If you cannot handle listening to uncensored democracy style discourse then maybe you can just stop listening instead of trying to censor everything you do not like.
They do not just mostly ignore individual pirites, they do the same for groups and put 0 effort into locking down their software. Since the very beginning attracting pirates to windows and office has been a major unspoken marketing ploy. No idea if it changed recently, but for many versions the method to crack office was to change a registry key from false to true. And windows hardly even punishes users of unregistered versions of windows.
So, you have no criminal convictions, you have done nothing anyone could charge you for, but a police officer does not like your answer, or just you, and decides to put you on a list designed to significantly effect your sentencing, and make sure that officers pay you special consideration whenever possible? America has been taking too many lessions from Canada in the criminal law department.
That is 100% unconstitutional.
You have even more freedom of speech in the US, so I am very certain that you would be more than covered there. Really, the only country in the entire world I could see a legitimate review labeled as defamation is the UK. Where the wording of their lawsin my oppinion , would make all negative review technically defamation.
That infrastructure was lane with billions of dollars of tax payer money. Unless every company who wishes to give it a go is also granted billions of dollars of tax payer money it is not a fair or winnable competition.
The last legislation we had. That only did not pass by a toenail. Was a law for forcing all resellers to charge whatever Bell told them to charge. Basically it was a law that in all but name dismantled every competitor of Bell and made future competition illigal. It would of more than quadrupled my monthly bill, and put my ISP out of business.
Because if they taxed individuals on their profits, that would be 0 tax for 99.9% of all individuals. People do not accumulate wealth, so you need to tax their wealth production instead. Also Individuals do not spend money to make money, so their profit margins are all the same, 100%.
If you wanted to tax wealth production, similarly, for corporation you would need to do it on an individual basis, as every single business has a different profit margin. It is not bad for anyone for a business to be making $.01 on ever 1000 orders, equating to making $101 on every $100 spent on materials and manpower, in fact that is sort of what you want. So you do not want to make that business unviable with taxation. So you would have to adjust the taxation based on the profit margin, and that is call taxing profits.
So in closing, taxing businesses profits is directly synonymous with taxing individuals income.
"ultra conformity" is just two words placed one after another to express an idea. In this case an excessive amount of conformity, aka more conformity that just the word "conformity" implies. "neocomformists" is the word I coined just now. It does not appear to be used, and I am suggesting we use it to describe this theoretical phenomenon I just described.
Radiation in real life is not like radiation in video games. When you encounter a dangerous irradiated zone you do not start screaming "It Burns, It Burns!", your eyes do not melt, your skin does not peel. You just statistically knock years off your life. Living there probably just cuts your lifespan in half, which in no way prevents a thriving ecosystem. Which is fine for animals and Russians, because Russians are fing crazy, but does not make it safe for general human occupation.
They absolutely are not hippies or emos, and that is not what I said, just that some of the same societal forces built all three of these groups. In broad strokes I would look at it like:
Hippies, ~neocomformists~ based on love.
Emos, ~neocomformists~ based on fear.
Hipsters, ~neocomformists~ based on hatred.
And no one can really point to a concrete example and really tell you exactly what one is as it is complicated. A hipster is an idea of a person, and pretty much no one fits an idea perfectly. Most people are shades of different ideas. I tried to give a picture of common traits that bind them, as there are no absolutes. Ultra conformity and narcissism can surface in many different forms cross culturally.
At the same time, you would not be wrong to call Hipsters a sort of cultural Zeitgeist. A generic punching bag to pin all of societies problems on. I would say both ideas can coexist.
Hipsters are the current generation's name for the ever changing group of ultra conformists. In the 90s there were emos who showed their conformity to their friends though cutting themselves, writing poems about death, and wearing black and fake vampire teeth; And in the 60's they wore tie-dye, danced in the mud naked, and took mind altering narcotics. As you can imagine, emos were a little too extreme (and not nearly as fun) and did not gather quite the same following.
This current generation, Hipsters, is particularly virulent as they have tapped into the latent hatred, bigotry, and racism in society. They wear cloths not only to show their conformity to each other but their contempt and hatred for everyone else through sarcasm; No matter if their difference is political, cultural, ideological, or just a difference in fashion sense.
These people, particularly this latest generation, do not think individually so much as they have a borg-like group think ability. They do not wear what they think is good, they do not believe things they have come to logically, they just figure what what is the most fashionable/cool thing and do that. To them whether you are heterosexual, gay, or bi is a fashion statement; The same as how when to wear a scarf no longer has anything to do with the temperature outside.
I could go on and on and fill a book with the specifics of these people, but this should give you an idea of the lowest common denominator that brings this large international movement together.
Which does not necessarily mean they do not exist in nature, just that they are less likely to exist unchanged for millions of years. Fungus is a great example. It is an entire branch of life, like animals or plants, but by its very nature is parasitic. In general this parasitic organism has found that it is better to give back more than you take. But it can easily out compete other fungus and really all other life if it decides not too.
So, that is why right now there is some dying forest in America, I believe, which is the site of the biggest lifeform on the planet, a single parasitic fungus that spans some mind boggling acreage and which found that giving back and living in cooperation with the trees was just too big of a hassle.
Slashdot Mirror
If you cannot handle listening to uncensored democracy style discourse then maybe you can just stop listening instead of trying to censor everything you do not like.
They do not just mostly ignore individual pirites, they do the same for groups and put 0 effort into locking down their software. Since the very beginning attracting pirates to windows and office has been a major unspoken marketing ploy. No idea if it changed recently, but for many versions the method to crack office was to change a registry key from false to true. And windows hardly even punishes users of unregistered versions of windows.
