So just how much damage would it cause if a certain unpopular nation with launch capability lofted a few tonnes of grit and ball bearings into orbit, packed around some high explosives, and set it off?
"Satellite Internet" does not and should not count as "high-speed Internet." For one, high-speed Internet combines both raw bandwidth and low latency. If you were to count Satellite internet, it would entirely discount the importance of latency, and also discount the importance of upload speeds.
20% is for really good service. 15% is the "standard," and less than that if you really got treated poorly. 15% isn't hard to calculate either. What's 15% of $35? Well, it's 10% ($3.5) plus half that ($1.75) = $5.25. Sometimes I'll round up a little bit to get easier mental numbers, your call.
Oh and while I'm here, slashdot's web designers are somewhat retarded as of the last few months. Seriously, and ad that takes up 1/3rd of the page? Who thinks of this shit? And now to make things worse, the user pane scrolls with the page when reading the comments, so you have to scroll heavily just to read the comments. The first dumbfuck idea can be fixed with adblock, but the second dumbfuck idea requires outright disabling javascript just to make the page readable.
When I just open up a page and read it, the ad stays up and then goes away quickly. When I middle-click a link to open in a tab, and then I come back a little later to read the tab (I do this all the time -- go through the main slashdot page and open all the stories first, then go through each tab), then I've found that the javascript that controls the ad breaks and the ad stays up permanently; I have to reload that tab to get things working again.
Would I stay in a stranger's home? Not even if you paid me.
When I travel, I always appreciate local flavor in my lodgings rather than some sterile hotel room that looks the same in San Francisco, London, Japan, or Rio. For the same reason, I consider it a complete waste if I go traveling abroad only to eat at McDonalds because I know what I'm getting.
Excessive government regulation -- that it's even possible to regulate a business into oblivion shows that we have too much regulation
Unless that business is harmful to the folks around it. Of course a business should be regulated in that case. It's not like the mythical 'invisible hand' is going to correct that. If someone opens up their house to short term rentals through Air B&B and the renters cause disturbances, the business eventually has to be liable. That's "regulation." (Side note, it seems like it's "the law" when it's something we agree with, "regulations" when it's something we don't) It's regulation meant to prevent those situations from occurring, because residents shouldn't HAVE to sue every time the neighbor's house becomes a party house on the weekend.
3) Rent-seeking cartels -- that an entire "competitive" industry is lining up to defeat a business competitor via regulation instead of promoting why they are better than the upstart shows how intellectually bankrupt American business is.
When the 'upstart' gains advantages by refusing to play by the same rules that you're required to play by, then it's not unfair or unethical to seek redress from the government and require that they enforce the laws equally.
Did you ever stop to think that maybe Ghostbusters just genuinely sucked ass? I haven't heard a single good review from friends on it so why should I think IMDb rating is rigged? Do you think these people that rated it poorly that didnt see it would have given it a good rating had they seen it? It seems to me lots of people legitimately disliked this film based on its premise alone. Bottom line is: if you make a controversial film expect a controversial review.
Ghostbusters sucked. I saw it and it was "meh." Fluff, a waste of my time. But the howling and outrage started long before the first trailer came out, and most of the virulent anti-GB stuff that came out came from people who didn't want to "waste their money" on it. IE, they didn't see it.
If someone wrote something like this about the Jewish deaths people would be on their head like a ton of bricks shouting "Holocaust Denier" I accuse you of being a "Famine Denier"
Because both are well documented, and we know mostly what went on in both events. If someone came in here saying 20 million Jews died in the German Holocaust and I responded that historians generally think that around 6 million Jews died in that time, that wouldn't make me a "Holocaust denier."
Historians also agree that the Nazi regime was pretty much the sole cause of the Holocaust, while saying Churchill or the British being the sole cause of the Bengal famine would be absolute nonsense. They're guilty, and this is a horrible act, no getting around it, of blocking aid that could have helped, but there were many major factors, such as rice crop disease and natural disasters, that helped to put them in that situation. If you would blame the British for that, why wouldn't you have put even more blame on the Japanese who cut off the regular rice exports from Burma that the Bengali depended on? Or the Axis attacks on ships that dared to cross the Indian Ocean? Yes, there's a more fringe scholarly line that pins the blame on the British War Cabinet because WWII virtually guaranteed that a famine would occur, the British basically determined where it would occur because, uhh.. racism. But that completely ignores all the other factors leading towards the famine, and it absolves local policy-makers of any blame as well as the industrialists who created such an extreme wealth gap that left so many destitute in the first place that they had nothing to fall back on.
