As for the sperm party, the point of the party is so that the mom can honestly say she doesn't know who the possible father is. As for DNA having a damn thing to do whether or not you can get ordered to pay child support, that is an urban legend.
I'm not sure your if trolling or ignorant, but I'll bite for the people that could be misled into thinking actually biological fatherhood would have anything to do with child support. Many states do not give the father any opportunity to challenge paternity. If your married, named by the mother and don't receive the summons to court in time or even simply live with a woman long enough you can be ordered to pay child support. There are countless examples of men who have been ordered to pay child support for a child that isn't there's.
I take it you have no issue with men reading about cases like this and refusing to be a sperm donor then? There's a huge shortage of sperms donors as it is and lesbian couples in particular have a large waiting list. Attitudes like yours are why this shortage exists and why it will only get worse. Do you have the same attitude about women that refuse to pay child support or contribute to the financial welfare of their kids?
What a crock, even for the lesbians that have only ever been lesbians (that's a lot less than the total), they will often take steps to help avoid exactly this scenario. The solution often involves several gay or gay friendly men and a sperm donor party. The entire point of having several men donate is to avoid having one take the child support hit.
Around that time welfare laws were written that only provided benefits if the child was born out of wedlock. Before that blacks actually had just as high of rate of marriage as whites in the US. At the time it was thought that welfare should only be for families where the father couldn't support the child and the cash was set to follow that idea. You only got the cash if you didn't have a family, the results of which have been widely documented.
A woman can still get benefits without naming the possible dad. My ex did it with the kid she had before she met me and she was far from alone. The mother chose to name the Dad because then she gets benefits and child support. She's letting the state be the bad guy to keep the blame off of her for her own greed. Quit making excuses for others malicious behavior.
Get real, mothers tell the state that they don't know who the possible father is every day. You have obviously never looked at how the process works. The mother could have avoided the entire situation by declining to name the man, and still gotten the benefits.
She chose to name the man and is letting the state of Kansas play the bad guy for her own benefit. She used him to get what she was otherwise unwilling to do and has now burned the guy that naively helped out a lesbian couple without having a lawyer on board.
Quit calling a spade a duck and offering an excuse for her abominable behavior.
Medical professionals have been saying for sometime now that you need to let a fever run it's course. To give an idea how much things have changed I once brought my child into the emergency room for a fever of 105.
I was then made to sign a piece of paper saying that I would not do so again for a temperature that low. Mind you this was the first time I had ever brought my child into the emergency room for a fever. Here's something from the Mayo clinic saying not to even take tyenol below a fever of 102
You have to learn the technologies that make you competitive in the job market. Your competition isn't the guy down the street, it's the guy in India or other like countries. You have to substantially market yourself against someone that could be making as little as 1/6th what you make now. In order to do that you have to have the skills that they can't bring to the market or that they don't tend to have. Any type of skills that requires personal presence is well worth adding.
Any skills that could be commoditized by and large have been by the likes of IBM to feed their outsourcing work. Remember that they focus on training up people for outsourcing and tend to stick to basic skills that can be marketed across a wide range of contracts.
If you really want to know what to focus on just go to the Indian versions of Monster, Dice and see what is in demand. Find what isn't in demand there but is in demand locally and is difficult to outsource. Specialist jobs are good for this as are consulting jobs as they are difficult or not worth the effort to outsource to India.
If you have a generic resume that only contains basic skills in wide usage you are extremely vulnerable to outsourcing. You will also have a difficult time landing a job once you have a few years experience and aren't fresh kid out of college cheap.
I'll consider abandoning Ad Block when a decade after ads are no longer the leading cause of malware. Until then I consider it a security requirement along with noscript.
More to the point of the battery is that good why aren't they trying to sell the battery technology. This is a battery that they claim is 30 times smaller, charges 1000 times faster and built well enough to be used as a critical life support system. That market would be far larger than the scuba market and make them far more money. This doesn't pass the sniff test.
Of course your conveniently forgetting the largest period of relative peace the world has ever known came about because of nuclear weapons hanging over peoples heads. I'm fairly certain the cost of another world war would pretty quickly outweigh the costs of nuclear arms.
Let's not forget that tens of millions were killed in world wars before nuclear weapons were around and countless millions that have been slaughtered with conventional arms. I know it kills your hyperbole, but reality is like that.
