"It's hard enough for doctors to make a living[.]" Are you f-ing kidding me? Doctors are one of the richest professions in the US. In fact, around of 30% of doctors is in the top 1% of income earners in the US. The fact that they are turning away business should be a clear indicator that they are under little financial hardship. When's the last time you saw an adjunct professor turn down classes at a community college because s/he didn't like the students work ethic or some other thing like that? Doctors having trouble making a living, now that is rich.
Not that it ever was fun but this is getting ridiculously boring. Microsoft has a new article or press release or conference where all they do is blast the more succesfull product from another company every damn week.
Ballmer talks smack about Google's business plan even though they keep growing earnings and revenue at faster clip than MS. He then comes out and blasts Google's hiring and calls their company bloated even though Google makes more money per employee than Microsoft.
Bill Gates comes out and talks smack about the iPod and how the Zune is soooo much better and how the Zune is going to eat the iPod's lunch. Then Gates coems out and talks smack about OS X and its security flaws and how much better Vista's security is. The iPhone is announced and the Bill and Ballmer come out and start spreading nonsense about how the IPhone is going to suck because everything else out there already is so much better and how no one in business and in enterprise is going to want one.
And now the Wii is more popular than the 360 and they come out and talk crap about teh Wii's graphics when from day 1 Nintendo said the point of the console was not the graphics but the revolutionary new controller. MS looks alike a company that has no direction or leadership and all it is doing is reacting to whatever their competitors do. it is pathetic.
There are no rules about notice. In the US the standard rule is "at-will employment." This is somethign that employers have fought for because it allows them to fire people quickly. Of course this cuts the other way too. You can be fired at the will of the employer but the emplyee can leave at his wil too. The exception to this is when the parties negotiate a contract. For example unions usually negotiate that the company cannot fire union members at-will, there must be casue. Normally union contracts still let the union members quit when they want to (and look for a job whereever they want to). On the other hand coaches and players in sports teams get multi-year contracts that as a rule don't let them quit when they want to unless they retire. Anyway the important thing is that unless there is a contracgt between the employer and the employee all employment in the US is at-will (of both parties).
FUD FUD FUD. How can somethign that is not even out yet be a failure? how can you complain about battery life when you or anyone you know doesnt have one? how much did you get paid to post this kind of nonsense?
When the Constitution was drafted and the bill of rights became a part of it it was thought that the bill of rights only applied to the federal government. So state governments actually had the right to limit any of those rights that the first ten ammendments protected. It wasn't until the mid-20th century that some parts of the bill of rights became incorporated, through some SCOTUS decisions using the 14th ammendment, and began to affect states. The second ammendment has never been incorporated. There is NO Constitutional protection from States and local governments regulating guns. OR at least there isnt such a protection unless some activist judge takes Consitutional law into his own hands.
Which schools are those? Where does the cut-off in the rakings happen? Yale, Harvard, Stanford, Columbia, NYU, Chicago, Penn, Michigan, Berkeley, Virginia, etc...
Not to be a stickler but Jobs said that the heart of the MAC (not Apple) is the operating system. That makes more sense too since the ipod makes up such a large chunk of the Apple revenue.
While I understand and am simpathetic to your slipery slope argument First Amendment law makes a very big distinction between the medium of delivery and the content of ideas. While the First Amendment allows regulation on the mode of distribution (eg. one cannot go to a neighborhood at 3am and blast ones ideas with a loudspeaker), Content (of ideas) falls squarely under the protection of the First Amendment (esp. if it is political content). So if a state legislature tried to have guidelines over what constitutes acceptable content the Supreme Court (and probably the District and Circuit courts way before) will hold the law to be unconstitutional.
Yeah but that takes work! AND you even have to think!
I totally agree with you. What follows is my rant.
We live in a society where the central question has become: "What do I do so I don't have to think?" Of course we are reaching the point where people ask themselves: "What can someone else do so that I don't have to think."
