Beside the point. Hearts fail all the time. If you subscribe to the Intelligent Design hypothesis, wouldn't you expect a lower failure rate of the Designer's designs? Something VASTLY superior to where human science will be in a few hundred years? Hearts that last more than a measly 80 years (on average)? Eyes that don't require glasses or contacts or surgery (like every single person I know)? Joint that are a little less fragile? Systems that don't destroy themselves when brought into contact with certain allergens or viruses?
For a Designer -- who is presumably ageless and immortal, if not perfect -- wouldn't you expect at least a higher success rate? Or is the hypothesis that we're just a test species while the bugs get worked out?
Shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. Neither Microsoft or Zynga has any near-term strategy or long-term future.
Yes, MS will continue to stay afloat a lot longer thanks to legacy contracts and ingrained habits. But in 15 years, they'll be lucky to be another Yahoo (who will be long dead, along with Zynga).
Russia and China have few secrets they'd be embarrassed about. They're happily, openly authoritarian. The US, on the other hand, pretends to be run according to the rule of the people, making it much easier to embarrass.
If your idea of "having an online presence" is tweeting and having a Facebook page, I would not hire you. Not that those are bad, but surely an IT guy can think of a thousand other ways of managing an online identity that are equally (or more) effective.
If you really believed any of the bullshit you just spewed, you'd campaign actively against anti-spam filters. After all, nothing should ever be censored, right?
This a thousand times. Thunderbolt-connected expansion would be a fine solution in a rack, or a stack, or even side-by-side like books on a shelf. But a cylinder? No.
Well, professing your ignorance and parroting a disproved talking point on slashdot is one option if you don't know something. Or you could just fucking google it.
The flaw in your logic is that you believe "freedom" and "voluntary association" is the same thing, and that they are absolute. Neither is true.
If I choose voluntarily to be locked up in prison, I lose any number of freedoms I had before. For example, I may no longer have the freedom to eat when I please, or go outside whenever I want to.
I have traded those freedoms in exchange for something else I want more -- to be in a prison.
I missed the part where Google Glass was handed out to every child in any given school and would then be impossible to turn off forever.
Google Glass ONLY records what you want it to record, and the information recorded that gets sent back to Google -- contrary to your assertion below -- can be entirely customized.
You seem to be implying that the tea party groups investigated were not doing so.
Care to cite some specific evidence of both?
Michelle Bachmann's own staff is testifying against her about spending irregularities. Sharon Angle (from right here in the great state of Nevada) has already paid $25,000 in fines for spending her campaign funds illegally.
Those are the only 2 Tea Partiers I can name.
I'm a conservative who was once very hopeful that the Tea Party might help turn around the Republican Party (which is more about expanding the government and the debt than anything else). Then I went to a Tea Party rally, where I got to hear all about how it's the duty of all Americans to NOT pay taxes, and how the niggers are taking over.
The government permits cable monopolies, and therefore have a responsibility to ensure that those monopolies aren't abusive (yeah, they're doing a piss poor job of it).
The solution is trivial: End cable monopolies. In the '80s there were 3 cable companies in my area, competition was fierce, and prices and service were great. Today there is a single cable company, and they are a disaster.
If the John McCain of 2000 had rerun in 2008, he would have won easily.
Instead the New & Improved John McCain embraced all the things that even Republicans hated about Bush, refusing to address the massive spending spree or the vast expansion of government size and authority overseen by Bush and the Republican Congress from 2000 to 2006.
...We don't need them. Crime has been falling since 1988 and the US murder rate is around 5.4 / 100,000 people. And that is close to its all time low. And terrorism is rare and unlikely to kill or hurt anyone. When can we start rolling out policy based on data and evidence not on fear?
I'll add: Link the amount of student aid available in the U.S. to the expected earnings. Engineering students == lots of aid. English majors* == little aid.
(Yes, I know there are exceptions -- we're talking *averages* here.)
, with a body designed to take more punishment at the cost of speed and agility
Is there a citation for this? I would expect them to be both faster and more agile than us, considering that when compared to most primates, we are both slow and clumsy.
All Americans are equal when it comes to marriage. All citizens have the legal right to marry a member of the opposite sex.
Not logical, and makes broad assumptions about the *purpose* of marriage.
