Pot is illegal because blacks and Mexicans smoked it, and hemp was threatening the cotton and (wood) paper industries.
And oil! Hemp seed oil was the most used fuel at the turn of the 20th century. It threatened the petroleum, wood, and cotton industries, and had to go. The hysteria generated to help public acceptance of a ban was the racial stuff.
Different tools for different jobs. This is the first post that isn't some rant about [Evil Empire | Flash Vulnerability | Linux Support]. The truth is never as polarized as people want it to be.
What's a "convicted criminal"?
This includes first-time MISDEMEANOR DUIs. In other words, a "convicted criminal" in the same sense as a first-time conviction for shoplifting candy bars.
In my honest opinion, this law is the real crime.
That's a pretty big leap. Stealing a candy bar isn't quite the same as risking the lives of everyone you encounter on the road. And then there's the argument "he wasn't THAT drunk." Come on. You don't need to drink. You don't need to drive after you drink. It's not that hard to just be responsible, and if you can't handle the responsibility, you don't get to drive without the lock.
People who use guns too irresponsibly don't get to keep guns. People who treat children too irresponsibly don't get to keep children. People who drive too irresponsibly don't get to drive. An interlock system is a way to allow people that need to drive the ability to do so while decreasing the likelihood of them killing someone.
This. Exactly this.
Driving is a privilege, not a right. If you choose to endanger the lives of others on the road by drinking beforehand, then you should lose that privilege.
Personally, I'd be happy with a few more non-judges (ideally a couple non-lawyers) on the Court (not a majority, but two or three), just to provide a touch of humanity.
I agree that a human touch is good (cf. Dred Scott), but I disagree about having non-lawyers on the court. I think we can all appreciate a decision maker who knows the rules, and knows when to break them. But putting someone in there who doesn't even know the rules is going to be more harmful than helpful. To put it another way, it's the responsibility of the elected legislature to come up with laws. The court should show wisdom in striking down laws that violate our Constitution (our core national values). But if we have a court that makes stuff up as it goes along, then we have ironically sacrificed the democratic element of our government for a pure tyranny of (unelected) judges.
I think that's the point. Our system, as it stands, has an overabundance of rules. There's also a kind of corruption that happens to those who have had too much exposure to the internals of the court. As was stated, most of the cases that go before SCOTUS have no legal precedent. There's little reason for a familiarity with "the rules," with one exception. They should be intimately familiar with the US Constitution and amendments, because their job is based upon deciding whether laws, or other cases, fall within those guidelines.
The last thing I need is a set of judges who de-prioritize the constitution, and either follow their political leanings or prior legal experience to enact judgments. That isn't their job.
I read that a while ago, and it ends up being primarily 2 or 3 key points that revolve around software freedom. While philosophical discussions are great, they aren't always subscribed to by everyone.
In short, I was expecting technical specifics of why Java was better, but there weren't any at all.
I was in the intersection at speed when the light turned from yellow to red.
The date on the camera makes a huge difference. The data recorded at the time of the incident needs to be spot on. The presumption is one of innocence, not guilt, which needs to be found beyond a reasonable doubt. If it's found that the data is circumspect in any way, including different dates of the incident, timing of the picture, etc, then there is cause for reasonable doubt.
Something that is of the people, by the people, and for the people should not be maliciously attacking its people to preserve an overblown budget.
Bumping the tax on gas is idiotic anyway, because the only reason it's so cheap is that it's subsidized by the government. What they should do is eliminate the subsidy.
Most nerd types on Facebook that could have iPads would likely have no inclination to fill out a survey. Compare that to the enormous amount of time that selfish elitist executives have to kill!
...Republicans have fought hard to have control of the message
If you truly believe that this is just a "republican" agenda, then you have been suckered into believing the other sides message.
BOTH parties are trying to do this, they aren't stupid. Once any party has some sort of power, they're not going to give it up. Don't be fooled by party "marketing" tactics.
It's pretty typical for the mindless sheeple followers of either party to frantically point blame at the other. The moment anyone states "Fox News" without proper reference to "CNN," or vice versa, should be immediately discounted.
The FCC is a government agency that has its commissioners appointed by the current president. Last time I checked, the current president is a Democrat.
