which you could theoretically win with as little as ~25% of the national popular vote.
Quicksort "theoretically" runs in O(n^2) time, too. The Electoral College is a vestige of "These United States". It gave the smaller states more clout in the Federal Elections (amongst other things), since they ran the risk of being outshouted by the big states and losing some power when they became states in the union. The idea of the Electoral College doesn't make any more sense than the United States Senate does, yet nobody really talks about how California has the same amount of representation as Montana in a national legislative body.
I think the general accepted forms of conspiracy are definitions 2, 3, and 4 (and of course, 1). Taking the context in what the GP said, he was talking about the lack of "surreptitious" cooperation on the part of the pro-ACTA parties. When context is provided, definition takes the passenger seat.
If it was anything other than Flash, and anyone other than Apple I'm sure more people would be outraged. To me this is more of Apple's and its control MO vs. the last decade's "rich internet architecture". Apple's doing what it always does, control its platform. I'm not sure why anybody's so surprised. I've been burned by the lock-in, lock-out myself (DISCLAIMER: I do own an Apple computer), but, I'm not going to cry myself to sleep over the marginalization of the Flash platform on the iPhone OS. I think most died-in-the-wool Apple users feel this way (ho hum/ meh), and Apple is willing to take advantage of this sentiment to further shape their own platform the way they want it. Right? Wrong? I don't think this is really a question of ethics or morals. I think it's Apple having their own way, and people with dollars not caring enough to get mad and go elsewhere.
the free availability should be motivation enough. it was for me.
I think the projection of self onto the societal-level of decision making gives us policy that only works for a few people. This is especially the case when you apply yourself as (presumably) an adult as a decent model for today's children. Their situation is invariably different from yours and using your own childhood as a model for a wide swath of today's youth is probably not going to match up to the needs and expectations of today.
Stick with the numbers. If it's more effective and costs less, while still being within the realm of morally acceptable, why not consider it as a viable option? That being said, I'd like to see more test groups before opening it up to something as strong as "we should implement this all over".
So you knew about the Big Bang and Evolution and were able to acknowledge their validity at about age 4 or 5? Even that early on as a child, you probably wouldn't have the capacity to grasp the implications of these topics. So like I said already, it's just you believing something like the Big Bang Theory or Evolution to be true, not knowing it to be true or valid. This is similar to believing in a religion or the like.
The US also has plenty of science programming on television. It's pretty well enjoyed by many Americans.
To the average layman/Joe/Jane "knowledge" of the truth of the Big Bang and Evolution is really tantamount to believing that they are true (that is, valid explanations of our reality). If you go off of a high school education, what do teachers really tell you aside from a few weeks' lecture (at best) and showing some pictures in a book? How does that equate to knowledge of these things aside from "my teacher told me it was true". Perhaps we're just doing a horrible job of managing our credibility on topics such as these. People in all walks of life both deny and affirm the validity of these two theories, yet they seem to appear everywhere (and are wildly [un]successful at their pursuits). Widespread belief in the (in)validity of these two things does not denote the working value of a high school level education, if not even a higher education outside of the areas relevant to these theories. In my opinion, of course.
If people only choose from the top 10 or so results from any search engine, and they make fairly generic searches, search engine choice shouldn't matter to much. For popular things, they all return approximately the same thing (in my experience, not in the same order, but they're mostly all there on the front page). People who are persnickety and make special searches a lot likely have a favored engine and will change the settings to match their needs. Most people want to configure their computer to do things about as much as they want to change the oil in their car.
Most of the problem is that sexual reproduction and evolution makes several contradictions with some really popular book that people take too literally.
There, fixed that for you. Also, the animals appear in the creation story in approximately the same order that evolution stipulates they would. Does it mean anything? I don't know, but it's not a flat out contradiction by a long shot. The contradictions exist in peoples' minds. The book you're talking about is too big and complex to contradict all but a few things.
Here's a good quick read on the topic. Martial Law in the USThe Supreme Court ruled Lincoln's declaration of Martial Law unconstitutional, by way of Milligan, a Confederate dissenter (funny how that works). It was martial law, though. I'm not sure how much weight the Supreme Court has at that point...
Declaring martial law has never happened in the US. Doing so would have huge negative political ramifications, as it should.
Incorrect. Open your history book to the Civil War.
President Lincoln declared a congressionally-approved martial law during the Civil War (along with suspending Haebus Corpus by himself two years earlier) and suspended the Haebus Corpus in the entire US with Congressional approval. You can argue whether or not it was the right decision, but I'd say we're still here, slave free, and a little less morally bankrupt today than we were then. Though, honest Abe might have been an exception to the rule when it came to the corrupting nature of power...who knows?
The nature of our DOE, NASA, and DOD budgets allow for this type of uncontrolled spending.
I think it's more of the fact that the people working at these organizations don't play hardball with contractors and make them finish on time and in budget. We need accountability measures that make these firms liable for budget overruns and late deliveries, especially ones that are so egregious.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this entire thread is obvious and irrelevant. I just thought I'd hop on the bandwagon with you.
Of course. I should have said "less" instead of more.
which you could theoretically win with as little as ~25% of the national popular vote.
Quicksort "theoretically" runs in O(n^2) time, too. The Electoral College is a vestige of "These United States". It gave the smaller states more clout in the Federal Elections (amongst other things), since they ran the risk of being outshouted by the big states and losing some power when they became states in the union. The idea of the Electoral College doesn't make any more sense than the United States Senate does, yet nobody really talks about how California has the same amount of representation as Montana in a national legislative body.