Everyone wants a pill to fix their problems. "I have heart disease cause I eat too much fat. What can someone do for me?" And here come the pills. One for weight loss, one for thining the fat in your blood, one to make sure the other two don't interact detrimentally, etc..." If you eat crap you will feel like crap. Go out do some exercise and eat well. I'm sure that if you do those two your heart will be better and your liver will live to tell the story.
So you are depressed? Go to the analyst. Read some books. Think about the problems you have don't just avoid them like a pansy. All this mess comes from the weird Victorian England/ WASPy "Don't deal with the elephant in the room" mentality. Well that is just harmful and silly. We need to acceptthings ans deal with them. Grab a Freud, Jung, Lacan, Klein, Ferenczi, NLP, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Bowlby, Horney, Kafka, or a Shakespeare book, etc... (I mixed in philosophy, literature, and psychoanalysis because depending on your issue any of them when used properly will help. Great literature is great because it deals with things that all human beings will have to deal with regardless of moment in history otherwise it is just a period piece.)
This is certainly a victory for those of us who believe that the country is better off when alternative political voices aren't suppressed.
Are you fucking kidding me? Sure cause Nader (a.k.a. republican henchman for hire) getting on the ballot means only that this is good for third party options. Please, be real. This is good if you like invading other countries and killing tons of arabs. Other than that i dont see the great benefit.
the truth is that the US has a presidential system that given the size of the US makes it extremely dificult to have more than two parties. It just takes too much money to run an effective campaign. If this were a parliamentary system there would be more parties representing more interests, but with a winner take all presidential system the third party will prety much be relegated to be a spoiler and not much else.
For Microsoft's law firm and for plaintiff's attorneys. I can already hear the class action lawyers cracking their knucles and getting ready. I'm sure the non-premium customers is a very large group.
I think that in part fantasy and sci fi are always in a conflict. fantasy is about eden. it is about the time before when heroes were heroes and everything was better. sci fi is about progress and about how things will be better in the future. (inknow there lots of sci fi is about a world that is worse but what im talking about is really the interest in scifi and in fantasy) so when the future dries up and it looks like it is going to get pretty bad people go back to fantasy. people want to live in the world of the late 1990s when money flowed and terrorists were not around. -it flowed for some and terrorists have always been around the media just has a way of shaping perception and thus thought- Of course when the past looks horrible, as it did after the civil rights movement and after the holocaust sci fi will thrive. people see a better future ahead that will somehow make the terrible past have some meaning. the pendulum will swing back to sci fi at some point and fantasy will be the one which is in 'trouble'.
pessimists dont make great lawyers. it is the other way around. I am in law school and let me tell you that the legal professions is one depressing undertaking. My law school does surveys about job satisfaction and the longer the person has been working ina firm the less satisfied he is with the work and the more he feels like he cant get out of it. So the longer a lawyer works the more experience gets and the depresion he faces.
The only way for an organization of individuals to have any sort of lasting "moral compass" is to dilute power among it members.
Isn't diluting power what causes paralysis in the first place? If no one agent has enough power then no action can be taken.
A heirarchical organization has only the "moral compass" of the fellow at the very top - not much of a moral compass.
You could argue that the person at the top of the hierarchy only mirrors the values of those that keep him on the top of the hierarchy.
Imbalances at the top are caused by imbalances at the bottom. Societies that did not have a centralized government (like medieval Iceland) ussually are extremely violent and poor. This is because the mob is constantly trying to keep anyone who is succesful down. Their success might destabilize the system and create a hierarchy.
Moral compass is not owned by the bottom nor by the top simply by being top or bottom. There have been plenty of corrupt leaders and corrupt masses. It is just easier to pin it all down on one person and scapegoat them. GWB didn't invade Iraq all on his own, most of the American public was in favor of the invasion when it happened.
For a long time I thought that e-books would never become viable. They seemed more like a curiosity. However in my last move i realized I would love to have all my books in electronic form.
In the past 4 years I moved from San Juan PR to Haverford PA, Rome Italy, Haverford PA, San Diego CA, Philadelphia PA, Berkeley CA, San Juan PR, Ann Arbor MI. Those are just moves not counting random one to two month long trips. My moving around is not going to stop for a while if ever.
