and white thinking is fairly important when it comes to law-making and better yet, for knowing if you're breaking a law. Of course there are things that are legal fiction, and they're often (obviously not always) there anyway for good reason.
You're entirely missing the point. There are many people who feel that gay == shameful, the direct implication being that they want gay folk to feel ashamed. Proud is an in-their-face declaration that they are not ashamed.
I'm not a fan of gay pride, because "pride" does not mean "not ashamed."
I'm not proud to be gay any more than I'm "proud" of being white, or male.
I'm not proud to be gay. I'm not just ashamed of it.
I'll put on my "soul-killing media company" hat here, because you're trying to argue logically with them, while they'll come at this from a different perspective.
In some ways, it is a substitute. However, many times these are games we aren't going to buy since we can't afford to buy every game out there.
Then you and your son can do without. It's either no experience, or you fork over the cash for the game. There is no legal middle ground there. You don't get to keep the cash and get a degraded game experience. Not being able to afford the media isn't an excuse, if you don't want to, or can't buy it, then you go without completely.
That would be the game argument at least. The "it's a way to sell the game" is certainly debatable, it seems to be semi-valid for commercial software, but on the other hand Slashdot is also full of folks who pirated their music because they didn't want to pay for it, but would rather use that money for food/computer games/other media, then made a bunch of other excuses for why they were justified. Jury is still out on how right either side is on that.
That's weird. Netflix cost me less than $20 and I there aren't even commercials to skip.
Hey, what a shock, Netflix's streaming options are shit because all the content companies decided that Netflix charges way too little. It's not even pay-per-view, the minimum standard for content company consumer gouging.
It's a pointless inconvenience and inefficiency. I would not want you on any dev team I had to work with, with your willful acceptance of busted-ass processes simply because they don't bother you much.
No, he's weighing the pros against the cons. The cons of the burdens of adjusting clocks are quite minor compared to the other pros and cons being discussed.
Or heck, legislate a shift in work hours. It's hardly more oppressive than legislating capricious changes in the freakin' clock
Legislating a shift in work hours is absolutely impossible, so it's certainly not more difficult than daylight savings time. And that's partially because daylight savings time is already done.
Drive home in the dark? Surely not from work, because if that were the case DST does nothing to help the 5-7pm commute since you're already in daylight at that time of year anyway.
Not true, at many/most latitudes in the US, 6pm is almost pitch dark in the winter.
Slashdot Mirror
That's Guyana, which is to the west of Surinam "Dutch Guiana."
The people died. They were wrong.
Did the scientists say that an earthquake would not happen? Can you point to specific statements by the geologists that there was no risk of an earthquake?
Unless you're tortured to get a plea bargain, a plea bargain is not torture. It is often coercion, and can be wrong for all those sorts of non-torturous reasons. But threatening someone with jail unless they accept a plea bargain is not torture -- that just waters down the definition of torture.
....
"Nature's fracking?"
Come on, there has to be a way to pin earthquakes on fracking somehow.
California didn't have any quakes until the oil companies moved in and started fracking up and down the coast.
Thanks AC, your comment (and presumed moderation) really contribute to the discussion.
So if those with money or political influence can cheat, poorer students ask, why shouldn't they?"
Two wrongs don't make a right.
It's similar to affirmative action, except taken by the student instead of the institution. The poor students are explicitly held down by the rich students, so as long as the degree the rich student gets doesn't reflect his effort, the poor students wonder why they have to be held to a higher standard. If they're the only one being held to that standard, then the only result of "Two wrongs don't make a right" is their continued subjugation.
Obviously, you can easily substitute "well-connected" for "rich" above.
The caste system is still strong in India.
yes, they would kick out people paying them lots of money to get in. There certainly is no incentive in a pure capitalist university to keep rich well paying people enrolled.
Of course there is; reputation is sometime's a university's best asset.
Oh, and a last note, there are quite a few good Indian engineers out there still, but there are far more mediocre ones, and it's difficult to tell the good from the bad when degrees, references, or anything other a personal recommendation from someone you trust can't be trusted.
I came across a site freelancers.com. Most of the projects on there are for university students cheating on their projects. Just another indicator India has fallen from the bright engineers of the 90's to the dim witted inept engineers that we see today.
Perhaps that, but also because those bright engineers of yesteryear got into it for the interest in the subject. Maybe they were also farsighted enough to see where the position could take them.
These days, tech is strongly, strongly pushed in India as it's seen as a great way to bring in foreign capital. It leads to too many engineers who can't actually hack it, like diploma mills in the US but on a much larger scale.
Immediately I thought of the fictional Mach 2 "Carreidas 160" from the Tintin comic book (written before the Concorde made supersonic jet travel possible). Swing wing design was also used on the F-111, but seems to have fallen out of favor.
Carreidas 160
The takedown was fake, but there's nothing we can do about that. The real issue is the fact that Google gave the personal information of the account holder to the people filing the DMCA complaint.