So no, I wouldn't say the Bengali Famine and the Holocaust are really in any way similar.
instead of trying to convey the sense of critical thought and skepticism that I and my brethren have been working fastidiously toward for the past 3 decades (or more)
Tell us more about the G@y N1ggers Association and frosty piss. You fAil it!
Then tell us about Ogg the open source caveman while I slurp hot grits of Natalie Portman's stone body.
The Turkish Government benefits by being able to control the narrative of history to make their ancestors look a lot better. Think of how much Americans absolutely revere their own founding fathers and take such pride in US history. There's a lot of power in being able to mythologize your nation's past.
It's worth noting that this isn't Best Picture of Best Foreign Film material either, its current 5-star rating is pretty close to what film critics who have seen the movie have put it at. General feeling is that the film is well intentioned and historically accurate but soapy. Think "Pearl Harbor" if it was more faithful to the politics -- there were fun moments in that movie as well, but the majority of its runtime was devoted to a love triangle with three very poorly written characters. The Promise also features a 'meh' love triangle amidst the background of the Armenian Genocide.
Well sure, but obviously that is not how their system has ever been set up.... so... is this another one of those ideals vs. reality debates or what?
Sure, but it has ALWAYS been intended for real people who have seen the movie. Of course, there's no way to enforce that sort of thing. In general though it isn't too much of a problem except in very controversial cases for mass-release movies, such as Ghostbusters (2016) or when the viewing numbers are so low, because of limited-release engagements in the first week. At that point, it's not TOO difficult to rig the system with lots of fraudulent votes.
Hillary's husband sexually assaulted a woman in the Oval Office. There can be no consensual sex between a powerful man and a woman under him in the power structure.
That is absolutely not true. It can be extremely inappropriate, even harassing, but a superior and a subordinate can have consensual sex. They're adults, they're perfectly capable of making their own decisions. Having professional power does not mean that any sexual liaison is automatically non-consensual.
Well I did say "formally" accused of. Of course, the Clintons have been accused of everything under the sun, some of which are of "who knows" territory, while others totally lack credibility like the Clinton Body Count, on the level of Trump's supposed pee parties.
Ok. I mean, not into it, but it sounds harmless enough. Knowing absolutely nothing about it, when I saw the word "Gorean" I immediately thought of the word "gore" which, from a sexual standpoint, I wanted nothing to do with it.
I guess this is one of those rare times on the Internet when you hear something weird and it turns out to be not nearly as bad as you thought.
Have you any idea WHY 50 shades of grey is so popular exactly?
I'll note that most BDSMers I know roll their eyes when 50 Shades of Grey is mentioned, since it takes sex abuse, abusive relationships, and emotional immaturity and stunting (on the part of both leads) and presents it as "BDSM," a mental problem that one should overcome, while real BDSM between informed consenting adults is quite a bit different.
It's the Gorean part I think that's the problem. What it means to be a "Gorean" is vague enough that the range of possibilities straddle the line between what is acceptable even in a place like the Bay Area.
I have made many mistakes in my Internet life. Someone will use some odd term and I'll say "Huh, I wonder what that is?" And then I find out, and I also find out I was a hell of a lot better off not knowing.
Now I face the same question. "I know what BDSM is, but what does Gorean mean?" The temptation to Google is there, but I also suspect I don't REALLY want to actually know.
Trump is a crude braggart. A sexual blowhard. If you need an example of an actual abusive predator, look to Hillary's spouse.
You're kidding, right? Trump was on mic openly bragging about things that he actually did that are worse than anything Bill Clinton was formally accused of.
They can censor anything they want because they're not bound by the constitution,
That is the prevailing opinion but I find it extremely dangerous since it means that Americans effectively do not have freedom of expression.
Americans effectively have freedom of expression, there is nothing stopping another service from hosting, or from creating their own hosting service to spread their message.
What Americans do not have is the right to force others, such as Twitter, to spread their message for them.
Slashdot Mirror
So just how much damage would it cause if a certain unpopular nation with launch capability lofted a few tonnes of grit and ball bearings into orbit, packed around some high explosives, and set it off?
Sounds like the whole plot of Gravity.
"Satellite Internet" does not and should not count as "high-speed Internet."
For one, high-speed Internet combines both raw bandwidth and low latency.
If you were to count Satellite internet, it would entirely discount the importance of latency, and also discount the importance of upload speeds.
