Well, that's your opinion and preference; you have not made any argument why private voting results in more freedom.
I have a friend who works at a smaller coal company as coal companies go (why he does, I'm not sure. If it's what you can get, it's what you can get). His manager told the employees around eight months ago that they would be laid off for voting Democratic in the Presidential election, because Democrats are trying to put coal out of business. Of course, since the vote is secret, you can say you're voting one way, out of self-interest, while actually voting another way. If votes were public,
When you face retribution for your vote, then you are not actually free to vote your conscience. If I could vote, but faced getting fired for my choice, or cast out from church, or expelled from a social club or anything like that, and I change my vote due to that, then my vote was a lie. It was dishonest, and meant only to reinforce the group-think. My individuality was squelched to try to force me into a collective. I can't think of anything, any sort of benefit that we would from making votes public that would be worth giving the private vote up.
In any case, the solution is indeed reducing the overall level of corruption, which can only been done by moving towards a minarchist system of government; as long as the US government spend $7 trillion per year, or $23000 per American, corruption is inevitable
In that at least, we agree. The system is too large to handle, too large to keep tabs on, and too large to hold people accountable.
Yes, most environments don't have HDMI. Conference rooms, maybe, though I've seen DVI more than HDMI (and sometimes VGA). Lecture halls, sure. If those are the only sorts of situations you need your laptop in, then by all means.
But most monitors don't have HDMI. Quite a few monitors are DVI only, and sometimes you'll find a higher-end model where the manufacturer splurges and throws in every connector under the sun.
So no, if space is at a premium, laptops shouldn't have built-in HDMI. A mini-displayport -> HDMI adapter has worked for me in every environment I've ever needed to use HDMI in.
Non-secret voting might well serve to deter extremism
Whether it does or not, it's not worth the lack of freedom. It would greatly deter voting your conscience, voting for the unpopular, generally bucking whatever happened to be politically correct. No one should ever face retribution for an honestly-cast secret vote.
And vote buying hasn't disappeared, it has become institutionalized in the form of massive government handouts to special interest groups (as the link you point to also hints at).
That's entirely different, but even if that was considered "vote buying," the solution to corruption is not even more corruption.
The problem with voting that way is you send it in then it all happens behind closed doors. They could be recording or destroying votes without any oversight.
Once my vote goes into the voting machine, I don't have much oversight over what happens to it after that, either.
Geez, you mean each state does it differently? No independant electoral commission?
Yes. The United States was conceived of and implemented as being a thin shell over the independent States to handle the tasks that individual states couldn't take care of on their own, such as common defense, trade laws, and such. Each state has always been responsible for and capable of running their own elections. That's why there is little information about elections in the US Constitution.
No, stop lying. Hillary was about to fire a stinger missile, but she froze up and couldn't pull the trigger.
Later Michael Bloomberg claimed that if it wasn't for Hillary's Parkinsons, he'd have taken his anti-gun money back.
Hillary wasn't lying about her dangerous time in Bosnia, and this video proves it. She visits wounded soldiers and little girls, dodges RPGs, and caps an enemy soldier herself. Stone cold.
Sure they do. This is the first year of sales declines since the early days of the Return of the Jobs. If you don't think that they wouldn't care about declining market share... well you're definitely wrong about that.
Yes Apple has an enormous fan-base and a large market share, but Steve Jobs is gone and his reality distortion field is fading. There is and never will be any company that people are so enamored with that they will stay at the top forever. Empires fall.
When you go somewhere to make a freaking presentation, you are handled a HDMI cable (it used to be a DVI one. And before a VGA one). You have to connect it to your laptop. This is what happens in a "pro" setting. Sometimes, the guy gives you an USB key and say: the docs we need to look at on screen are on the key. You need to connect the key to your machine.
This is why it is called a "pro" laptop. It does those things.
This seems like a fairly weird critique -- I'm sorry but most environments don't have HDMI either. And I'm not sure I've seen an HDMI adapter that allows for anything higher than 1920x1200. If you having a single monitor output, it should be something capable of dual-link (IE, 2560x1440).
Actually, I'm pretty sure that is where things are heading. Either the keyboard will become an extended touch bar or maybe each key will have a tiny display on it
And at that we'd have to go back to typing by looking at keyboard, like people just learning to type do. Without the ridges of physical keys, you can't tell what keys your fingers are actually on.
Does seem a little odd they stopped after the first inch
Not that odd. Keyboards are actually typable for longer than 10 minutes at a time without eventually mashing your fingertips into pulp. Even the super-thin keys on a Macbook are better than the hard surface of a screen. You do NOT want a retina screen keyboard. Horrible idea.