People count on useful idiots like you. Stalin considered people like yourself to be critical for success. Tyrants and dictators depend on useful idiots to stand by and do nothing will they commit their atrocities.
Iraq was working better under Saddam than it is now, it's a joke (or would be if it hadn't cost so many lives)
So we should continue to leave countries under dictators that violate treaties, employ government rapists and kill their own citizens in large blocs because the country will run better? Tell you what, next time there's a genocide going on, why don't you send a sternly worded letter to the people doing it and see how that works?
In the words of Burke âoeThe only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.â Continue standing by and doing nothing while innocents are slaughtered by the millions in genocides because no one will 'go to war'. Your hands are clean only because your knee deep in blood.
Let's make this headline more accurate and honest, okay?
Anti-GMO Luddites Win Victory On Hawaiian Island
These has never been a single reputable study by anyone anywhere that has shown GMO anything to be unhealthy. GMO products have been made for decades and have been intensely studies by people with a vested interest in keeping them out. This range of scientific lunacy is in the same camp as wifi causes cancer and vaccination scaremongering.
Let's get real, this has jack to do with GMO and everything to do with eco naive that get their talking points from greenpeace and protectionism from those countries that haven't started making their own GMO foods yet. Once other countries start making their own versions of GMO foods all of the objections to GMO foods will vanish overnight from everyone that isn't an eco-naive twit.
These medications are bad for you, people die once in while, were going to sue and try to ban them. This seems to get just about everyone's approval. However these other medications that were made in a garage or jungle or other unsanitary conditions and routinely kill untold numbers of people but just happen to get people high. Let's legalize them!
If an alien species were to look and observe these types of things they would mark "do not contact" after determining the human race was crazy as hell.
You had it right the first time, snark should never be done half ass. Quality snark is to be admired and held up as a thing to be beholden. You have to take pride in your work, how can you take pride in half ass snark?
Re:A natural reaction to Faux News i think
on
The Rise of Hoax News
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Fox news was established to cater to a market that wasn't being met by a person willing to meet it. The cable news at the time came in two flavors, CNN and CNN headline news both of which were owned by Ted Turner. Ted Turner is a billionaire corporate mongrel by the way, but he is a very liberal corporate mongrel (he was married to Jane Fonda for years). The result was that CNN reflected his political views and had a great number of disenfranchised viewers.
Murdoch had already built up a media empire in other parts of the world and saw the bias in the reporting and gladly exploited it by catering to a conservative viewpoint. You'll want to do some research on your basics, because conservative is not the same thing as pro-corporate or republican. Many very large corporations (e.g. Apple) publicly espouse views that are very much not in line with conservative dogma.
Not a conservative or republican or a Fox news fan, but this revisionist history stuff is as bad as the stuff that Fox is accused of at times.
Re:The cost of publishing is zero...
on
The Rise of Hoax News
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Nonsense, it all boils down to human nature and people seeking out the 'truth' that matches their political views. People seek out the news that reinforces their views just as they always have. When a story comes along that reinforces your political views it's likely to get you read it because it confirms that you are "right".
The problem is that nowadays with the Internet we can make the problem with self referential reinforcement all the worse. Facebook, google and other sources are constantly trying to customize your news to make a tailored experience for you that will ensure you have higher click-through rates. They find the stories that you tend to click on and give you more of the same, after a while the result is that you only tend to see like minded stories. Log into a fresh computer and the news while look very different than the one you already use.
For example the gay waitress claiming to be insulted on a receipt - lots of people bought the story because they wanted to believe these things happen. Almost nobody bothered to check with the couple accused of the insult, and when they did they showed a credit card statement proving they left a good tip. People want to believe the things that confirm their political beliefs and they will seek out the news that does that and avoid the news that proves them wrong. It's human nature.
I worked at a University for a few years where we had thousands of staff tablets. I can assure you that the tablets never got used for anything other than consuming content, status symbols and brief emails or notes. Even when they were actually used to produce content it's always easy to tell when an email was written on a tablet due to the short and abbreviated way it was composed.
If your in school you should be there to produce content (homework, research etc) and for that a tablet is the worst choice possible, and it's no different for industry or government. It's the one thing Microsoft got right about the Surface, give it an integrated keyboard to make it feasible to actually produce content. Without the keyboard your left with a consumption device or a status symbol.