I think the general accepted forms of conspiracy are definitions 2, 3, and 4 (and of course, 1). Taking the context in what the GP said, he was talking about the lack of "surreptitious" cooperation on the part of the pro-ACTA parties. When context is provided, definition takes the passenger seat.
Here's the big question. If multiplied by fiat, does work ethic become zero?
Just you wait. This is the year of GIMP on the desktop. Just like last year, and next year.
What's the point of developing software?
Fun and dollars.
If it was anything other than Flash, and anyone other than Apple I'm sure more people would be outraged. To me this is more of Apple's and its control MO vs. the last decade's "rich internet architecture". Apple's doing what it always does, control its platform. I'm not sure why anybody's so surprised. I've been burned by the lock-in, lock-out myself (DISCLAIMER: I do own an Apple computer), but, I'm not going to cry myself to sleep over the marginalization of the Flash platform on the iPhone OS. I think most died-in-the-wool Apple users feel this way (ho hum/ meh), and Apple is willing to take advantage of this sentiment to further shape their own platform the way they want it. Right? Wrong? I don't think this is really a question of ethics or morals. I think it's Apple having their own way, and people with dollars not caring enough to get mad and go elsewhere.
Present your argument in formal logic, then. I'll take your side if it's sound :).
the free availability should be motivation enough. it was for me.
I think the projection of self onto the societal-level of decision making gives us policy that only works for a few people. This is especially the case when you apply yourself as (presumably) an adult as a decent model for today's children. Their situation is invariably different from yours and using your own childhood as a model for a wide swath of today's youth is probably not going to match up to the needs and expectations of today.
Stick with the numbers. If it's more effective and costs less, while still being within the realm of morally acceptable, why not consider it as a viable option? That being said, I'd like to see more test groups before opening it up to something as strong as "we should implement this all over".
Citation please.
But, but, some people are more equal than others!
So you knew about the Big Bang and Evolution and were able to acknowledge their validity at about age 4 or 5? Even that early on as a child, you probably wouldn't have the capacity to grasp the implications of these topics. So like I said already, it's just you believing something like the Big Bang Theory or Evolution to be true, not knowing it to be true or valid. This is similar to believing in a religion or the like.
The US also has plenty of science programming on television. It's pretty well enjoyed by many Americans.
To the average layman/Joe/Jane "knowledge" of the truth of the Big Bang and Evolution is really tantamount to believing that they are true (that is, valid explanations of our reality). If you go off of a high school education, what do teachers really tell you aside from a few weeks' lecture (at best) and showing some pictures in a book? How does that equate to knowledge of these things aside from "my teacher told me it was true". Perhaps we're just doing a horrible job of managing our credibility on topics such as these. People in all walks of life both deny and affirm the validity of these two theories, yet they seem to appear everywhere (and are wildly [un]successful at their pursuits). Widespread belief in the (in)validity of these two things does not denote the working value of a high school level education, if not even a higher education outside of the areas relevant to these theories. In my opinion, of course.
If people only choose from the top 10 or so results from any search engine, and they make fairly generic searches, search engine choice shouldn't matter to much. For popular things, they all return approximately the same thing (in my experience, not in the same order, but they're mostly all there on the front page). People who are persnickety and make special searches a lot likely have a favored engine and will change the settings to match their needs. Most people want to configure their computer to do things about as much as they want to change the oil in their car.
Most of the problem is that sexual reproduction and evolution makes several contradictions with some really popular book that people take too literally.
There, fixed that for you. Also, the animals appear in the creation story in approximately the same order that evolution stipulates they would. Does it mean anything? I don't know, but it's not a flat out contradiction by a long shot. The contradictions exist in peoples' minds. The book you're talking about is too big and complex to contradict all but a few things.
I use ISO-8859-1, you insensitive clod!
Here's a good quick read on the topic. Martial Law in the USThe Supreme Court ruled Lincoln's declaration of Martial Law unconstitutional, by way of Milligan, a Confederate dissenter (funny how that works). It was martial law, though. I'm not sure how much weight the Supreme Court has at that point...
Declaring martial law has never happened in the US. Doing so would have huge negative political ramifications, as it should.
Incorrect. Open your history book to the Civil War.
President Lincoln declared a congressionally-approved martial law during the Civil War (along with suspending Haebus Corpus by himself two years earlier) and suspended the Haebus Corpus in the entire US with Congressional approval. You can argue whether or not it was the right decision, but I'd say we're still here, slave free, and a little less morally bankrupt today than we were then. Though, honest Abe might have been an exception to the rule when it came to the corrupting nature of power...who knows?
The nature of our DOE, NASA, and DOD budgets allow for this type of uncontrolled spending.
I think it's more of the fact that the people working at these organizations don't play hardball with contractors and make them finish on time and in budget. We need accountability measures that make these firms liable for budget overruns and late deliveries, especially ones that are so egregious.
Sure, but he means human in the humanistic sense, not the biological sense.
Why are you saying that math skills and people skills are mutually exclusive?
By the prophet Ayn Rand in her prophecy Atlas Shrugged! The glorious Rearden Metal has come to save us all!!
You said the Internet was its own society, and I immediately thought of this.