Either way, the US is far too tight assed about nudity, and far too lenient with violence. It isn't a new discussion, and it isn't going to end anytime soon, either.
And there are quite a few more stories that involve family members picking up legally owned firearms in a moment of anger to kill another family member, or in a moment of distress to commit suicide.
If this were the reason for gun control, why don't they also institute knife control?
Being from the US, I'm really looking forward to the day when we won't use combustion engines. I think we're heading in the right direction, in that respect.
You know, I was going to lament the waste that it seems it will be to pump the relief well and seal off this oil well because of the vastness of the reserve and how much oil and natural gas they could get from it since they can collect it now with the cap on it.
Most reserves have a great many wells associated with them. It's a big reservoir, it's not unusable because one well had a blowout.
What's more intriguing is the quality of the crude coming out of the well. It's not typical stuff.
My point was that you can't have a full time job, a healthy family life, and still be considered financially successful while also being a drug abuser.
So, what is abuse and who gets to define it? Wouldn't it be abuse when continued use adversely affects job, family, and health? If it doesn't affect these things, isn't it just heavy use?
The article states this condition of abuse as saying, "they are high functioning, until something happens!" It's a little telling - one thing happening once does not make it a chronic occurrence. If I take Nyquil to help with allergies every now and then, and fell asleep at the wheel as a result, does that make me a high-functioning Nyquil abuser?
Shit happens. If shit happens repeatedly, then it's time to articulate it as abuse. Otherwise, it's a mistake, or a moment of poor judgment. While it could be related to the usage, it doesn't necessarily have to be. Humans are flawed. They fuck up. Even non-users do.
What I actually said/meant was that there should be tankers AND equipment to straddle a broken pipe, the same type of equipment that they have just finished building and installing. My point is that this shouldn't be trial and error. As a condition of drilling, they should have already invested in recovery methods before they begin. As for your comment about it taking days for the emergency tankers to arrive, oil has been gushing for 3 months! Even if the tankers were docked in Europe, it would only take a couple of weeks or so at full steam to arrive at the gulf. That is significantly less than 3 months.
The standard is a blowout preventer, which works just fine. In this case, it was the blowout preventer that was damaged. BP's failure was more likely the result of cost-cutting measures of not ensuring that their equipment was up to standard, and not that they didn't have loads of additional precautionary emergency support.
BP will probably go under on account of this. It was their fault that they weren't following regulation, for if they had, none of this would have happened.
Your post doesn't make sense, and you will forgive me if I write you off as a corporate drone.
This part makes me more inclined to write you off.
what has always made RPGs what they are; storyline, character-driven dialogue and novel elements unique to each game
Don't forget character progression. RPGs feel the way they do because your character becomes stronger as a result of your play. Every RPG has this in some form or another. Zelda did it through gear and hearts, Deus Ex through mods, skills, and so on.
The big problems with developing games on the cheap isn't that you can't afford all the "pretty pictures," it's that you can't afford the *promotion*. I would be willing to bet that modern A-list games spend almost as much these days on marketing as they do on raw development. If you can't afford that kind of money for advertising, promotion, hype, press junkets, etc. then you're most likely not going to be making much money (if any at all). That's all well and good if you're a small indie, doing small games. But you're not going to make the next Gears of War, Halo, or World of Warcraft on a small budget. Even if you could make a great FPS or MMO without all the pretty pictures (and it has been done), it's not going to sell in those kind of numbers at $50-$60 a pop if no one has heard about it.
You have to look at where they originally started. It's a bit like houses - you start small, and graduate into the next size. Once you have a cash pool, then you can support bigger development. Fame also follows.
Shattered Steele wasn't an epic game. It built a foundation, though, which allowed Bioware to work on the Infinity Engine, which led to plethora of RPGs. Once the engine was "done," it became a matter of writing story, scripting events, and artwork. There might be some engine refinement as time goes on, but the cost of development is lower for subsequent titles than the first one. That's sensible business.
Blizzard had even longer to wait before a real success. They did a number of video game ports and games like the Vikings and Blackthorne (platformers, pretty simple games) before releasing the first Warcraft title. Even Warcraft wasn't a massive hit at first - it took some time before sales took off. Diablo and WC2 is when Blizzard really exploded and went "epic."