A dongle by its very nature sticks out. It is totally phallic.
You've never seen breasts, have you?
Yeah, but dongles are usually limp and flimsy. Sometimes you get dongles that are totally hard, but they're often not worth it since they cause stress on the device.
Well, I mean, she has literally no skills to speak of. Who would hire her?
Let's see. No real skills. Willing to make a big stink about minor infractions. Willing to do this in public and got two people fired for an extremely minor offense. Never apologizes, just doubles down on entitlement.
That's the long-term solution, which wouldn't do much for the current problem devices that are out there.
We'll get over the current problem. We always do. But we never seem to get around to that 'long-term solution.' I think at this point implementing the long-term solution is more important than stopping the bleeding. Otherwise the neverending cycle will continue.
The problem is application software. Try running steam on even a 1920x1080 screen. The font is absolutely tiny and they don't provide any option for changing it (at least not that I've found.)
The Steam network is pretty nice. The client even does some cool things. But I have never seen a worse instant messenger / chat platform than the steam UI. It is... I mean, we throw the work 'horrible' around often, but the Steam client is horrible I use it on a monitor with a 101 DPI, and it's horribly tiny and it can't be adjusted. And unlike Skype, telegram, AIM, gchat, IRC, and just about every other chat netowkr out there, the protocol is entirely closed and there's no way to access it with a third-party client. So... so long, Steam friends!
Into Darkness was a sucky movie, but the Niburu scene was the only good part about it, and the only time the first two movies (didn't see the third) managed to capture some of the "spirit" of the original series.
Perhaps I am just jaded as an American, but in the US political parties aren't like that. They change their stance according to whoever is the leader of the party.
Political parties in the US tend to band together under a common political view, but they aren't uniform. On the Republican side, you'll have the Neo-Conservatives who are the party of intervention, of projecting American strength abroad and of proactively dealing with threats to the country and its allies. On the other hand, you'll have the Tea Partiers, who are the more Libertarian wing of the party and may have strong disagreements with the USA sending troops and money to other countries. Like Rand Paul, they might even be isolationist in comparison. You'll have the evangelicals who can belong to either camp, though they'll sometimes get a cold welcome from the tea partiers, many of whom won't share in the Dominionist sentiments. The Tea Partiers will be more for privacy rights (against the government), while neo-cons will be more likely to engage in domestic spying.
Yet they almost all agree that most local decisions should be left to local and state agencies rather than the federal government. They almost all will agree that federal taxes are too high, and they'll think that federal spending on social programs should be cut and either moved to the states, be shifted to charity, or eliminated entirely. They'll all tend to be against gun control and abortion, and for strong border security.
Similar factions exist in the Democratic Party, where you'll have the more business-friendly moderates, the more socialism-favoring left, and varying levels of anti-war or interventionism. What seems consistent across the two parties is that with some exceptions, most people can overlook a candidate's position on a single issue if they agree with much of the rest of his platform. A Democrat who is anti-war could still vote for Obama despite his mixed record on that front, an Occupy Wall-Streeter could vote for Hillary even if she's a bit too cozy with business for their tastes. For me, the most frustrating part of trying to find a third-party candidate that I like is that so many of them are single-issue candidates, while the President and Congress have to be adept at a very wide spectrum of issues and policies.
I'd like to see more collusion-busting. IE, when entire industries band together under a trade group that makes all the companies act in concert. Seen most often in the entertainment industry like the RIAA/MPAA, but it's seen elsewhere as well. I'm not sure HOW you would break up collusion, but that's the direction I'd like to see things go.
And you think you can live in a world without someone from the government telling you how to live and what to think, creating nice little safe spaces for when you get triggered.
Oh yeah. Our world is soooooooooooooooooo horrible.
How have we survived for 240 years with a government of some type? Oh it's terrible, TERRIBLE.
Shhhhh! That example goes directly against the narrative!
It's an interesting digression because the film version switched roles of the kids around. In the book, the boy was the dinosaur expert AND the computer expert. The girl had some interest in sports but otherwise contributed nothing to the plot and whined a lot. Spielburg saw that and thought.. "why don't we give a reason for BOTH of them to exist.."
Slashdot Mirror
Time for MS to follow firefoxs lead. Click to view flash.
But the problem is that no one is going to click to view a flash ad. Or click to view a flash tracking cookie.
Well, that's your opinion and preference; you have not made any argument why private voting results in more freedom.