That being said, if Apple makes a 12.9" tablet, there are a lot of people that would buy it for a content consumption device just like they do with any other apple tablet. Apple should make it just for all the people that would appreciate a larger tablet for lounging around the house with and it would do quite well there, especially if it gets the upgraded screen that was talked about. But don't fool yourself into thinking that a larger tablet would have a damn thing to do with either education or producing content.
If he had been executed as he should have been we wouldn't have this problem. Death for spam, surely this sentence is the law in some country somewhere...
Your missing the point of doing this. This doesn't have anything to do with putting Android on the desktop, it has everything to do with sending a message to Microsoft. PC makers have suffered their largest decline in sales - ever. The decline has jack to do with tablets (which were for sale before windows 8) and everything to do with Metro. The manufacturers which have collectively lost billions of dollars on the disaster called Metro are at their wits end and desperate for Microsoft to change this.
Unfortunately for the industry Microsoft has only grudgingly provided half ass measures with boot to desktop (off by default) and the Start button that simply returns you to Metro instead of the Start Menu. It's a way for Microsoft to claim their listening without actually making the changes that are needed as it is still necessary to interface with Metro. The industry just went through a decade plus slump with XP and sees the writing on the wall that the enterpise will not touch windows 8. Home users are avoiding it because the reputation is worse than Vista, in fact it's uptake rate is even worse than Vista's.
It's a pissing contest and Microsoft has deeper pockets to wait things out longer than the manufacturers do. The manufacturers have begged, pleaded and screamed at Microsoft to revert back from forcing Metro on users by default. Everyone knows that Microsoft could easily restore the Start Menu and set the desktop to be the default, but they refuse to do it because they are trying to force people to become familiar with their tablet and phone interfaces and to use their marketplace.
The result is that the manufacturers are now sending a message to Microsoft that they can start putting Android on the desktop instead of Windows. It's a common Linux interface that the public knows and accepts, it's free and the app market is well established. By standardizing on Android for the desktop they could easily push enough development resources to make Android the desktop default. If Microsoft doesn't fix the issues with the Start Menu and boot to desktop by default 2015 could be the year of Linux on the desktop - by Android.
The problem isn't the capabilities of Unix, it's never been about that. The problem has always been about the usability of Unix from the average Joe's perspective. The fact that new users are typically told to RTFM and met with hostility certainly hurts the cause. It wasn't any different with DOS, it was a command line OS that was so counter-intuitive to learn that it spawned the entire 'For Dummies" series of books. By the time Windows 95 came out and put a useful GUI on DOS it was such a big deal that people lined up outside the stores at midnight just to buy it.
Steve Jobs understood this and worked ruthlessly to make Mac OS easy to use regardless of the back end. Nowadays you have the argument that Android and Mac OS/iOS are out there an extremely popular, but again they are simply GUI shells to the back-end that hide everything. Cisco routers and switches also have GUI's that will happily hide everything that was previously done by a command line. Really, the bottom line is that unless your in certain fields in IT or a programmer you don't have anything to gain by playing with command line. I grew up on the command line, I have spent decades with it, but I can't justify it to anyone just because I went through it.
Time's change, I remember supporting Novell Netware 2.x and 3.x and Token Ring, but I'm not about to suggest anyone spend time learning Netware or Token Ring either. I've had these conversations with people new to the field, they don't see the point, they just see a GUI to learn and buttons to click. The OS itself doesn't make a damn bit of difference, they don't want anything to do with a command line.
Early beer wasn't intended for getting drunk and wasn't as strong as the beer of today is. It was intended as a day in, day out workaday drink for the masses.
You've also got to remember that people back then didn't understand basic hygiene (Queen Elizabeth likely only bathed a couple times in her life) or why things like boiling water would be beneficial. Principals that today are widely understood simply weren't known back then. Even things as simple as washing your hands before surgery are very recent developments (more soldiers died from infections from wounds in the Civil war than were killed on the field).
What people did know was that people that drank beer didn't get sick like the people that drank water. They also knew that it tasted better than water and they were raised up on it as generations prior had been. It was likely cheaper to buy beer than the firewood to boil your own water if you lived in a city, it was also certainly less hassle when you consider that many households didn't have kitchens. In short there was simply no reason to go through the effort of boiling water.
Slashdot Mirror
As for the sperm party, the point of the party is so that the mom can honestly say she doesn't know who the possible father is. As for DNA having a damn thing to do whether or not you can get ordered to pay child support, that is an urban legend.