The main problem is that new development studios bite off more than they can chew. They end up owing to VC, feeling stressed over deadlines, and releasing buggy, unfinished, or poorly designed products. You can get to development of games on the scale of Bioware or Blizzard once your company has built itself a decent foundation.
Do you realize how many people buy Apple products because they "simply work"? This one unreliable product has planted the seed of doubt.
A bigger question is: How many iPhones have you seen floating around without a third party cover?
While the base iPhone is unreliable, it's great if it's put in a cover. The vast majority of users use covers, which would mean that the vast majority of users will notice no sign of unreliability. Hell, they probably only found out because of Consumer Reports, and then also saw "it doesn't apply if a case is used..." and figure that they're unaffected. And they truly are unaffected.
This doesn't change the fact that Apple is shipping a faulty product, but the phone on its own is not necessarily how the masses use the phone.
A written contract is binding, just as a verbal one is. The difference is that the written contract has evidence, the verbal one is on each party's honor.
It doesn't matter if it was crayon on toilet paper, if it's got signatures, then it's a valid and fully binding contract.
The operating system manages the hardware, and provides an interface between the hardware and applications. Everything else is an application (including most libraries, since they're just reusable parts of applications).
That would be the kernel, not the OS. An OS not only provides applications an interface with the hardware, but also functions as an interface for the user as well. GNU is a partial operating system that has no specific kernel. When it is paired with a kernel (GNU/HURD or GNU/LINUX), then it is considered an operating system.
As such, it is necessary for an OS to have a set of applications, in addition to the kernel.
If someone with such a low UID (well, not really *that* low, but still that account has to be more than 10 years old) hasn't hit the karma cap yet, there's something seriously wrong.
It's strange to realize that this account is that old.
I'd make a correction to that - computer science is a subset of mathematics. Computer programming, on the other hand, is not. There is a difference between the two.
Slashdot Mirror
Pot is illegal because blacks and Mexicans smoked it, and hemp was threatening the cotton and (wood) paper industries.
And oil! Hemp seed oil was the most used fuel at the turn of the 20th century. It threatened the petroleum, wood, and cotton industries, and had to go. The hysteria generated to help public acceptance of a ban was the racial stuff.
Different tools for different jobs. This is the first post that isn't some rant about [Evil Empire | Flash Vulnerability | Linux Support]. The truth is never as polarized as people want it to be.
Mod the parent up, please.
What's a "convicted criminal"? This includes first-time MISDEMEANOR DUIs. In other words, a "convicted criminal" in the same sense as a first-time conviction for shoplifting candy bars. In my honest opinion, this law is the real crime.
That's a pretty big leap. Stealing a candy bar isn't quite the same as risking the lives of everyone you encounter on the road. And then there's the argument "he wasn't THAT drunk." Come on. You don't need to drink. You don't need to drive after you drink. It's not that hard to just be responsible, and if you can't handle the responsibility, you don't get to drive without the lock.
People who use guns too irresponsibly don't get to keep guns. People who treat children too irresponsibly don't get to keep children. People who drive too irresponsibly don't get to drive. An interlock system is a way to allow people that need to drive the ability to do so while decreasing the likelihood of them killing someone.
This. Exactly this.
Driving is a privilege, not a right. If you choose to endanger the lives of others on the road by drinking beforehand, then you should lose that privilege.
Personally, I'd be happy with a few more non-judges (ideally a couple non-lawyers) on the Court (not a majority, but two or three), just to provide a touch of humanity.
I agree that a human touch is good (cf. Dred Scott), but I disagree about having non-lawyers on the court. I think we can all appreciate a decision maker who knows the rules, and knows when to break them. But putting someone in there who doesn't even know the rules is going to be more harmful than helpful. To put it another way, it's the responsibility of the elected legislature to come up with laws. The court should show wisdom in striking down laws that violate our Constitution (our core national values). But if we have a court that makes stuff up as it goes along, then we have ironically sacrificed the democratic element of our government for a pure tyranny of (unelected) judges.