The problem is that your statement assumes the purpose of marriage is procreation, or perhaps to unite a penis with a vagina, since those are pretty much the only things exclusive to male/female union. (One might argue that child rearing IS the logical purpose and intent of marriage, in which case same-sex marriages must also be permitted, as there are many, many single lesbians and gay men with children.)
Not only is there nothing in any law that says this, but to believe it would necessitate outlawing marriage for elderly people, many handicapped, males with untreated ED, and the infertile.
Additionally, while procreation, sex, or child rearing CAN'T logically be the purpose of marriage, union with a loved one IS a more logical purpose, and could potentially include same-sex couples. As could marriages based solely on business arrangements.
Also, it's not possible that we have a "legal right to marry a member of the opposite sex" because the legal rights we have are spelled out in the Constitution (or ruled on by the Court), and that ain't one of them.
In short, you're pretending that the law says what you want it to say in order to make a logical argument for the exclusion of same-sex marriages, and there isn't one.
There is, however, a strong logical argument FOR same-sex marriages.
Does that not simply lend credence to his claim of "the end of democracy in America"?
I'm struggling to see how this has anything to do with Democracy in any way.
Have his opponents not heard of Barbra Streisand?
I'm struggling to see how this has anything at all to do with the Streisand effect. No one is named, so no one has had attention brought to themselves. Certainly DC doesn't care whether people know about this or not.
The interesting thing here is that the story Didn't push his agenda yet his story was still rejected.
I assume this statement is how you got modded Insightful, although "Redundant" might be more accurate since that's in TFS.
Here's my comment, which is much more insightful:
Card's demonization is the Left Wings version of the Dixie Chicks [non]controversy: Public person makes statement unrelated to their artistic works, and an idiotic public punishes them for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Beside the point. Hearts fail all the time. If you subscribe to the Intelligent Design hypothesis, wouldn't you expect a lower failure rate of the Designer's designs? Something VASTLY superior to where human science will be in a few hundred years? Hearts that last more than a measly 80 years (on average)? Eyes that don't require glasses or contacts or surgery (like every single person I know)? Joint that are a little less fragile? Systems that don't destroy themselves when brought into contact with certain allergens or viruses?
For a Designer -- who is presumably ageless and immortal, if not perfect -- wouldn't you expect at least a higher success rate? Or is the hypothesis that we're just a test species while the bugs get worked out?
Shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. Neither Microsoft or Zynga has any near-term strategy or long-term future.
Yes, MS will continue to stay afloat a lot longer thanks to legacy contracts and ingrained habits. But in 15 years, they'll be lucky to be another Yahoo (who will be long dead, along with Zynga).
Russia and China have few secrets they'd be embarrassed about. They're happily, openly authoritarian. The US, on the other hand, pretends to be run according to the rule of the people, making it much easier to embarrass.
If your idea of "having an online presence" is tweeting and having a Facebook page, I would not hire you.
If your idea of "having an online presence" is tweeting and having a Facebook page, I would not hire you. Not that those are bad, but surely an IT guy can think of a thousand other ways of managing an online identity that are equally (or more) effective.
If you really believed any of the bullshit you just spewed, you'd campaign actively against anti-spam filters. After all, nothing should ever be censored, right?
This a thousand times. Thunderbolt-connected expansion would be a fine solution in a rack, or a stack, or even side-by-side like books on a shelf. But a cylinder? No.
Form over function.
Well, professing your ignorance and parroting a disproved talking point on slashdot is one option if you don't know something. Or you could just fucking google it.
There's no evidence that any of this is illegal. THAT'S what's fucking scary about it.
Not a single teacher though, "Hey, there isn't a single logical situation where this could possibly add to the children's safety"?
And he can't help it if you don't bother backing up your statements. I see something about Minority Report, and nothing about any "gain" to be had.
The flaw in your logic is that you believe "freedom" and "voluntary association" is the same thing, and that they are absolute. Neither is true.
If I choose voluntarily to be locked up in prison, I lose any number of freedoms I had before. For example, I may no longer have the freedom to eat when I please, or go outside whenever I want to.
I have traded those freedoms in exchange for something else I want more -- to be in a prison.
Gasoline is much, much cheaper in the U.S. (yes, even in California) than the vast majority of the rest of the world -- I think that was the point.
I missed the part where Google Glass was handed out to every child in any given school and would then be impossible to turn off forever.