I'm not sure your if trolling or ignorant, but I'll bite for the people that could be misled into thinking actually biological fatherhood would have anything to do with child support. Many states do not give the father any opportunity to challenge paternity. If your married, named by the mother and don't receive the summons to court in time or even simply live with a woman long enough you can be ordered to pay child support. There are countless examples of men who have been ordered to pay child support for a child that isn't there's.
http://www.khou.com/news/Houst...
http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/r...
A recent law was proposed that would end the absurdity of paying child support for kids that aren't yours in the State of Washington:
http://www.thenewstribune.com/...
I take it you have no issue with men reading about cases like this and refusing to be a sperm donor then? There's a huge shortage of sperms donors as it is and lesbian couples in particular have a large waiting list. Attitudes like yours are why this shortage exists and why it will only get worse. Do you have the same attitude about women that refuse to pay child support or contribute to the financial welfare of their kids?
What a crock, even for the lesbians that have only ever been lesbians (that's a lot less than the total), they will often take steps to help avoid exactly this scenario. The solution often involves several gay or gay friendly men and a sperm donor party. The entire point of having several men donate is to avoid having one take the child support hit.
Around that time welfare laws were written that only provided benefits if the child was born out of wedlock. Before that blacks actually had just as high of rate of marriage as whites in the US. At the time it was thought that welfare should only be for families where the father couldn't support the child and the cash was set to follow that idea. You only got the cash if you didn't have a family, the results of which have been widely documented.
A woman can still get benefits without naming the possible dad. My ex did it with the kid she had before she met me and she was far from alone. The mother chose to name the Dad because then she gets benefits and child support. She's letting the state be the bad guy to keep the blame off of her for her own greed. Quit making excuses for others malicious behavior.
Get real, mothers tell the state that they don't know who the possible father is every day. You have obviously never looked at how the process works. The mother could have avoided the entire situation by declining to name the man, and still gotten the benefits.
She chose to name the man and is letting the state of Kansas play the bad guy for her own benefit. She used him to get what she was otherwise unwilling to do and has now burned the guy that naively helped out a lesbian couple without having a lawyer on board.
Quit calling a spade a duck and offering an excuse for her abominable behavior.
Target wasn't following security best practices. They were aware of certain risks and willingly took them.
Medical professionals have been saying for sometime now that you need to let a fever run it's course. To give an idea how much things have changed I once brought my child into the emergency room for a fever of 105.
I was then made to sign a piece of paper saying that I would not do so again for a temperature that low. Mind you this was the first time I had ever brought my child into the emergency room for a fever. Here's something from the Mayo clinic saying not to even take tyenol below a fever of 102
http://www.mayoclinic.org/dise...
http://pediatrics.aappublicati...
You have to learn the technologies that make you competitive in the job market. Your competition isn't the guy down the street, it's the guy in India or other like countries. You have to substantially market yourself against someone that could be making as little as 1/6th what you make now. In order to do that you have to have the skills that they can't bring to the market or that they don't tend to have. Any type of skills that requires personal presence is well worth adding.
Any skills that could be commoditized by and large have been by the likes of IBM to feed their outsourcing work. Remember that they focus on training up people for outsourcing and tend to stick to basic skills that can be marketed across a wide range of contracts.
If you really want to know what to focus on just go to the Indian versions of Monster, Dice and see what is in demand. Find what isn't in demand there but is in demand locally and is difficult to outsource. Specialist jobs are good for this as are consulting jobs as they are difficult or not worth the effort to outsource to India.
If you have a generic resume that only contains basic skills in wide usage you are extremely vulnerable to outsourcing. You will also have a difficult time landing a job once you have a few years experience and aren't fresh kid out of college cheap.
I think we just found the most complex and expensive alarm clock man has ever made. All that and I doubt it even has a snooze button.
I'll consider abandoning Ad Block when a decade after ads are no longer the leading cause of malware. Until then I consider it a security requirement along with noscript.
More to the point of the battery is that good why aren't they trying to sell the battery technology. This is a battery that they claim is 30 times smaller, charges 1000 times faster and built well enough to be used as a critical life support system. That market would be far larger than the scuba market and make them far more money. This doesn't pass the sniff test.