I think that's the point. Our system, as it stands, has an overabundance of rules. There's also a kind of corruption that happens to those who have had too much exposure to the internals of the court. As was stated, most of the cases that go before SCOTUS have no legal precedent. There's little reason for a familiarity with "the rules," with one exception. They should be intimately familiar with the US Constitution and amendments, because their job is based upon deciding whether laws, or other cases, fall within those guidelines.
The last thing I need is a set of judges who de-prioritize the constitution, and either follow their political leanings or prior legal experience to enact judgments. That isn't their job.
Uh, who do you suppose would be paying off the debt otherwise?
For real. In IL, they just charge for all lanes instead of a special one. Then they tax your gas on top of that.
I read that a while ago, and it ends up being primarily 2 or 3 key points that revolve around software freedom. While philosophical discussions are great, they aren't always subscribed to by everyone.
In short, I was expecting technical specifics of why Java was better, but there weren't any at all.
A stop sign is not a stop light.
That isn't my car.
That isn't me driving.
I was in the intersection at speed when the light turned from yellow to red.
The date on the camera makes a huge difference. The data recorded at the time of the incident needs to be spot on. The presumption is one of innocence, not guilt, which needs to be found beyond a reasonable doubt. If it's found that the data is circumspect in any way, including different dates of the incident, timing of the picture, etc, then there is cause for reasonable doubt.
Something that is of the people, by the people, and for the people should not be maliciously attacking its people to preserve an overblown budget.
Bumping the tax on gas is idiotic anyway, because the only reason it's so cheap is that it's subsidized by the government. What they should do is eliminate the subsidy.
Most nerd types on Facebook that could have iPads would likely have no inclination to fill out a survey. Compare that to the enormous amount of time that selfish elitist executives have to kill!
Ice Crown Cathedral
Are you sure that it's WoW that you're playing?
If you truly believe that this is just a "republican" agenda, then you have been suckered into believing the other sides message.
BOTH parties are trying to do this, they aren't stupid. Once any party has some sort of power, they're not going to give it up. Don't be fooled by party "marketing" tactics.
It's pretty typical for the mindless sheeple followers of either party to frantically point blame at the other. The moment anyone states "Fox News" without proper reference to "CNN," or vice versa, should be immediately discounted.
The FCC is a government agency that has its commissioners appointed by the current president. Last time I checked, the current president is a Democrat.
Either way, the US is far too tight assed about nudity, and far too lenient with violence. It isn't a new discussion, and it isn't going to end anytime soon, either.
And there are quite a few more stories that involve family members picking up legally owned firearms in a moment of anger to kill another family member, or in a moment of distress to commit suicide.
If this were the reason for gun control, why don't they also institute knife control?
Being from the US, I'm really looking forward to the day when we won't use combustion engines. I think we're heading in the right direction, in that respect.
You know, I was going to lament the waste that it seems it will be to pump the relief well and seal off this oil well because of the vastness of the reserve and how much oil and natural gas they could get from it since they can collect it now with the cap on it.
Most reserves have a great many wells associated with them. It's a big reservoir, it's not unusable because one well had a blowout.
What's more intriguing is the quality of the crude coming out of the well. It's not typical stuff.
My point was that you can't have a full time job, a healthy family life, and still be considered financially successful while also being a drug abuser.
So, what is abuse and who gets to define it? Wouldn't it be abuse when continued use adversely affects job, family, and health? If it doesn't affect these things, isn't it just heavy use?
The article states this condition of abuse as saying, "they are high functioning, until something happens!" It's a little telling - one thing happening once does not make it a chronic occurrence. If I take Nyquil to help with allergies every now and then, and fell asleep at the wheel as a result, does that make me a high-functioning Nyquil abuser?
Shit happens. If shit happens repeatedly, then it's time to articulate it as abuse. Otherwise, it's a mistake, or a moment of poor judgment. While it could be related to the usage, it doesn't necessarily have to be. Humans are flawed. They fuck up. Even non-users do.
What I actually said/meant was that there should be tankers AND equipment to straddle a broken pipe, the same type of equipment that they have just finished building and installing. My point is that this shouldn't be trial and error. As a condition of drilling, they should have already invested in recovery methods before they begin. As for your comment about it taking days for the emergency tankers to arrive, oil has been gushing for 3 months! Even if the tankers were docked in Europe, it would only take a couple of weeks or so at full steam to arrive at the gulf. That is significantly less than 3 months.