Google Glass ONLY records what you want it to record, and the information recorded that gets sent back to Google -- contrary to your assertion below -- can be entirely customized.
You seem to be implying that the tea party groups investigated were not doing so. Care to cite some specific evidence of both?
Michelle Bachmann's own staff is testifying against her about spending irregularities. Sharon Angle (from right here in the great state of Nevada) has already paid $25,000 in fines for spending her campaign funds illegally.
Those are the only 2 Tea Partiers I can name.
I'm a conservative who was once very hopeful that the Tea Party might help turn around the Republican Party (which is more about expanding the government and the debt than anything else). Then I went to a Tea Party rally, where I got to hear all about how it's the duty of all Americans to NOT pay taxes, and how the niggers are taking over.
So yeah, audit them. All of them.
The government permits cable monopolies, and therefore have a responsibility to ensure that those monopolies aren't abusive (yeah, they're doing a piss poor job of it).
The solution is trivial: End cable monopolies. In the '80s there were 3 cable companies in my area, competition was fierce, and prices and service were great. Today there is a single cable company, and they are a disaster.
If the John McCain of 2000 had rerun in 2008, he would have won easily.
Instead the New & Improved John McCain embraced all the things that even Republicans hated about Bush, refusing to address the massive spending spree or the vast expansion of government size and authority overseen by Bush and the Republican Congress from 2000 to 2006.
And then he chose a moron as a running mate.
Facts are off the table.
I've never had any problem with any of them. I can also use both a Phillips and a flat-head screwdriver.
I'll add: Link the amount of student aid available in the U.S. to the expected earnings. Engineering students == lots of aid. English majors* == little aid.
(Yes, I know there are exceptions -- we're talking *averages* here.)
, with a body designed to take more punishment at the cost of speed and agility
Is there a citation for this? I would expect them to be both faster and more agile than us, considering that when compared to most primates, we are both slow and clumsy.
I use a Transformer Prime w/ keyboard dock as my primary laptop. Thanks to a great app ecosystem, it's more useful than a ($1300!) Chromebook.
Here's hoping Pichai works toward realizing the potential of Android, and phases out Chrome as an "operating system."
All Americans are equal when it comes to marriage. All citizens have the legal right to marry a member of the opposite sex.
Not logical, and makes broad assumptions about the *purpose* of marriage.
The problem is that your statement assumes the purpose of marriage is procreation, or perhaps to unite a penis with a vagina, since those are pretty much the only things exclusive to male/female union. (One might argue that child rearing IS the logical purpose and intent of marriage, in which case same-sex marriages must also be permitted, as there are many, many single lesbians and gay men with children.)
Not only is there nothing in any law that says this, but to believe it would necessitate outlawing marriage for elderly people, many handicapped, males with untreated ED, and the infertile.
Additionally, while procreation, sex, or child rearing CAN'T logically be the purpose of marriage, union with a loved one IS a more logical purpose, and could potentially include same-sex couples. As could marriages based solely on business arrangements.
Also, it's not possible that we have a "legal right to marry a member of the opposite sex" because the legal rights we have are spelled out in the Constitution (or ruled on by the Court), and that ain't one of them.
In short, you're pretending that the law says what you want it to say in order to make a logical argument for the exclusion of same-sex marriages, and there isn't one.
There is, however, a strong logical argument FOR same-sex marriages.
Does that not simply lend credence to his claim of "the end of democracy in America"?
I'm struggling to see how this has anything to do with Democracy in any way.
Have his opponents not heard of Barbra Streisand?
I'm struggling to see how this has anything at all to do with the Streisand effect. No one is named, so no one has had attention brought to themselves. Certainly DC doesn't care whether people know about this or not.
The interesting thing here is that the story Didn't push his agenda yet his story was still rejected.
I assume this statement is how you got modded Insightful, although "Redundant" might be more accurate since that's in TFS. Here's my comment, which is much more insightful:
Card's demonization is the Left Wings version of the Dixie Chicks [non]controversy: Public person makes statement unrelated to their artistic works, and an idiotic public punishes them for it.
Besides, take away the bullshit competitiveness, and all you're left with are candy assed civilians.
...and yet our soldiers are protected by civilian contractors in many U.S. military bases.
Kinda makes you wonder who's highly trained and who's a candy ass, no?