I have a friend who works at a smaller coal company as coal companies go (why he does, I'm not sure. If it's what you can get, it's what you can get). His manager told the employees around eight months ago that they would be laid off for voting Democratic in the Presidential election, because Democrats are trying to put coal out of business. Of course, since the vote is secret, you can say you're voting one way, out of self-interest, while actually voting another way. If votes were public,
When you face retribution for your vote, then you are not actually free to vote your conscience. If I could vote, but faced getting fired for my choice, or cast out from church, or expelled from a social club or anything like that, and I change my vote due to that, then my vote was a lie. It was dishonest, and meant only to reinforce the group-think. My individuality was squelched to try to force me into a collective. I can't think of anything, any sort of benefit that we would from making votes public that would be worth giving the private vote up.
In any case, the solution is indeed reducing the overall level of corruption, which can only been done by moving towards a minarchist system of government; as long as the US government spend $7 trillion per year, or $23000 per American, corruption is inevitable
In that at least, we agree. The system is too large to handle, too large to keep tabs on, and too large to hold people accountable.
Yes, most environments don't have HDMI.
Conference rooms, maybe, though I've seen DVI more than HDMI (and sometimes VGA). Lecture halls, sure. If those are the only sorts of situations you need your laptop in, then by all means.
But most monitors don't have HDMI. Quite a few monitors are DVI only, and sometimes you'll find a higher-end model where the manufacturer splurges and throws in every connector under the sun.
So no, if space is at a premium, laptops shouldn't have built-in HDMI. A mini-displayport -> HDMI adapter has worked for me in every environment I've ever needed to use HDMI in.
The GP was obviously posting a parody, but he also has a point.
Non-secret voting might well serve to deter extremism
Whether it does or not, it's not worth the lack of freedom. It would greatly deter voting your conscience, voting for the unpopular, generally bucking whatever happened to be politically correct. No one should ever face retribution for an honestly-cast secret vote.
And vote buying hasn't disappeared, it has become institutionalized in the form of massive government handouts to special interest groups (as the link you point to also hints at).
That's entirely different, but even if that was considered "vote buying," the solution to corruption is not even more corruption.
In Texas there is no curtain; the voting "booth" was just a short plastic wing that doesn't prevent anyone from seeing your screen.
Ascii diagram showing that voters A and B can easily see the other's screens.
In California it's the same, but the wing comes out further, to the edge of the desk/table/stand being used.
|..A..||..B..|
\_____/\_____/
The problem with voting that way is you send it in then it all happens behind closed doors. They could be recording or destroying votes without any oversight.
Once my vote goes into the voting machine, I don't have much oversight over what happens to it after that, either.
Geez, you mean each state does it differently? No independant electoral commission?
Yes. The United States was conceived of and implemented as being a thin shell over the independent States to handle the tasks that individual states couldn't take care of on their own, such as common defense, trade laws, and such. Each state has always been responsible for and capable of running their own elections. That's why there is little information about elections in the US Constitution.
Ah, the old Super Bowl myth!
No, stop lying. Hillary was about to fire a stinger missile, but she froze up and couldn't pull the trigger.
Later Michael Bloomberg claimed that if it wasn't for Hillary's Parkinsons, he'd have taken his anti-gun money back.
Hillary wasn't lying about her dangerous time in Bosnia, and this video proves it. She visits wounded soldiers and little girls, dodges RPGs, and caps an enemy soldier herself. Stone cold.
Sure they do. This is the first year of sales declines since the early days of the Return of the Jobs.
If you don't think that they wouldn't care about declining market share... well you're definitely wrong about that.
Yes Apple has an enormous fan-base and a large market share, but Steve Jobs is gone and his reality distortion field is fading. There is and never will be any company that people are so enamored with that they will stay at the top forever. Empires fall.
As for gigabit ethernet: I dig why they don't want to put that on the laptop. The laptop is too thin to fit the jack,
Sounds like a design flaw to me.
When you go somewhere to make a freaking presentation, you are handled a HDMI cable (it used to be a DVI one. And before a VGA one). You have to connect it to your laptop. This is what happens in a "pro" setting. Sometimes, the guy gives you an USB key and say: the docs we need to look at on screen are on the key. You need to connect the key to your machine.
This is why it is called a "pro" laptop. It does those things.
This seems like a fairly weird critique -- I'm sorry but most environments don't have HDMI either.
And I'm not sure I've seen an HDMI adapter that allows for anything higher than 1920x1200. If you having a single monitor output, it should be something capable of dual-link (IE, 2560x1440).
Actually, I'm pretty sure that is where things are heading. Either the keyboard will become an extended touch bar or maybe each key will have a tiny display on it
And at that we'd have to go back to typing by looking at keyboard, like people just learning to type do. Without the ridges of physical keys, you can't tell what keys your fingers are actually on.