My books usually take like 15 boxes to be packed.
If I could have all my books on the palm of my hand on a device that I can read as well as a book I would -now- take the device in a hearbeat -as long as there was some way of having a back up for all the books-.
The idea behind wikipedia is cool, but just by skimming one entry I have seen two factual mistakes. One is probably just a mistake (which i tried to correct but it remains the same a month later) but the other one seems like someone has an ax to grind and is actually putting in false information that they wish were true.
In the Puerto Rico entry it says that Puerto Ricans dont pay federal taxes, that is simply not true. There is no separate federal taxation category for Puerto Ricans. What is true is that income earned in puerto rico by pays no federal taxes.
The entry also says that only 20% of puerto ricans decend from blacks which is a lie. Immigration from europe and slaves brough from africa accounted for almost 100% of the population and it was about 50-50 white and black. The article instead says that 60% of the population can claim amerindian descent. THat is bullshit. the indians in puerto rico were killed in practically less than a generation. that is why they started bringing black slave in the first place.
Everytime I see stories about radio issues I dont even bother because I never listen to the radio. I never listen to the radio cause most of it is crap. So I just take my ipod or some CDs with me. One summer my car broke down and took like a month to get fixed and the rental car had no tape or CD player in it so I had to listen to the radio. I basically had it on NPR and the college station the entire month everything else was too plain terrible to bother. The funny thing is that the radio sucks precisely because of what is happening in this story. A bunch of asswipes think that everyone wants to listen to the same crappy music and have created all these stations that play the same tired top 20 music. They kill competition with regulation or with M&A. I hope they lose. More options are needed.
Oh no not at all i think most of it is fucked up. The thing though is that the act itself is not one whole cohesive thing. it is made up of hundreds of sactions and each section deals with different things. A lot of them are morally reprehensible and some are even outright wrong but not too many of then are outright unconstitutional if you look a the available case law from the SC.
they still need a warrant. nothing in the PATRIOT act allows law enforcement officers to search without a warrant. the real issue is when the warrant has to be served. You probably are thinking of section 213 of the PATRIOT act that gives: "AUTHORITY FOR DELAYING NOTICE OF THE EXECUTION OF A WARRANT."
The USA PATRIOT Act is not unconstitutional. Maybe sections of it are but the whole thing is not. If you were to go to court on an issue revolving around the act more likely than not the courts would rule only on the section that deal with your particular problem not on the whole act. Courts tend to keep their decisions limited in scope and will only rule on the particular facts of the case at hand unlike a legislative body that passes laws that have a much more broad application.
This is of course a generalization. Sometimes courts will decide on more general issues but it is ussualy done when the legislatures have avoided -most of the time on purpose- dealing with the issue themselves.
What is intetersting about this is that the FBI asked him anything. They have the ability to perform a sneak-and-peek search without the need to show a warrant beforehand and they can also have the search happen and show the warrant much later. It seems strange that they would call ahead of time and give the suspect time to dispose of any incriminating evidence. The whole thing is odd.
No. Not even GWB. The other day he said his usual line about how: "they hate freedom. we love freedom. blah blah blah..." HE started laughing. At this point he can't even say his lines and keep a straight face.
My comment had nothing to do with raising animals to eat them.
I was bothered by the tone that the post at the top took about this issue, namely that it is a joke.
It isn't a joke. It isn'f funny. This mindset is very damaging to the environment but more damaging to out interaction among ourselves. The kind of person that abuses animals or jokes about their suffering is not diferent to those who do the same with human beings.
I also don't care if my comment bothers you seems to me that you are just as guilty of the bahavior you accuse me of.
I think this is implying that there will be mad cow epidemics on a regular basis and that we need to learn how to use the cows that have to be killed so that they are not totally wasted. it is really about efficiency. twisted but 'efficient'.