This is one reason why I don't use real names when signing up for any web site. They want my real name? Date of birth? Etc? Well fuck them, they don't NEED to know it, and their desire to have it is none of my concern. If you're showing your own face and voice in a Youtube video, privacy can be tricky, but otherwise... don't give out your personal information, even if a web site, of all things, demands it.
Oh please, of course he wanted it public. Why make a "I'm proud to be Gay" public announcement if he didn't want to make his private life public?
Because he's already been outed. Now it's about controlling the message.
, I could care less, right up to the point where people start making press releases and public statements, then it ticks me off
So there should be no more announcements when heterosexual couples get married, right?
There was a day when talking about one's sex life in public was taboo (no matter which way you where).
Tim Cook didn't say "I was banging my boyfriend until 3am last night." That's sex life. Saying you're dating someone else or that you might even *shock* want to get married isn't talking about sex life. You have a double standard. If it's socially acceptable for heterosexual people to talk about those things but then you scream "oh my god, flasher in a trenchcoat," then you're a fucking hypocrite.
Gay sex is a private behavior, and I don't need to hear about it. Just being gay is not.
That was Sara Palin vs Joe Biden, not Sara Palin vs Barak Obama.
Most people thought John McCain would kick the bucket within the year, so you had a much higher chance of President Palin than a President Biden. If you have a healthy president, and the vice president just spins in a circle and makes airplane noises, no one cares. They care very much when the president has to drink the blood of unicorns to stay alive (which is the only explanation that fits).
I know of two "sexual preferences": heterosexual and homosexual.
Poor bisexuals, everyone forgets about them.
Hyperbolic, maybe. Certainly not "nonsense." Substitute "few" as the notion this is not really socially defensible is generally learned by high school.
More than one religion certainly stresses that it's not only actions that matter, but what is in your heart. Didn't Jesus say that if you merely looked at a woman with lust, you had committed adultery?
If a dog dry humps your leg and jizzes over your socks, are you a rapist?
No, but your socks might be.
"responsibility" doesn't say anything because it isn't a living being. If an animal starts having sex with you because you got into a certain position, that qualifies as "consent" to me, or to anyone with a brain. Children, again, it depends on the individual. Your black-and-white thinking has no real place in a free, rational society, in my opinion.
Black and white thinking is fairly important when it comes to law-making and better yet, for knowing if you're breaking a law. Of course there are things that are legal fiction, and they're often (obviously not always) there anyway for good reason.
You're entirely missing the point. There are many people who feel that gay == shameful, the direct implication being that they want gay folk to feel ashamed. Proud is an in-their-face declaration that they are not ashamed.
I'm not a fan of gay pride, because "pride" does not mean "not ashamed."
I'm not proud to be gay any more than I'm "proud" of being white, or male.
I'm not proud to be gay. I'm not just ashamed of it.
"grievance industry?" "cultural destruction?" Oh, brother.
I'll put on my "soul-killing media company" hat here, because you're trying to argue logically with them, while they'll come at this from a different perspective.
In some ways, it is a substitute. However, many times these are games we aren't going to buy since we can't afford to buy every game out there.
Then you and your son can do without. It's either no experience, or you fork over the cash for the game. There is no legal middle ground there. You don't get to keep the cash and get a degraded game experience. Not being able to afford the media isn't an excuse, if you don't want to, or can't buy it, then you go without completely.
That would be the game argument at least. The "it's a way to sell the game" is certainly debatable, it seems to be semi-valid for commercial software, but on the other hand Slashdot is also full of folks who pirated their music because they didn't want to pay for it, but would rather use that money for food/computer games/other media, then made a bunch of other excuses for why they were justified. Jury is still out on how right either side is on that.
That's weird. Netflix cost me less than $20 and I there aren't even commercials to skip.
Hey, what a shock, Netflix's streaming options are shit because all the content companies decided that Netflix charges way too little. It's not even pay-per-view, the minimum standard for content company consumer gouging.
Because I base all of my life choices based on what is (currently) acceptable in movie theaters... (smh)
But they also get banned in bars, parties, etc... Pretty much any place where people don't like it when someone has a camera at them all the time.
It's a pointless inconvenience and inefficiency. I would not want you on any dev team I had to work with, with your willful acceptance of busted-ass processes simply because they don't bother you much.
No, he's weighing the pros against the cons. The cons of the burdens of adjusting clocks are quite minor compared to the other pros and cons being discussed.
Or heck, legislate a shift in work hours. It's hardly more oppressive than legislating capricious changes in the freakin' clock
Legislating a shift in work hours is absolutely impossible, so it's certainly not more difficult than daylight savings time. And that's partially because daylight savings time is already done.
Drive home in the dark? Surely not from work, because if that were the case DST does nothing to help the 5-7pm commute since you're already in daylight at that time of year anyway.
Not true, at many/most latitudes in the US, 6pm is almost pitch dark in the winter.