Of course your conveniently forgetting the largest period of relative peace the world has ever known came about because of nuclear weapons hanging over peoples heads. I'm fairly certain the cost of another world war would pretty quickly outweigh the costs of nuclear arms.
Let's not forget that tens of millions were killed in world wars before nuclear weapons were around and countless millions that have been slaughtered with conventional arms. I know it kills your hyperbole, but reality is like that.
People count on useful idiots like you. Stalin considered people like yourself to be critical for success. Tyrants and dictators depend on useful idiots to stand by and do nothing will they commit their atrocities.
So we should continue to leave countries under dictators that violate treaties, employ government rapists and kill their own citizens in large blocs because the country will run better? Tell you what, next time there's a genocide going on, why don't you send a sternly worded letter to the people doing it and see how that works?
In the words of Burke âoeThe only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.â Continue standing by and doing nothing while innocents are slaughtered by the millions in genocides because no one will 'go to war'. Your hands are clean only because your knee deep in blood.
Let's make this headline more accurate and honest, okay?
These has never been a single reputable study by anyone anywhere that has shown GMO anything to be unhealthy. GMO products have been made for decades and have been intensely studies by people with a vested interest in keeping them out. This range of scientific lunacy is in the same camp as wifi causes cancer and vaccination scaremongering.
Let's get real, this has jack to do with GMO and everything to do with eco naive that get their talking points from greenpeace and protectionism from those countries that haven't started making their own GMO foods yet. Once other countries start making their own versions of GMO foods all of the objections to GMO foods will vanish overnight from everyone that isn't an eco-naive twit.
The legalizing it trend is about far more than marijuana and it always has been. Don't fool yourself.
These medications are bad for you, people die once in while, were going to sue and try to ban them. This seems to get just about everyone's approval. However these other medications that were made in a garage or jungle or other unsanitary conditions and routinely kill untold numbers of people but just happen to get people high. Let's legalize them!
If an alien species were to look and observe these types of things they would mark "do not contact" after determining the human race was crazy as hell.
You had it right the first time, snark should never be done half ass. Quality snark is to be admired and held up as a thing to be beholden. You have to take pride in your work, how can you take pride in half ass snark?
Fox news was established to cater to a market that wasn't being met by a person willing to meet it. The cable news at the time came in two flavors, CNN and CNN headline news both of which were owned by Ted Turner. Ted Turner is a billionaire corporate mongrel by the way, but he is a very liberal corporate mongrel (he was married to Jane Fonda for years). The result was that CNN reflected his political views and had a great number of disenfranchised viewers.
Murdoch had already built up a media empire in other parts of the world and saw the bias in the reporting and gladly exploited it by catering to a conservative viewpoint. You'll want to do some research on your basics, because conservative is not the same thing as pro-corporate or republican. Many very large corporations (e.g. Apple) publicly espouse views that are very much not in line with conservative dogma.
Not a conservative or republican or a Fox news fan, but this revisionist history stuff is as bad as the stuff that Fox is accused of at times.
Nonsense, it all boils down to human nature and people seeking out the 'truth' that matches their political views. People seek out the news that reinforces their views just as they always have. When a story comes along that reinforces your political views it's likely to get you read it because it confirms that you are "right".
The problem is that nowadays with the Internet we can make the problem with self referential reinforcement all the worse. Facebook, google and other sources are constantly trying to customize your news to make a tailored experience for you that will ensure you have higher click-through rates. They find the stories that you tend to click on and give you more of the same, after a while the result is that you only tend to see like minded stories. Log into a fresh computer and the news while look very different than the one you already use.
For example the gay waitress claiming to be insulted on a receipt - lots of people bought the story because they wanted to believe these things happen. Almost nobody bothered to check with the couple accused of the insult, and when they did they showed a credit card statement proving they left a good tip. People want to believe the things that confirm their political beliefs and they will seek out the news that does that and avoid the news that proves them wrong. It's human nature.
I worked at a University for a few years where we had thousands of staff tablets. I can assure you that the tablets never got used for anything other than consuming content, status symbols and brief emails or notes. Even when they were actually used to produce content it's always easy to tell when an email was written on a tablet due to the short and abbreviated way it was composed.
If your in school you should be there to produce content (homework, research etc) and for that a tablet is the worst choice possible, and it's no different for industry or government. It's the one thing Microsoft got right about the Surface, give it an integrated keyboard to make it feasible to actually produce content. Without the keyboard your left with a consumption device or a status symbol.