Slashdot Mirror
"It's hard enough for doctors to make a living[.]" Are you f-ing kidding me? Doctors are one of the richest professions in the US. In fact, around of 30% of doctors is in the top 1% of income earners in the US. The fact that they are turning away business should be a clear indicator that they are under little financial hardship. When's the last time you saw an adjunct professor turn down classes at a community college because s/he didn't like the students work ethic or some other thing like that? Doctors having trouble making a living, now that is rich.
Not that it ever was fun but this is getting ridiculously boring. Microsoft has a new article or press release or conference where all they do is blast the more succesfull product from another company every damn week.
Ballmer talks smack about Google's business plan even though they keep growing earnings and revenue at faster clip than MS. He then comes out and blasts Google's hiring and calls their company bloated even though Google makes more money per employee than Microsoft.
Bill Gates comes out and talks smack about the iPod and how the Zune is soooo much better and how the Zune is going to eat the iPod's lunch. Then Gates coems out and talks smack about OS X and its security flaws and how much better Vista's security is. The iPhone is announced and the Bill and Ballmer come out and start spreading nonsense about how the IPhone is going to suck because everything else out there already is so much better and how no one in business and in enterprise is going to want one.
And now the Wii is more popular than the 360 and they come out and talk crap about teh Wii's graphics when from day 1 Nintendo said the point of the console was not the graphics but the revolutionary new controller. MS looks alike a company that has no direction or leadership and all it is doing is reacting to whatever their competitors do. it is pathetic.
There are no rules about notice. In the US the standard rule is "at-will employment." This is somethign that employers have fought for because it allows them to fire people quickly. Of course this cuts the other way too. You can be fired at the will of the employer but the emplyee can leave at his wil too. The exception to this is when the parties negotiate a contract. For example unions usually negotiate that the company cannot fire union members at-will, there must be casue. Normally union contracts still let the union members quit when they want to (and look for a job whereever they want to). On the other hand coaches and players in sports teams get multi-year contracts that as a rule don't let them quit when they want to unless they retire. Anyway the important thing is that unless there is a contracgt between the employer and the employee all employment in the US is at-will (of both parties).
FUD FUD FUD. How can somethign that is not even out yet be a failure? how can you complain about battery life when you or anyone you know doesnt have one? how much did you get paid to post this kind of nonsense?
"Every state and local gun ban"
When the Constitution was drafted and the bill of rights became a part of it it was thought that the bill of rights only applied to the federal government. So state governments actually had the right to limit any of those rights that the first ten ammendments protected. It wasn't until the mid-20th century that some parts of the bill of rights became incorporated, through some SCOTUS decisions using the 14th ammendment, and began to affect states. The second ammendment has never been incorporated. There is NO Constitutional protection from States and local governments regulating guns. OR at least there isnt such a protection unless some activist judge takes Consitutional law into his own hands.
Which schools are those? Where does the cut-off in the rakings happen? Yale, Harvard, Stanford, Columbia, NYU, Chicago, Penn, Michigan, Berkeley, Virginia, etc...
Not to be a stickler but Jobs said that the heart of the MAC (not Apple) is the operating system. That makes more sense too since the ipod makes up such a large chunk of the Apple revenue.
While I understand and am simpathetic to your slipery slope argument First Amendment law makes a very big distinction between the medium of delivery and the content of ideas. While the First Amendment allows regulation on the mode of distribution (eg. one cannot go to a neighborhood at 3am and blast ones ideas with a loudspeaker), Content (of ideas) falls squarely under the protection of the First Amendment (esp. if it is political content). So if a state legislature tried to have guidelines over what constitutes acceptable content the Supreme Court (and probably the District and Circuit courts way before) will hold the law to be unconstitutional.
Yeah but that takes work! AND you even have to think!
I totally agree with you. What follows is my rant.
We live in a society where the central question has become: "What do I do so I don't have to think?" Of course we are reaching the point where people ask themselves: "What can someone else do so that I don't have to think."
Everyone wants a pill to fix their problems. "I have heart disease cause I eat too much fat. What can someone do for me?" And here come the pills. One for weight loss, one for thining the fat in your blood, one to make sure the other two don't interact detrimentally, etc..." If you eat crap you will feel like crap. Go out do some exercise and eat well. I'm sure that if you do those two your heart will be better and your liver will live to tell the story.