Cool story bro, but the history and future of video gaming was written by and on the computer and mainframe.
Have you ever tried to sink a plastic boat, it is literally impossible. A plastic battleship would be unstoppable.
So, you have no criminal convictions, you have done nothing anyone could charge you for, but a police officer does not like your answer, or just you, and decides to put you on a list designed to significantly effect your sentencing, and make sure that officers pay you special consideration whenever possible? America has been taking too many lessions from Canada in the criminal law department. That is 100% unconstitutional.
Just seize and building they want and move in.
With the title moneyball, I am imagining the police pulling a wad of cash through the streets, and jailing anyone they catch.
But it is only interesting to apple fan boys. I do not care any more than I would care if there was a disagreement over some mlp lore.
I did, but could not get over the name. Slashdot aka /. is just a fantastic name imho. SN just does not roll of the keyboard quite as nicely.
You have even more freedom of speech in the US, so I am very certain that you would be more than covered there. Really, the only country in the entire world I could see a legitimate review labeled as defamation is the UK. Where the wording of their lawsin my oppinion , would make all negative review technically defamation.
No, but it is the type of legislation that the Canadian government will pass.
So why did the Java machine not correctly optimize it?
Adblock has a pretty low percentage of internet statistics.
That infrastructure was lane with billions of dollars of tax payer money. Unless every company who wishes to give it a go is also granted billions of dollars of tax payer money it is not a fair or winnable competition.
The last legislation we had. That only did not pass by a toenail. Was a law for forcing all resellers to charge whatever Bell told them to charge. Basically it was a law that in all but name dismantled every competitor of Bell and made future competition illigal. It would of more than quadrupled my monthly bill, and put my ISP out of business.
Because if they taxed individuals on their profits, that would be 0 tax for 99.9% of all individuals. People do not accumulate wealth, so you need to tax their wealth production instead. Also Individuals do not spend money to make money, so their profit margins are all the same, 100%.
If you wanted to tax wealth production, similarly, for corporation you would need to do it on an individual basis, as every single business has a different profit margin. It is not bad for anyone for a business to be making $.01 on ever 1000 orders, equating to making $101 on every $100 spent on materials and manpower, in fact that is sort of what you want. So you do not want to make that business unviable with taxation. So you would have to adjust the taxation based on the profit margin, and that is call taxing profits.
So in closing, taxing businesses profits is directly synonymous with taxing individuals income.
"ultra conformity" is just two words placed one after another to express an idea. In this case an excessive amount of conformity, aka more conformity that just the word "conformity" implies. "neocomformists" is the word I coined just now. It does not appear to be used, and I am suggesting we use it to describe this theoretical phenomenon I just described.
Radiation in real life is not like radiation in video games. When you encounter a dangerous irradiated zone you do not start screaming "It Burns, It Burns!", your eyes do not melt, your skin does not peel. You just statistically knock years off your life. Living there probably just cuts your lifespan in half, which in no way prevents a thriving ecosystem. Which is fine for animals and Russians, because Russians are fing crazy, but does not make it safe for general human occupation.
They absolutely are not hippies or emos, and that is not what I said, just that some of the same societal forces built all three of these groups. In broad strokes I would look at it like:
Hippies, ~neocomformists~ based on love.
Emos, ~neocomformists~ based on fear.
Hipsters, ~neocomformists~ based on hatred.
And no one can really point to a concrete example and really tell you exactly what one is as it is complicated. A hipster is an idea of a person, and pretty much no one fits an idea perfectly. Most people are shades of different ideas. I tried to give a picture of common traits that bind them, as there are no absolutes. Ultra conformity and narcissism can surface in many different forms cross culturally.
At the same time, you would not be wrong to call Hipsters a sort of cultural Zeitgeist. A generic punching bag to pin all of societies problems on. I would say both ideas can coexist.
http://www.quickmeme.com/img/6...
Hipsters are the current generation's name for the ever changing group of ultra conformists. In the 90s there were emos who showed their conformity to their friends though cutting themselves, writing poems about death, and wearing black and fake vampire teeth; And in the 60's they wore tie-dye, danced in the mud naked, and took mind altering narcotics. As you can imagine, emos were a little too extreme (and not nearly as fun) and did not gather quite the same following.
This current generation, Hipsters, is particularly virulent as they have tapped into the latent hatred, bigotry, and racism in society. They wear cloths not only to show their conformity to each other but their contempt and hatred for everyone else through sarcasm; No matter if their difference is political, cultural, ideological, or just a difference in fashion sense.
These people, particularly this latest generation, do not think individually so much as they have a borg-like group think ability. They do not wear what they think is good, they do not believe things they have come to logically, they just figure what what is the most fashionable/cool thing and do that. To them whether you are heterosexual, gay, or bi is a fashion statement; The same as how when to wear a scarf no longer has anything to do with the temperature outside.
I could go on and on and fill a book with the specifics of these people, but this should give you an idea of the lowest common denominator that brings this large international movement together.
Firefox lost me at least 10 versions ago, or whatever.
So sometime last week then?
The system I outlined was one that was exactly like what we have now.
I have heard the most common way to tell a drunk driver from a sober one is that the drunk most often drives way slower.
Which does not necessarily mean they do not exist in nature, just that they are less likely to exist unchanged for millions of years. Fungus is a great example. It is an entire branch of life, like animals or plants, but by its very nature is parasitic. In general this parasitic organism has found that it is better to give back more than you take. But it can easily out compete other fungus and really all other life if it decides not too.
So, that is why right now there is some dying forest in America, I believe, which is the site of the biggest lifeform on the planet, a single parasitic fungus that spans some mind boggling acreage and which found that giving back and living in cooperation with the trees was just too big of a hassle.