Does seem a little odd they stopped after the first inch
Not that odd. Keyboards are actually typable for longer than 10 minutes at a time without eventually mashing your fingertips into pulp. Even the super-thin keys on a Macbook are better than the hard surface of a screen. You do NOT want a retina screen keyboard. Horrible idea.
A dongle by its very nature sticks out. It is totally phallic.
You've never seen breasts, have you?
Yeah, but dongles are usually limp and flimsy.
Sometimes you get dongles that are totally hard, but they're often not worth it since they cause stress on the device.
Well, I mean, she has literally no skills to speak of. Who would hire her?
Let's see.
No real skills.
Willing to make a big stink about minor infractions.
Willing to do this in public and got two people fired for an extremely minor offense.
Never apologizes, just doubles down on entitlement.
Yes, she sounds like winner.
That's the long-term solution, which wouldn't do much for the current problem devices that are out there.
We'll get over the current problem. We always do.
But we never seem to get around to that 'long-term solution.'
I think at this point implementing the long-term solution is more important than stopping the bleeding. Otherwise the neverending cycle will continue.
2) NIMBYs refuse to let ANY housing project happen in the city, preventing new and more dense housing being built.
And when they allow a large building, the builder f's it up by building it on soft bayfill without anchoring it on bedrock, and it starts to lean.
The problem is application software. Try running steam on even a 1920x1080 screen. The font is absolutely tiny and they don't provide any option for changing it (at least not that I've found.)
The Steam network is pretty nice. The client even does some cool things. But I have never seen a worse instant messenger / chat platform than the steam UI. It is... I mean, we throw the work 'horrible' around often, but the Steam client is horrible I use it on a monitor with a 101 DPI, and it's horribly tiny and it can't be adjusted. And unlike Skype, telegram, AIM, gchat, IRC, and just about every other chat netowkr out there, the protocol is entirely closed and there's no way to access it with a third-party client. So... so long, Steam friends!
Into Darkness was a sucky movie, but the Niburu scene was the only good part about it, and the only time the first two movies (didn't see the third) managed to capture some of the "spirit" of the original series.
Perhaps I am just jaded as an American, but in the US political parties aren't like that. They change their stance according to whoever is the leader of the party.
Political parties in the US tend to band together under a common political view, but they aren't uniform. On the Republican side, you'll have the Neo-Conservatives who are the party of intervention, of projecting American strength abroad and of proactively dealing with threats to the country and its allies. On the other hand, you'll have the Tea Partiers, who are the more Libertarian wing of the party and may have strong disagreements with the USA sending troops and money to other countries. Like Rand Paul, they might even be isolationist in comparison. You'll have the evangelicals who can belong to either camp, though they'll sometimes get a cold welcome from the tea partiers, many of whom won't share in the Dominionist sentiments. The Tea Partiers will be more for privacy rights (against the government), while neo-cons will be more likely to engage in domestic spying.
Yet they almost all agree that most local decisions should be left to local and state agencies rather than the federal government. They almost all will agree that federal taxes are too high, and they'll think that federal spending on social programs should be cut and either moved to the states, be shifted to charity, or eliminated entirely. They'll all tend to be against gun control and abortion, and for strong border security.
Similar factions exist in the Democratic Party, where you'll have the more business-friendly moderates, the more socialism-favoring left, and varying levels of anti-war or interventionism. What seems consistent across the two parties is that with some exceptions, most people can overlook a candidate's position on a single issue if they agree with much of the rest of his platform. A Democrat who is anti-war could still vote for Obama despite his mixed record on that front, an Occupy Wall-Streeter could vote for Hillary even if she's a bit too cozy with business for their tastes. For me, the most frustrating part of trying to find a third-party candidate that I like is that so many of them are single-issue candidates, while the President and Congress have to be adept at a very wide spectrum of issues and policies.
Which companies do you propose we bust?
I'd like to see more collusion-busting. IE, when entire industries band together under a trade group that makes all the companies act in concert. Seen most often in the entertainment industry like the RIAA/MPAA, but it's seen elsewhere as well. I'm not sure HOW you would break up collusion, but that's the direction I'd like to see things go.
And you think you can live in a world without someone from the government telling you how to live and what to think, creating nice little safe spaces for when you get triggered.
Oh yeah. Our world is soooooooooooooooooo horrible.
How have we survived for 240 years with a government of some type? Oh it's terrible, TERRIBLE.
Shhhhh!
That example goes directly against the narrative!
It's an interesting digression because the film version switched roles of the kids around.
In the book, the boy was the dinosaur expert AND the computer expert. The girl had some interest in sports but otherwise contributed nothing to the plot and whined a lot. Spielburg saw that and thought.. "why don't we give a reason for BOTH of them to exist.."