The standard is a blowout preventer, which works just fine. In this case, it was the blowout preventer that was damaged. BP's failure was more likely the result of cost-cutting measures of not ensuring that their equipment was up to standard, and not that they didn't have loads of additional precautionary emergency support.
BP will probably go under on account of this. It was their fault that they weren't following regulation, for if they had, none of this would have happened.
Your post doesn't make sense, and you will forgive me if I write you off as a corporate drone.
This part makes me more inclined to write you off.
what has always made RPGs what they are; storyline, character-driven dialogue and novel elements unique to each game
Don't forget character progression. RPGs feel the way they do because your character becomes stronger as a result of your play. Every RPG has this in some form or another. Zelda did it through gear and hearts, Deus Ex through mods, skills, and so on.
The big problems with developing games on the cheap isn't that you can't afford all the "pretty pictures," it's that you can't afford the *promotion*. I would be willing to bet that modern A-list games spend almost as much these days on marketing as they do on raw development. If you can't afford that kind of money for advertising, promotion, hype, press junkets, etc. then you're most likely not going to be making much money (if any at all). That's all well and good if you're a small indie, doing small games. But you're not going to make the next Gears of War, Halo, or World of Warcraft on a small budget. Even if you could make a great FPS or MMO without all the pretty pictures (and it has been done), it's not going to sell in those kind of numbers at $50-$60 a pop if no one has heard about it.
You have to look at where they originally started. It's a bit like houses - you start small, and graduate into the next size. Once you have a cash pool, then you can support bigger development. Fame also follows.
Shattered Steele wasn't an epic game. It built a foundation, though, which allowed Bioware to work on the Infinity Engine, which led to plethora of RPGs. Once the engine was "done," it became a matter of writing story, scripting events, and artwork. There might be some engine refinement as time goes on, but the cost of development is lower for subsequent titles than the first one. That's sensible business.
Blizzard had even longer to wait before a real success. They did a number of video game ports and games like the Vikings and Blackthorne (platformers, pretty simple games) before releasing the first Warcraft title. Even Warcraft wasn't a massive hit at first - it took some time before sales took off. Diablo and WC2 is when Blizzard really exploded and went "epic."
The main problem is that new development studios bite off more than they can chew. They end up owing to VC, feeling stressed over deadlines, and releasing buggy, unfinished, or poorly designed products. You can get to development of games on the scale of Bioware or Blizzard once your company has built itself a decent foundation.
Do you realize how many people buy Apple products because they "simply work"? This one unreliable product has planted the seed of doubt.
A bigger question is: How many iPhones have you seen floating around without a third party cover?
While the base iPhone is unreliable, it's great if it's put in a cover. The vast majority of users use covers, which would mean that the vast majority of users will notice no sign of unreliability. Hell, they probably only found out because of Consumer Reports, and then also saw "it doesn't apply if a case is used..." and figure that they're unaffected. And they truly are unaffected.
This doesn't change the fact that Apple is shipping a faulty product, but the phone on its own is not necessarily how the masses use the phone.
A written contract is binding, just as a verbal one is. The difference is that the written contract has evidence, the verbal one is on each party's honor.
It doesn't matter if it was crayon on toilet paper, if it's got signatures, then it's a valid and fully binding contract.
more like a noisy and obnoxious minority of a community.
So all slashdot users are Christians?
The operating system manages the hardware, and provides an interface between the hardware and applications. Everything else is an application (including most libraries, since they're just reusable parts of applications).
That would be the kernel, not the OS. An OS not only provides applications an interface with the hardware, but also functions as an interface for the user as well. GNU is a partial operating system that has no specific kernel. When it is paired with a kernel (GNU/HURD or GNU/LINUX), then it is considered an operating system.
As such, it is necessary for an OS to have a set of applications, in addition to the kernel.
If someone with such a low UID (well, not really *that* low, but still that account has to be more than 10 years old) hasn't hit the karma cap yet, there's something seriously wrong.
It's strange to realize that this account is that old.
I'd make a correction to that - computer science is a subset of mathematics. Computer programming, on the other hand, is not. There is a difference between the two.