So you are depressed? Go to the analyst. Read some books. Think about the problems you have don't just avoid them like a pansy. All this mess comes from the weird Victorian England/ WASPy "Don't deal with the elephant in the room" mentality. Well that is just harmful and silly. We need to acceptthings ans deal with them. Grab a Freud, Jung, Lacan, Klein, Ferenczi, NLP, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Bowlby, Horney, Kafka, or a Shakespeare book, etc... (I mixed in philosophy, literature, and psychoanalysis because depending on your issue any of them when used properly will help. Great literature is great because it deals with things that all human beings will have to deal with regardless of moment in history otherwise it is just a period piece.)
ahh... no.
that is the basic answer.
Would you have sex with margaret tatcher?
that is the smart-ass answer
Is bill gates cooler than steven jobs?
this is the functional answer.
your answer will says whether you 'switch' or not.
This is certainly a victory for those of us who believe that the country is better off when alternative political voices aren't suppressed.
Are you fucking kidding me? Sure cause Nader (a.k.a. republican henchman for hire) getting on the ballot means only that this is good for third party options. Please, be real. This is good if you like invading other countries and killing tons of arabs. Other than that i dont see the great benefit.
the truth is that the US has a presidential system that given the size of the US makes it extremely dificult to have more than two parties. It just takes too much money to run an effective campaign. If this were a parliamentary system there would be more parties representing more interests, but with a winner take all presidential system the third party will prety much be relegated to be a spoiler and not much else.
For Microsoft's law firm and for plaintiff's attorneys. I can already hear the class action lawyers cracking their knucles and getting ready. I'm sure the non-premium customers is a very large group.
I think that in part fantasy and sci fi are always in a conflict. fantasy is about eden. it is about the time before when heroes were heroes and everything was better. sci fi is about progress and about how things will be better in the future. (inknow there lots of sci fi is about a world that is worse but what im talking about is really the interest in scifi and in fantasy) so when the future dries up and it looks like it is going to get pretty bad people go back to fantasy. people want to live in the world of the late 1990s when money flowed and terrorists were not around. -it flowed for some and terrorists have always been around the media just has a way of shaping perception and thus thought- Of course when the past looks horrible, as it did after the civil rights movement and after the holocaust sci fi will thrive. people see a better future ahead that will somehow make the terrible past have some meaning. the pendulum will swing back to sci fi at some point and fantasy will be the one which is in 'trouble'.
pessimists dont make great lawyers. it is the other way around. I am in law school and let me tell you that the legal professions is one depressing undertaking. My law school does surveys about job satisfaction and the longer the person has been working ina firm the less satisfied he is with the work and the more he feels like he cant get out of it. So the longer a lawyer works the more experience gets and the depresion he faces.
The only way for an organization of individuals to have any sort of lasting "moral compass" is to dilute power among it members.
Isn't diluting power what causes paralysis in the first place? If no one agent has enough power then no action can be taken.
A heirarchical organization has only the "moral compass" of the fellow at the very top - not much of a moral compass.
You could argue that the person at the top of the hierarchy only mirrors the values of those that keep him on the top of the hierarchy.
Imbalances at the top are caused by imbalances at the bottom. Societies that did not have a centralized government (like medieval Iceland) ussually are extremely violent and poor. This is because the mob is constantly trying to keep anyone who is succesful down. Their success might destabilize the system and create a hierarchy.
Moral compass is not owned by the bottom nor by the top simply by being top or bottom. There have been plenty of corrupt leaders and corrupt masses. It is just easier to pin it all down on one person and scapegoat them. GWB didn't invade Iraq all on his own, most of the American public was in favor of the invasion when it happened.
For a long time I thought that e-books would never become viable. They seemed more like a curiosity. However in my last move i realized I would love to have all my books in electronic form.