It's third grade multiplication: meal cost * 1.2
20% is for really good service. 15% is the "standard," and less than that if you really got treated poorly.
15% isn't hard to calculate either. What's 15% of $35? Well, it's 10% ($3.5) plus half that ($1.75) = $5.25. Sometimes I'll round up a little bit to get easier mental numbers, your call.
How much gas will I use getting to the restaurant? I want that calculated into the bill too.
Why, do you buy your gas at the restaurant?
Oh and while I'm here, slashdot's web designers are somewhat retarded as of the last few months. Seriously, and ad that takes up 1/3rd of the page? Who thinks of this shit? And now to make things worse, the user pane scrolls with the page when reading the comments, so you have to scroll heavily just to read the comments. The first dumbfuck idea can be fixed with adblock, but the second dumbfuck idea requires outright disabling javascript just to make the page readable.
When I just open up a page and read it, the ad stays up and then goes away quickly.
When I middle-click a link to open in a tab, and then I come back a little later to read the tab (I do this all the time -- go through the main slashdot page and open all the stories first, then go through each tab), then I've found that the javascript that controls the ad breaks and the ad stays up permanently; I have to reload that tab to get things working again.
Would I stay in a stranger's home? Not even if you paid me.
When I travel, I always appreciate local flavor in my lodgings rather than some sterile hotel room that looks the same in San Francisco, London, Japan, or Rio. For the same reason, I consider it a complete waste if I go traveling abroad only to eat at McDonalds because I know what I'm getting.
Excessive government regulation -- that it's even possible to regulate a business into oblivion shows that we have too much regulation
Unless that business is harmful to the folks around it. Of course a business should be regulated in that case. It's not like the mythical 'invisible hand' is going to correct that. If someone opens up their house to short term rentals through Air B&B and the renters cause disturbances, the business eventually has to be liable. That's "regulation." (Side note, it seems like it's "the law" when it's something we agree with, "regulations" when it's something we don't) It's regulation meant to prevent those situations from occurring, because residents shouldn't HAVE to sue every time the neighbor's house becomes a party house on the weekend.
3) Rent-seeking cartels -- that an entire "competitive" industry is lining up to defeat a business competitor via regulation instead of promoting why they are better than the upstart shows how intellectually bankrupt American business is.
When the 'upstart' gains advantages by refusing to play by the same rules that you're required to play by, then it's not unfair or unethical to seek redress from the government and require that they enforce the laws equally.
A person with very noble intentions, trying to show some compassion.
Unless you're Greek!
It's not really a Hollywood studio, though. "Open Road Films" was launched by two theater chains apart from Hollywood.
Why Syria? Last I checked, the left has already aligned itself with islam, and since there is "only one Islam", that basically aligns you with daesh.
Amazing, good job with those strawmen! That's some quality straw you've shoved in there.
Did you ever stop to think that maybe Ghostbusters just genuinely sucked ass? I haven't heard a single good review from friends on it so why should I think IMDb rating is rigged? Do you think these people that rated it poorly that didnt see it would have given it a good rating had they seen it? It seems to me lots of people legitimately disliked this film based on its premise alone. Bottom line is: if you make a controversial film expect a controversial review.
Ghostbusters sucked. I saw it and it was "meh." Fluff, a waste of my time. But the howling and outrage started long before the first trailer came out, and most of the virulent anti-GB stuff that came out came from people who didn't want to "waste their money" on it. IE, they didn't see it.
If someone wrote something like this about the Jewish deaths people would be on their head like a ton of bricks shouting "Holocaust Denier" I accuse you of being a "Famine Denier"
Because both are well documented, and we know mostly what went on in both events. If someone came in here saying 20 million Jews died in the German Holocaust and I responded that historians generally think that around 6 million Jews died in that time, that wouldn't make me a "Holocaust denier."
Historians also agree that the Nazi regime was pretty much the sole cause of the Holocaust, while saying Churchill or the British being the sole cause of the Bengal famine would be absolute nonsense. They're guilty, and this is a horrible act, no getting around it, of blocking aid that could have helped, but there were many major factors, such as rice crop disease and natural disasters, that helped to put them in that situation. If you would blame the British for that, why wouldn't you have put even more blame on the Japanese who cut off the regular rice exports from Burma that the Bengali depended on? Or the Axis attacks on ships that dared to cross the Indian Ocean? Yes, there's a more fringe scholarly line that pins the blame on the British War Cabinet because WWII virtually guaranteed that a famine would occur, the British basically determined where it would occur because, uhh.. racism. But that completely ignores all the other factors leading towards the famine, and it absolves local policy-makers of any blame as well as the industrialists who created such an extreme wealth gap that left so many destitute in the first place that they had nothing to fall back on.