That being said, if Apple makes a 12.9" tablet, there are a lot of people that would buy it for a content consumption device just like they do with any other apple tablet. Apple should make it just for all the people that would appreciate a larger tablet for lounging around the house with and it would do quite well there, especially if it gets the upgraded screen that was talked about. But don't fool yourself into thinking that a larger tablet would have a damn thing to do with either education or producing content.
If he had been executed as he should have been we wouldn't have this problem. Death for spam, surely this sentence is the law in some country somewhere...
Your missing the point of doing this. This doesn't have anything to do with putting Android on the desktop, it has everything to do with sending a message to Microsoft. PC makers have suffered their largest decline in sales - ever. The decline has jack to do with tablets (which were for sale before windows 8) and everything to do with Metro. The manufacturers which have collectively lost billions of dollars on the disaster called Metro are at their wits end and desperate for Microsoft to change this.
Unfortunately for the industry Microsoft has only grudgingly provided half ass measures with boot to desktop (off by default) and the Start button that simply returns you to Metro instead of the Start Menu. It's a way for Microsoft to claim their listening without actually making the changes that are needed as it is still necessary to interface with Metro. The industry just went through a decade plus slump with XP and sees the writing on the wall that the enterpise will not touch windows 8. Home users are avoiding it because the reputation is worse than Vista, in fact it's uptake rate is even worse than Vista's.
It's a pissing contest and Microsoft has deeper pockets to wait things out longer than the manufacturers do. The manufacturers have begged, pleaded and screamed at Microsoft to revert back from forcing Metro on users by default. Everyone knows that Microsoft could easily restore the Start Menu and set the desktop to be the default, but they refuse to do it because they are trying to force people to become familiar with their tablet and phone interfaces and to use their marketplace.
The result is that the manufacturers are now sending a message to Microsoft that they can start putting Android on the desktop instead of Windows. It's a common Linux interface that the public knows and accepts, it's free and the app market is well established. By standardizing on Android for the desktop they could easily push enough development resources to make Android the desktop default. If Microsoft doesn't fix the issues with the Start Menu and boot to desktop by default 2015 could be the year of Linux on the desktop - by Android.
The problem isn't the capabilities of Unix, it's never been about that. The problem has always been about the usability of Unix from the average Joe's perspective. The fact that new users are typically told to RTFM and met with hostility certainly hurts the cause. It wasn't any different with DOS, it was a command line OS that was so counter-intuitive to learn that it spawned the entire 'For Dummies" series of books. By the time Windows 95 came out and put a useful GUI on DOS it was such a big deal that people lined up outside the stores at midnight just to buy it.
Steve Jobs understood this and worked ruthlessly to make Mac OS easy to use regardless of the back end. Nowadays you have the argument that Android and Mac OS/iOS are out there an extremely popular, but again they are simply GUI shells to the back-end that hide everything. Cisco routers and switches also have GUI's that will happily hide everything that was previously done by a command line. Really, the bottom line is that unless your in certain fields in IT or a programmer you don't have anything to gain by playing with command line. I grew up on the command line, I have spent decades with it, but I can't justify it to anyone just because I went through it.
Time's change, I remember supporting Novell Netware 2.x and 3.x and Token Ring, but I'm not about to suggest anyone spend time learning Netware or Token Ring either. I've had these conversations with people new to the field, they don't see the point, they just see a GUI to learn and buttons to click. The OS itself doesn't make a damn bit of difference, they don't want anything to do with a command line.
Early beer wasn't intended for getting drunk and wasn't as strong as the beer of today is. It was intended as a day in, day out workaday drink for the masses.
You've also got to remember that people back then didn't understand basic hygiene (Queen Elizabeth likely only bathed a couple times in her life) or why things like boiling water would be beneficial. Principals that today are widely understood simply weren't known back then. Even things as simple as washing your hands before surgery are very recent developments (more soldiers died from infections from wounds in the Civil war than were killed on the field).
What people did know was that people that drank beer didn't get sick like the people that drank water. They also knew that it tasted better than water and they were raised up on it as generations prior had been. It was likely cheaper to buy beer than the firewood to boil your own water if you lived in a city, it was also certainly less hassle when you consider that many households didn't have kitchens. In short there was simply no reason to go through the effort of boiling water.