In the past 4 years I moved from San Juan PR to Haverford PA, Rome Italy, Haverford PA, San Diego CA, Philadelphia PA, Berkeley CA, San Juan PR, Ann Arbor MI. Those are just moves not counting random one to two month long trips. My moving around is not going to stop for a while if ever.
My books usually take like 15 boxes to be packed.
If I could have all my books on the palm of my hand on a device that I can read as well as a book I would -now- take the device in a hearbeat -as long as there was some way of having a back up for all the books-.
The idea behind wikipedia is cool, but just by skimming one entry I have seen two factual mistakes. One is probably just a mistake (which i tried to correct but it remains the same a month later) but the other one seems like someone has an ax to grind and is actually putting in false information that they wish were true.
In the Puerto Rico entry it says that Puerto Ricans dont pay federal taxes, that is simply not true. There is no separate federal taxation category for Puerto Ricans. What is true is that income earned in puerto rico by pays no federal taxes.
The entry also says that only 20% of puerto ricans decend from blacks which is a lie. Immigration from europe and slaves brough from africa accounted for almost 100% of the population and it was about 50-50 white and black. The article instead says that 60% of the population can claim amerindian descent. THat is bullshit. the indians in puerto rico were killed in practically less than a generation. that is why they started bringing black slave in the first place.
Everytime I see stories about radio issues I dont even bother because I never listen to the radio. I never listen to the radio cause most of it is crap. So I just take my ipod or some CDs with me. One summer my car broke down and took like a month to get fixed and the rental car had no tape or CD player in it so I had to listen to the radio. I basically had it on NPR and the college station the entire month everything else was too plain terrible to bother. The funny thing is that the radio sucks precisely because of what is happening in this story. A bunch of asswipes think that everyone wants to listen to the same crappy music and have created all these stations that play the same tired top 20 music. They kill competition with regulation or with M&A. I hope they lose. More options are needed.
Oh no not at all i think most of it is fucked up. The thing though is that the act itself is not one whole cohesive thing. it is made up of hundreds of sactions and each section deals with different things. A lot of them are morally reprehensible and some are even outright wrong but not too many of then are outright unconstitutional if you look a the available case law from the SC.
search property without presenting a warrant
."
they still need a warrant. nothing in the PATRIOT act allows law enforcement officers to search without a warrant. the real issue is when the warrant has to be served. You probably are thinking of section 213 of the PATRIOT act that gives: "AUTHORITY FOR DELAYING NOTICE OF THE EXECUTION OF A WARRANT
The USA PATRIOT Act is not unconstitutional. Maybe sections of it are but the whole thing is not. If you were to go to court on an issue revolving around the act more likely than not the courts would rule only on the section that deal with your particular problem not on the whole act. Courts tend to keep their decisions limited in scope and will only rule on the particular facts of the case at hand unlike a legislative body that passes laws that have a much more broad application.
This is of course a generalization. Sometimes courts will decide on more general issues but it is ussualy done when the legislatures have avoided -most of the time on purpose- dealing with the issue themselves.
What is intetersting about this is that the FBI asked him anything. They have the ability to perform a sneak-and-peek search without the need to show a warrant beforehand and they can also have the search happen and show the warrant much later. It seems strange that they would call ahead of time and give the suspect time to dispose of any incriminating evidence. The whole thing is odd.
No. Not even GWB. The other day he said his usual line about how: "they hate freedom. we love freedom. blah blah blah..." HE started laughing. At this point he can't even say his lines and keep a straight face.
I'm sorry that I can't type to your satisfaction.
My comment had nothing to do with raising animals to eat them.
I was bothered by the tone that the post at the top took about this issue, namely that it is a joke.
It isn't a joke. It isn'f funny. This mindset is very damaging to the environment but more damaging to out interaction among ourselves. The kind of person that abuses animals or jokes about their suffering is not diferent to those who do the same with human beings.
I also don't care if my comment bothers you seems to me that you are just as guilty of the bahavior you accuse me of.
I think this is implying that there will be mad cow epidemics on a regular basis and that we need to learn how to use the cows that have to be killed so that they are not totally wasted. it is really about efficiency. twisted but 'efficient'.