So no, I wouldn't say the Bengali Famine and the Holocaust are really in any way similar.
instead of trying to convey the sense of critical thought and skepticism that I and my brethren have been working fastidiously toward for the past 3 decades (or more)
Tell us more about the G@y N1ggers Association and frosty piss. You fAil it!
Then tell us about Ogg the open source caveman while I slurp hot grits of Natalie Portman's stone body.
And? What's your preferred outcome? Who benefits?
The Turkish Government benefits by being able to control the narrative of history to make their ancestors look a lot better. Think of how much Americans absolutely revere their own founding fathers and take such pride in US history. There's a lot of power in being able to mythologize your nation's past.
IMDB is the MTV Movie Awards of movie rating websites.
It's worth noting that this isn't Best Picture of Best Foreign Film material either, its current 5-star rating is pretty close to what film critics who have seen the movie have put it at. General feeling is that the film is well intentioned and historically accurate but soapy. Think "Pearl Harbor" if it was more faithful to the politics -- there were fun moments in that movie as well, but the majority of its runtime was devoted to a love triangle with three very poorly written characters. The Promise also features a 'meh' love triangle amidst the background of the Armenian Genocide.
Well sure, but obviously that is not how their system has ever been set up.... so... is this another one of those ideals vs. reality debates or what?
Sure, but it has ALWAYS been intended for real people who have seen the movie. Of course, there's no way to enforce that sort of thing. In general though it isn't too much of a problem except in very controversial cases for mass-release movies, such as Ghostbusters (2016) or when the viewing numbers are so low, because of limited-release engagements in the first week. At that point, it's not TOO difficult to rig the system with lots of fraudulent votes.
Hillary's husband sexually assaulted a woman in the Oval Office. There can be no consensual sex between a powerful man and a woman under him in the power structure.
That is absolutely not true. It can be extremely inappropriate, even harassing, but a superior and a subordinate can have consensual sex. They're adults, they're perfectly capable of making their own decisions. Having professional power does not mean that any sexual liaison is automatically non-consensual.
Well I did say "formally" accused of. Of course, the Clintons have been accused of everything under the sun, some of which are of "who knows" territory, while others totally lack credibility like the Clinton Body Count, on the level of Trump's supposed pee parties.
Ok. I mean, not into it, but it sounds harmless enough. Knowing absolutely nothing about it, when I saw the word "Gorean" I immediately thought of the word "gore" which, from a sexual standpoint, I wanted nothing to do with it.
I guess this is one of those rare times on the Internet when you hear something weird and it turns out to be not nearly as bad as you thought.
Have you any idea WHY 50 shades of grey is so popular exactly?
I'll note that most BDSMers I know roll their eyes when 50 Shades of Grey is mentioned, since it takes sex abuse, abusive relationships, and emotional immaturity and stunting (on the part of both leads) and presents it as "BDSM," a mental problem that one should overcome, while real BDSM between informed consenting adults is quite a bit different.
It's the Gorean part I think that's the problem. What it means to be a "Gorean" is vague enough that the range of possibilities straddle the line between what is acceptable even in a place like the Bay Area.
I have made many mistakes in my Internet life. Someone will use some odd term and I'll say "Huh, I wonder what that is?" And then I find out, and I also find out I was a hell of a lot better off not knowing.
Now I face the same question. "I know what BDSM is, but what does Gorean mean?" The temptation to Google is there, but I also suspect I don't REALLY want to actually know.
Trump is a crude braggart. A sexual blowhard. If you need an example of an actual abusive predator, look to Hillary's spouse.
You're kidding, right? Trump was on mic openly bragging about things that he actually did that are worse than anything Bill Clinton was formally accused of.
That is the prevailing opinion but I find it extremely dangerous since it means that Americans effectively do not have freedom of expression.
Americans effectively have freedom of expression, there is nothing stopping another service from hosting, or from creating their own hosting service to spread their message.
What Americans do not have is the right to force others, such as Twitter, to spread their message for them.
I graduated from a leading leftist university, but unlike you, I actually learned something. Those people are friggin crazy.
Yeah, I saw Reefer Madness too. Pot is the devil's weed, and those pot users are whack!